Chicago Wilderness and Its Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Home , Callopistria, Chicago Wilderness, Fauna of Illinois, Kingbird, Lee Botts, Lithophane (moth)

Chapter 1 Executive Summary Chicago Wilderness and Its Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Many of the surviving natural communities of the 1. 1 Chicago region are of national and global significance In t r o d u c t i o n for conservation. The region is blessed with both richness and opportunity for its conservation. Yet res e a r ch indicates that we are experiencing a steady decline in both 1.1.1 Chicago Wilderness: who we are, native species and communities. For example: what we are accomplishing. • In a review for this plan, the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s “Chicago Wilderness” refers to nature and to the people Science and Land Management Teams found that and institutions that protect it. Chicago Wilderness is m o re than half of the major community types of the 200,000 acres of protected conservation land—some of region were at the highest level of conservation con- the largest and best surviving woodlands, wetlands, and cern due either to the small amount remaining or to prairies in the Midwest. It is also the much larger matrix the poor ecological health of the remaining examples. of public and private lands of many kinds that support • A 1995 survey of DuPage County forest pre s e r v e s na t u r e in the region along with the people who prot e c t revealed that 80% of its natural areas had declined to and live compatibly with it. poor health (Applied Ecological Services 1995). Native Americans were part of the natural ecosystem • A region-wide 1998 study by the Morton Ar b o re t u m he r e for thousands of years. Tod a y , thousands of volun- (Bowles et al. 1998b) documented a significant change teers and hundreds of scientists, land managers, educ- over the past 20 years in forest struc t u r e, including a ators, and others are crucial to the survival of our natural decline in density and richness of shrub species, a loss ecosystems, as is the “Chicago Wilderness” work of the of mid-size oaks, and an increase in smaller-size sugar 88 member organizations. The geographic area covered maples. The study attributed these changes to increa s - by the Chicago Wilderness region includes northeastern ed shade owing to greater oak and maple canopy Illinois, northwestern Indiana, and southeastern Wis c o n - cover and, in some cases, to deer brow s i n g . sin. The coalition’s membership includes local govern- While the community types in the region have in some ments, state and federal agencies, centers for re s e a rc h cases almost vanished from the earth, this challenge is far and education, and conservation orga n i z a t i o n s . di ff e r ent from other societal challenges we face in that we know what needs to be done to address it. The Chicago The boundaries of the Chicago Wilderness region capture region’s farsighted leaders set up preserve systems that a spectacular concentration of rare ecosystem types. today support almost all of the species ever known to These ecosystems harbor a high diversity of species, have occurred in the region’s vast prairies, savannas, including a large number of those listed as threatened or woodlands, dunes, marshes, fens, and sedge meadows. e n d a n g e red in the states of Illinois, Indiana, and Restoration ecology, a growing field for applied res e a rc h , Wisconsin. Indeed, outside of the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s has provided proven techniques and tools to manage region, levels of diversity drop off sharply. Boundaries these fragmented natural areas. The Chicago region is a of the watersheds containing the natural communities center of expertise and citizen involvement in the res t o r a - helped to define the region, as did the large concentration tion and management of these rare natural communities. of natural preserves in the metropolitan area .

5 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

The purpose of the Chicago Wilderness collaboration is ment, and they also embody our feelings of shared cul- to sustain, res t o r e, and expand our remnant natural com- t u re, history, and community. The nations of the world munities. Thanks to a great concentration of prof e s s i o n a l have signed a treaty calling biodiversity the common expertise and the contributions of thousands of volun- heritage of humankind and calling on all people to be teers, we have the ability to achieve this purpose, and in custodians of the biodiversity found in their countries a cost-effective manner. In doing this, we are also enrich- and reg i o n s . ing the quality of life for ourselves and our children. Now in its third year, our collaborative effort is starting to take In Chicago Wilderness, the value of biodiversity is not l a rger strides to build something big, something that just at the global level, but most importantly for our own could some day transform this region into the world’s citizens. Natural communities and species are the basis of first urban bioreserve, a metropolitan area where people the region’s environmental health. They provide ecologi- live in harmony with rare and valuable nature. cal services in maintaining water quality, abating the impact of floods, supporting pollination of crops, and co n t ro l ling outbreaks of pests. Equally important, biodi- 1.1.2 What is meant by biodiversity versity contributes immeasurably to the quality of life for and why is it important? the citizens of the region and to the region’s long-term economic vitality. Recent polls and election results show The terms ecosystems, natural communities, biodiversity, an d that residents of the region strongly support prot e c t i o n su s t a i n a b i l i t y ar e used throughout this plan. An ecosys- of natural areas for the future. Only if we continue and tem is the combination of living things and the physical expand upon the far-sighted conservation work of those systems (geology, topography, moisture, climate, etc.) who built the Chicago region, will we be able to pass these within which they must live. A natural community is the pr ecious biodiversity values on to future generations. mix of plants and animals found living together in a healthy ecosystem. Su s t a i n a b i l i t y refers to our ability to Yet, there is overwhelming evidence that our pro j e c t e d enjoy and make use of natural communities in a manner development patterns and their unanticipated re s u l t s that does not compromise future generations’ ability to will lead to diminishing economic benefits and degrada- do the same. tion of the other services that we derive from our living res o u r ces. A further discussion of the benefits of pres e r v - B i o d i v e r s i t y is the totality of genes, species, and ecosys- ing biodiversity and the implications of future growth in tems in a region. For example, a healthy prairie commu- the region are contained later in the Recovery Plan. nity would normally include dozens of plant species as well as habitat for various species of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, insects, mites, fungi, and bacteria. 1.1.3 What is the recovery plan? Within a region the size of the Chicago area, biodiversity can also be measured by the number and variety of nat- The Biodiversity Recovery Plan is both a plan and a ural communities that exist side by side in a given area , pr ocess guided by its many sponsors. It is intended as a such as oak savannas, meadows, and wetlands. A h i g h living document, not a fixed roadmap, that will continue de g r ee of biodiversity is normally an indication of a heal- to evolve as new ideas and information arise. For that th y , sustainable natural community, ecosystem, or reg i o n . reason, it is a snapshot in time, presenting our best evaluation of the current situation and how we can addres s This plan identifies 49 diffe r ent natural community types issues and capitalize on opportunities. The success of the in the region. Of these, 25 are at least rare or uncommon plan depends on the responses of those who read it and at the global level, and as many as 23 are globally imper- incorporate its findings and suggestions into their own iled. A p p roximately 1,500 native plant species occur in work. Likewise, its future usefulness depends on sugges- the region, making the Chicago metropolitan area one of tions for improvement and new priorities from its rea d e r s . the more botanically rich areas, natural or otherwise, in the United States. This plan also finds that many of the The plan is intended to complement the many other region’s animals, including grassland birds, woodland planning efforts that are guiding the region toward a bi r ds, savanna reptiles and amphibians, marsh rep t i l e s better and more productive future. Foremost among and amphibians, prairie insects, and savanna and wood- these are the plans of the three regional planning com- land insects, are globally important for conservation. missions; the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC), the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Ar ound the world, people depend on biodiversity for the Commission (SEWRPC), and the Northwestern Indiana very sustenance of life. The living things with which we Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC). Other effo r t s s h a re the planet provide us with clean water and air, ar e also contributing to the regional discussions, includ- food, clothing, shelter, medicines, and aesthetic enjoy- ing the Campaign for Sensible Growth and the Metro- polis 2020 Plan.

6 Chapter 1. Executive Summary: Chicago Wilderness and Its Biodiversity Recovery Plan

This recovery plan outlines the steps necessary to achieve c. Maintain existing quality of publicly owned, high- the overall goal of the Chicago Wilderness collaboration. quality natural area s . That goal, in summary, is to protect the natural communities d. Pr otect high-quality natural areas in private owner- of the Chicago region and to res t o r e them to long-term viability, sh i p . in order to enrich the quality of life of its citizens and to contribute to the preservation of global biodiversity. e. Mitigate factors with negative impacts that occur outside of natural areas but within their watersheds To achieve this goal, the recovery plan identifies the fol- or buffer zones. lowing measurable objectives: 4. Re s t o r e natural communities to ecological health. 1. In v o l v e the citizens, organizations, and agencies of the region in efforts to conserve biodiversity. a. Reestablish the ecological health of deteriorating high-quality natural area s . a. Obtain broad-based and active public participation in the long-term protection, restoration, and stew- b. I m p rove all natural areas, concentrating first on ar dship of the region’s natural communities. those that contribute most to global and re g i o n a l bi o d i v e r s i t y . b. St r engthen local government support by communicating with and involving officials in planning c. Pr ovide corridors that link areas as needed. ef forts and conservation prog r a m s . d. Re s t o r e ecological processes that support sustain- c. Build partnerships among organizations and agen- able systems. cies in support of biodiversity in the reg i o n . e. Return natural communities to sufficient size for d. Maintain and strengthen volunteer participation viable animal populations by restoring or rec re a t - in stewardship and res e a rc h . ing them. Fermilab and Midewin are examples. e. Stimulate active private-sector involvement. 5. Ma n a g e natural communities to sustain f. Integrate a broader range of stakeholders, includ- native biodiversity. ing businesses and constituency organizations into biodiversity conservation effo r t s . a. Attain greater capability for ecological management within public entities. 2. Im p ro v e the scientific basis of ecological b. Encourage sharing of experience and re s o u rc e s ma n a g e m e n t . among natural-area managers in diffe r ent jurisdic- ti o n s . a. In c r ease knowledge of species, communities, and ecological relationships and proc e s s e s . c. Monitor recovery pro g ress and status of natural co m m u n i t i e s . b. Specify results to be achieved in biodiversity and in c r eased sustainability, including reliable indica- d. Demonstrate the feasibility of protection and res t o r - tors, baselines, and targe t s . ation in fragmented, human-dominated landscapes, making use of such tools as pre s c r i b e d c. Evaluate the results of restoration and management burning, restoration of hydrol o g y , and removal of alternatives based on data in order to address those invasive species. alternatives’ effects on target species and communi t i e s . 6. De v e l o p citizen awareness and understanding d. Clearly identify conservation priorities. of local biodiversity to ensure support and pa r t i c i p a t i o n . e. Develop region-wide performance standards and monitoring techniques that can be implemented by a. Form educational partnerships among citizens, land managers. or ganizations, and agencies to promote awaren e s s . b. Build sufficient awareness of natural communities 3. Pro t e c t globally and regionally important of the region and their global significance so that natural communities. they become a recognized part of the culture of the a. Identify priority areas and elements for prot e c t i o n reg i o n . based on an assessment of their contribution to con- c. Develop educational programs to promote broa d - serving biodiversity at global and regional levels. based understanding of the global significance of b. P rotect high-quality natural areas in suff i c i e n t the region’s natural communities. ac r eage to permit restoration and management for su s t a i n a b i l i t y .

7 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

d. Design educational strategies to meet the needs of A th i r d audience includes all concerned and active citi- all audiences at all levels. zens. Those who vote, speak out publicly and privately, and make choices of many kinds are crucial participants e. Reach those not traditionally involved with educa- in the Chicago Wilderness collaboration. This third audi- tion in natural history or conservation. ence will be reached primarily through the plan’s components of public participation and education, rather 7. Fo s t e r a sustainable relationship between society than through the plan direc t l y . and nature in the region. a. Integrate conservation of biodiversity into ongoing development and planning for land use, trans- 1.1.5 How should different portation, and infrastruc t u re . audiences use the plan? b. Encourage major land users to adopt practices that This recovery plan is intentionally broad in scope, out- pr omote biodiversity and its sustainability by inte- lining the full range of actions needed across the entire grating the beauty and function of nature into our region to conserve biodiversity. As a consequence, the ne i g h b o r hood, corporate, and public lands. plan is best viewed as a tool that provides general direc - tion and illustrates the types of actions that can be taken c. Encourage inclusion of biodiversity goals in local to conserve biodiversity. The plan is a blueprint for action planning and implementation. and a ref e r ence source for ideas. Because each decision or d. Identify and address factors that lead to sustainable action that affects biodiversity will be made in a specific us e . local context, and at times local priorities or unavoidable constraints will suggest a diff e rent path than might be e. Regularly monitor indicators of biodiversity and suggested as a priority for the entire region, the plan is sustainability throughout the reg i o n . not intended as a set of mandates. f. Support and encourage efforts of citizen scientists working to conserve biodiversity. Nonetheless, the priorities and actions in the plan rep r e- sent a regional consensus on the most important items for 8. En r i c h the quality of the lives of the region’s citizens. p ro g ress on biodiversity conservation. To be eff e c t i v e , those making decisions at the local level in the re g i o n a. Enhance human health through improved air and should consider carefully the issues discussed in the plan water quality as well as protection from flooding by and attempt to address them in their own planning restoring and maintaining the ecological integrity pr ocesses. One lesson from the plan is that the region as of natural communities. a whole can sustain biodiversity that is not sustainable b. In c r ease opportunities for all citizens to experience t h rough local action alone. Success in this re g a rd will the beauty and restorative powers of nature. only come if all actors in the region incorporate a broa d e r regional view in their own decision-making, and if we c. Identify strategies that promote economic grow t h cooperate across local jurisdictions. while sustaining biodiversity. 1. 2 1.1.4 Who are the plan’s 1. 2 intended audiences? The vision

One primary audience for the Recovery Plan includes the For the past 200 years, the south end of Lake Michigan thousands of staff members and hundreds of thousands has been the setting of a classic drama. While building of members of Chicago Wilderness organizations. These its economic and cultural wealth, Chicago, one of the o rganizations have accepted responsibility for helping nation’s largest metropolises, has partially preserved the to define and achieve the results contained in the plan. natural communities that had developed here since the ret r eat of the last glacier, approximately 10,000 years ago. Another primary audience is all persons who are res p o n - As the metropolis continues to expand, its natural riches sible for making or shaping decisions that affect the decline. Hence the vision: region’s land use, water-re s o u r ce management, and bio- d i v e r s i t y. Included here are local, state, and federal To establish a broad policy of beneficial coexistence in elected and appointed officials and private owners of which the region’s natural heritage is preserved, la r ge properties. Also included are key opinion shapers improved, and expanded even as the metropolis grows. and recognized leaders in the reg i o n .

8 Chapter 1. Executive Summary: Chicago Wilderness and Its Biodiversity Recovery Plan

At the landscape level, the vision includes a network of pr otected lands and waters that will preserve habitat for 1. 3 a complete spectrum of the region’s natural communi- Key findings and ties. More natural land—both public and private—will have been added to the current core areas and their man- re c o m m e n d a t i o n s agement will be both active and adaptive. Acritical mass of sites will be large enough to maintain a sustainable The Biodiversity Recovery Plan contains a number of complex of interdependent species and natural commu- recommended actions at varied levels of detail and nities. Carefully monitored habitat corridors will con- importance. Some of the more important ones are indi- nect sites, both small and large, opening paths for ancient cated below, either verbatim or in summary form, with patterns of migration and dispersal. Fire will be used as chapter ref e re n c e s . a management tool in order to promote ecosystem renewal. Cycles of prescribed burning will continue the work of lightning and Native American cultures . 1.3.1 Manage more land to protect and restore biodiversity. At the ecosystem level, water will regain its rightful Much of the region’s legally protected land is not yet place as a natural agent of renewal. Rainstorms will drain being effectively managed to preserve remnant native mo r e slowly, with less damage to downstream prop e r t i e s communities. Until re c e n t l y, it was thought that most and to the streams themselves, due to the capacity for types of natural areas, if left alone, would preserve them- temporary storage and absorption aff o rded by natural selves. Studies have increasingly shown that the quality open lands. With appropriate management, pre s e r v e d of our natural communities, including those protected by lands and water bodies will again host healthy commu- public ownership, is steadily degrading because natural nities of native plants and animals for future generations pr ocesses have been interrupted and/or because of inva- to study and enjoy. sive or overly abundant species. (See Chapter 5.) The continuing degradation of existing preserves is a major At the species level, regional populations of animals and th r eat to sustaining and enhancing biodiversity. plants will be assured long-term viability. Size and connectivity of habitat will contribute to their survival; rare Ecological management practices are available to deal species will be protected from catastrophe. Whether with these problems. Limited management is underway native like deer or alien like purple loosestrife, prob l e m in certain forest preserves and parks and on some pri- species will be prevented from destroying the natural vately held lands. But current levels of management are, communities in which they live. in most instances, far from adequate. Th e re f o r e, this plan While our busy lives do not always provide enough opportunity assigns the highest priority to establishing and maintaining the to consider our increasingly precarious relationship with pr oper management of natural communities. n a t u re, we have reached the point where we must fulfill this vision to benefit one species more than all others—our own. • Mo r e res o u r ces need to be applied to the management The region’s human communities will reclaim a cultural of protected lands in the region. The shortage of dollars tradition of restoring, protecting, and managing the glob- to manage lands and waters for biodiversity rep res e n t s ally outstanding natural communities that enrich our a major threat to the region’s natural communities. In lives. In the spirit of the far-sighted planners who cre- addition to the high-quality sites being managed ated this region’s earliest forest preserves, we will make to d a y , medium- and lower-quality sites, particularly our built environment compatible with the needs of our those containing higher-priority community types, wild neighbors. need management efforts. (Chapter 5) • State-of-the-art management practices should be The foundation for this vision already exists in the applied more broadly to protected lands. This will region’s extensive parks and forest preserves, in the reg - req u i r e more qualified personnel, both volunteer and ulations protecting wetlands, flood plains, and rare and paid, than are presently available (Chapters 5, 9, 11) . en d a n g e r ed species, in the investments already made to Land managers should apply a diversity of manage- i m p rove the quality of water in the region’s stre a m s , ment practices in order to sustain natural communi- rivers, and lakes, and in the public and private institu- ties. (Chapter 5) tions whose missions include a concern for the reg i o n ’ s natural environment. Even so, the fulfillment of the • The expanded and more effective use of volunteers in vision will re q u i re a greatly expanded level of public land management, monitoring, and stewardship will understanding and support. Indeed, this vision can only be essential for maintaining the health of conserva- be realized if it becomes broadly shared . tion lands. (Chapter 11)

9 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

• The use of prescribed fire needs to be greatly ex- • Federal, state, and local funding for land acquisition panded. Aregional training program should be devel- by county forest preserve and conservation districts oped for crew members and burn leaders. Outre a c h and by other preservation agencies should be expand- p rograms should be used to educate local governed with the preservation of biodiversity as a priority. ments in the use of prescribed fire in managing natural Recognizing that public funds are limited, biodiversity ecosystems. State agencies need to craft air- q u a l i t y conservation efforts should to the greatest extent pos- regulations that foster the expanded use of pres c r i b e d sible also support the multiple-use missions of public burns. Finally, a variety of burn strategies is needed. agencies. (Chapters 8, 11) A single management regime, such as burning at the • In Illinois, the state’s imposition of property-tax caps same intensity and same time each year, is unlikely to makes the funding of further acquisition and manage- sustain biological diversity. (Chapters 5, 9) ment more problematic. Local governments should • Planning for the management of natural communi- seek to pass ref e r enda as necessary to obtain the rev - ties should be carried out on a countywide or reg i o n a l enues needed to achieve this plan. (Chapters 8, 11) scale, allowing a diversity of management strategies • State governments should increase funding to open- and effects. For example, wetland management space grants programs, both for their own lands and should be coordinated on a regional basis to assure for lands to be acquired by county forest preserve and that birds have appropriate habitat within the reg i o n conservation districts, park districts, and other eligible reg a r dless of local fluctuations in wetland conditions. jurisdictions. (Chapter 11) (Chapters 5, 9) • I n c reased federal funding for preserving conservation land is a critical need. High priority should be 1.3.2 Preserve more land with existing given to applications by states and local governments or potential benefits for biodiversity. that address critical needs for conserving biodiversity as outlined in this plan. (Chapter 11) The Chicago region currently contains 200,000 acres of pr otected land in national parks, state parks, regional for- • Land-acquisition plans of public agencies should give est preserves, and open spaces owned and maintained by consideration to the presence of endangered and park districts, private institutions, and corporations. Al l th r eatened species. (Chapter 7) of these lands contain important natural communities or • The granting of protective easements and other pro- else serve as buffers, protecting and supporting the nat- tective measures by private landowners for natural ural areas. Over the past few years, local pre s e r v a t i o n ar eas and buffer zones is an important tool for biodi- agencies have steadily acquired land for a variety of pur- versity protection and will increase in significance as poses and they expect to acquire more in the years ahead. acquisition of public lands becomes more diff i c u l t . This plan recommends that a high priority be given to identi- Mo r e training and res o u r ces for the use of these tech- fying and preserving important but unprotected natural com- niques are needed. (Chapter 8) munities, especially those threatened by development, and to p rotecting areas that can function as large blocks of natural habitat though restoration and management. The plan rec o m - 1.3.3 Protect high-quality streams and mends that these areas be preserved where possible by the expansion of public preserves, by the public acquisition of large lakes through watershed planning new sites, or by the actions of qualified private owners. and mitigation of harmful activities to conserve aquatic biodiversity. • Public and private agencies should act immediately One of the most significant negative impacts of human to preserve those high-quality natural areas in the settlement on the Chicago region’s natural environ m e n t region that remain unprotected. High-quality re m- has been on streams, rivers, lakes, and wetlands. Drain- nants, even if small, are important reservoirs of genetic ing and filling of wetlands, channelizing of stre a m s , material for maintaining regional biodiversity. Em- in c r eases in storm-water run o f f due to expanding imper- phasis should be on those community types of higher vious surfaces and resultant changes in the fre q u e n c y priority as outlined in this plan. (Chapter 4, 5) and extent of floods, changes in groundwater levels, and • Chicago Wilderness and the regions’ land-owning the introduction of wastes, chemical products, and erod e d agencies should develop a priority list of areas need- soils into all of the region’s water bodies have had disas- ing protection based on regional priorities for biodi- tr ous consequences for virtually all forms of aquatic life. versity conservation. (Chapter 5)

10 Chapter 1. Executive Summary: Chicago Wilderness and Its Biodiversity Recovery Plan

As urbanization continues, programs, policies, and reg - T h e re are distinct diff e rences between re s e a rch, moni- ulations to manage water res o u r ces should be developed toring, and inventory, yet if these activities are linked and implemented with an eye to sustaining natural com- together in meaningful ways, the results can immediately munities. The effectiveness of our efforts to manage be put to use by conservation practitioners and thus can water res o u r ces should be measured, in part, by the num- im p r ove biodiversity management. Management within ber and variety of native species found in aquatic habitats an experimental framework, making use of results th r oughout the reg i o n . in future management decisions, is ref e r r ed to as adaptive management. Developing and implementing a reg i o n a l • The highest priority for biodiversity conservation is monitoring program and pursuing a prioritized re s e a rc h to maintain the quality of the remaining high-quality agenda will provide significant contributions to conservation st r eams and lakes, those that support high numbers of of biodiversity. native and threatened species. (Chapter 6) • Compile a prioritized list of res e a r ch needs. Support • State and local public agencies should protect high- re s e a rch projects that will help Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s quality streams and lakes through proper watershed scientists and land managers to better understand pre- planning and management, including plans for storm- settlement landscape conditions and processes, cur- water management. (Chapters 6, 8) rent landscape conditions and processes, the best • Local agencies should promote natural drainage, cre- techniques to res t o r e communities to improved eco- ate buffer strips and greenways along streams, and logical health, and req u i r ements for sustaining biodi- cr eate or res t o r e streamside wetlands. Attention should versity over the long-term. Examples of specific area s be given to changes in groundwater levels for terres - of res e a r ch needs are given in Chapter 5. trial communities and wetlands. (Chapters 5, 6, 8) • Compile a thorough literature review of pre v i o u s • Local agencies and private landowners should con- studies reg a r ding management of natural communi- sider restoring streams to their natural meandering ties and conservation of biodiversity relevant to effo r t s courses, restoring riffles and other elements of strea m in Chicago Wilderness. (Chapter 9) habitat, and using bioengineering solutions to control • Develop better links with academia and pro m o t e st r eambank erosion. (Chapter 6, 8) mo r e res e a r ch projects within the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s • Local agencies should avoid new or expanded waste- region. This could be achieved through a number of water discharges into high-quality streams. A l t e r n- ap p r oaches, including setting up a central location of atives include routing flows to regional facilities, using priority res e a r ch needs as a res o u r ce for graduate stu- land treatment, and using constructed wetlands for dents. Another suggestion is to promote the Chicago i m p roving treated effluent before discharging to Wilderness region as a re s e a rch station. This would st r eams. (Chapters 6, 8) help students to identify appropriate sites and experts, as well as to receive permits. (Chapter 9) • Many dams in the region impede the movement of fish and other aquatic life up and down the waterway. • Develop and implement a regional monitoring prot o - Co n s e q u e n t l y , high-quality streams sometimes abrup - col that emphasizes adaptive management for mak- tly deteriorate above or below a dam. Where dams are ing pro g ress toward selected management goals. not needed for water supply, flood control, or re c re- (Chapter 9) ation, removal or modification with stru c t u res that e ffectively permit the passage of aquatic species would help to conserve biodiversity (Chapter 6). 1.3.5 Apply both public and private resources more extensively and effe c - 1.3.4 Continue and expand tively to inform the region’s citizens research and monitoring. of their natural heritage and what must be done to protect it. While land managers use the best current knowledge about the management needs of natural communities A p recondition to the success of any important public and species, there is always opportunity and need to endeavor is the understanding and support of a signifi- im p r ove management techniques and learn more about cant portion of the public. The topic of sustaining biodi- the complexity of ecosystems and their functioning. ve r s i t y , including an understanding of its importance to Management and monitoring activities need to be orga - c u r rent and future generations, is just beginning to be nized so that they help evaluate the effectiveness of taught in schools and conveyed through the local media. c u r rent techniques, and re s e a rch projects need to be Many communities are not being reached through these designed to answer questions relevant to management. ef forts and even citizens who already have a strong envi-

11 Biodiversity Recovery Plan ronmental ethic are often unaware of the richness of our the inclusion of biodiversity objectives within state, regional biodiversity and of local restoration successes. regional, and local plans and laws or ordinances governing the urban and suburban development proc e s s e s . Chapter 10 lays out two types of communications actions aimed at addressing the challenge described above. The • Counties and municipalities should amend their com- long-term goals are necessary to build long-term capacity pr ehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and other reg u - and understanding in the region, while the short-term lations to incorporate relevant re c o m m e n d a t i o n s goals address immediate issues of communication and contained in this plan. (Chapter 8, 11) public rel a t i o n s . • The Illinois EPAshould establish a process for rev i e w - ing and approving the expansion of wastewater ser- • E n s u re that every student graduating from a school vice areas that takes into consideration the impacts on in the Chicago Wilderness region is “biodiversity- the total natural environment within affected water- li t e r a t e . ” sheds. (Chapters 6, 8) • Make topics relating to biodiversity and Chicago • State agencies responsible for major transportation Wilderness a focus of local colleges and universities. in f r a s t ru c t u r e should incorporate biodiversity princi- • I n c rease the number of communities receiving non- ples into their planning and implementation deci- school-based biodiversity education prog r a m s . sions. Further, when a state infrastruc t u r e investment such as a toll road or major airport is likely to trigger • Gain a better understanding of the views of a broa d e r substantial residential, commercial, or industrial segment of the Chicago-area population on re s t o r a- development, impacted state agencies and local gov- ti o n . ernments should be re q u i red to enter enforc e a b l e • I m p rove the public’s understanding of the role of a g reements minimizing adverse environmental im- management in natural areas and communicate doc- pacts including the loss of biodiversity. (Chapter 11) umented benefits of local restoration efforts, particu- • Support the Regional Greenways Plan for northeast- larly those of most value to humans. ern Illinois and the Natural Ar eas Plan for southwest- • Foster local grassroots communication and pro v i d e ern Wisconsin. These plans identify actions to prot e c t mo r e opportunities for citizens to get involved in the and manage critical habitats for plants and animals decision-making process. Work with user gro u p s and generally improve ecosystems. They complement a ffected by restoration efforts on issues of common and support the objectives of this Recovery Plan. co n c e r n . (Chapters 3, 8) • I m p rove the credibility and public perception of the • Participate in the discussions of the Campaign for people involved in restoration effo r t s . Sensible Growth and Metropolis 2020. The Campaign pr omotes principles of economic development, red e - • Engage advocacy organizations in our efforts. Put a velopment, and open space preservation. Metrop o l i s st ru c t u r e in place to respond quickly to issues of per- 2020 has proposed actions to help the region develop ception as they arise. in a manner that will protect its economic vitality, • Assess the current state of biodiversity knowledge while maintaining its high quality of life. (Chapter 3) held by key decision-makers such as elected offi c i a l s • Support implementation of regional growth strate- and their staff, land managers, and planners. Cre a t e gies by the Northeastern Illinois Planning Comm- pr ograms to address their needs for biodiversity edu- ission, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning ca t i o n . Commission, and the Northwest Indiana Regional Planning Commission, insofar as these plans seek to 1.3.6 Adopt local and regional devel- reduce the region’s excessive rate of land consumption, preserve important open spaces, and pro m o t e opment policies that reflect the need to im p r oved water quality. (Chapter 3) restore and maintain biodiversity. In the course of regulating private development and expanding the public infrastruc t u r e in the three-state reg i o n , public officials have the opportunity to preserve and enhance biodiversity. This can be accomplished throu g h

12 Chapter 2 The Values of Biodiversity

While the connection between the region’s forest pre- 2.12. 1 serves and parks and the lofty ideals of an international Overview of the values convention may seem slim, in fact, what we conserve he r e has direct bearing on the preservation of global bio- of biodiversity di v e r s i t y . Further, and more important, the loss of biodiversity and its associated values that motivated the nations of the world to develop the Convention is occur- 2.1.1 Biodiversity conservation ring right here in the Chicago region. The people who as a global concern live here stand to lose as much as the people of trop i c a l ra i n f o r ests or old-growth fores t s . Understanding the full value of biodiversity in the reg i o n is req u i r ed in order to evaluate this plan’s rec o m m e n d a - tions. Unfortunately, it is difficult to develop and apply 2.1.2 The range of values neat economic measures for the current and future value of the region’s biodiversity to its citizens. In addition, of biodiversity attempting to justify biodiversity conservation only in Direct-use values terms of its utilitarian benefits to people will inevitably Economists and biologists who measure the value of bio- un d e r estimate its true value. There is, however, a wide diversity categorize those values by how people benefit range of recognized values of biodiversity, deriving from f rom them. In one such category are direct-use values, biodiversity at both the local and global levels. A st ro n g w h e re people directly consume or use species for their case can be made not only that conservation of biodiver- benefit. Most of the significant direct-use values are asso- sity makes good economic sense but also that it is impor- ciated with the great store of global biodiversity. These tant to the region’s citizens in ways that go beyond include the values of natural products for developing adequate economic measures. This chapter outlines the pharmaceuticals, for developing and maintaining the various values associated with biodiversity and evalu- genetic basis for agriculture, and for supporting indus- ates some of the costs and benefits of conservation tries based on use species such as fisheries and timber actions in Chicago Wil d e r n e s s . extraction. (For more discussion, see World Resourc e s Institute et al. 1992.) While most of these industries are The rapid decline of biodiversity around the world is a not based directly on species in Chicago Wilderness, sci- policy issue of major global concern. At the Earth Summit entists recognize that it is the global store of biodiversity, in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, most of the governments of the to which Chicago Wilderness contributes, that maintains world signed a global Convention on Biological Diver- options for the future for these and other major economic si t y . By 1993, enough nations had ratified the Convention activities. With the growth of the use of biotechnology, that it entered into force as international law. The the economic value of genetic material from natural Convention recognizes the conservation of biodiversity so u r ces is likely to rise. as a “common concern of humankind,” due to its intrinsic values and its importance to people. The Convention Ecosystem services asserts that governments are responsible for conserving In a second major category of value associated with their biological diversity and using biological res o u rc e s biodiversity are indirect values provided by ecosystem in a sustainable manner. services. Ecosystem services are the conditions and

13 Biodiversity Recovery Plan p rocesses through which natural ecosystems, and the ated with developing human-made solutions to the prob - species that constitute them, sustain and fulfill human lem. The Tunnel and Reservoir Plan, known as the Deep life (Daily 1997). We could not survive without the basic Tunnel, of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District, services provided by natural systems. These include pri- is a multi-billion dollar undertaking to collect excess mary conversion of sunlight to energy , nutrient cycling ru n o ff and treat it before releasing it into waterways. and retention, recycling of organic wastes, soil formation, These are the services that once were provided more moderation of climate extremes, moderation and control extensively by prairies, woodlands, and wetlands. of flood damage, control of insect pests, protection of water quality, and pollination of crops (Sullivan 1997, Recreation and aesthetics Daily 1997). Important factors in calculating the value of biodiversity ar e the rec r eational use of natural areas and the value that The link between ecosystem services and biodiversity is people place on natural systems for aesthetics and as part not always easy to demonstrate. While ecological theory of the cultural heritage. Not only are the protected lands pr edicts that biodiversity should be linked to improv e d that constitute Chicago Wilderness of global significance ecosystem function, res e a r ch at an ecosystem scale with for biodiversity, but they are also of enormous value for ap p r opriate controls is difficult to conduct. Some critics the quality of life of the region’s citizens. Public use of the may argue that any green plant can fix carbon dioxide fo r est preserves is staggering, with an estimated 40 mil- th r ough photosynthesis, and that non-native species can lion annual visits to Cook County lands alone (Fore s t play many of the roles that native species once played. Pr eserve District of Cook County 1994). In Lake County While this is true to a limited degree, a review of avail- in 1998, 75% of residents reported visiting a forest pre- able res e a r ch indicates that many aspects of the stability, serve within the previous two years, with hiking the functioning, and sustainability of ecosystems depend on most common use (Richard Day Research 1998). Ac t i v e biodiversity (Mooney et al. 1995, Tilman 1996, Tilman et na t u r e-based activities enjoyed by millions of the reg i o n ’ s al. 1996). The conservation and management of natural residents include hiking, bird watching, fishing, and pho- a reas that maintain diverse woodlands, prairies, and to g r a p h y . In 1996, more than 3 million people rep o r t e d aquatic systems will help assure the sustained pro d u c- engaging in wildlife watching in Illinois, contributing an tion of ecosystem services. estimated $1.6 billion to the economy (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Bureau of the Census 1998). While life as we know it could not continue without these ecosystem services, their value can be considered infinite. The high levels of use of the region’s natural areas indi- Ho w e v e r , it is possible to estimate the value they prov i d e cate the importance of these areas and their biodiversity di r ectly to our economy and the cost of replacing them to the quality of life in the region. The attractiveness of with human-made substitutes. As a very rough approx i - the region as a place to live and work is also a critical fac- mation, economists have estimated that the value of tor in its future economic competitiveness (Johnson ecosystem services and natural capital at the global level 1999). Healthy natural areas are the key for biodiversity, is $33 trillion per year, or approximately twice the global and they provide unparalleled opportunities for the out- g ross national product (Constanza et al. 1997). In the door rec r eation that millions of people in the region want. United States, Pimentel et al. (1997) estimate the annual economic benefits of ecosystem services at appro x i- Non-use values mately $300 billion. A final type of value associated with biodiversity, and a type harder to quantify, is non-use value. This includes These global and national studies are difficult to direc t l y feelings of ethical obligation to protect other species from connect to loss of biodiversity at the local level. extinction, religious values associated with cherishing the Nonetheless, they do indicate that biodiversity is likely Earth and its inhabitants, and the desire to leave for being grossly undervalued as we continue development f u t u re generations that which we are able to enjoy. In patterns that lead to its loss. At the local level, we can some ways, these concerns are the core motives for pro- m e a s u re some of the obvious costs associated with the tecting biodiversity. A national survey of public attitudes past loss of natural areas and biodiversity. Flooding on about biodiversity, a survey that included focus groups in the Des Plaines River alone costs local governments and Chicago, found that responsibility to future generations p roperty owners $20 million in an average year. In the and a belief that nature is God’s creation were the two late 1980s, two floods caused an estimated $100 million in most common reasons people cited for caring about con- damage (Illinois DNR 1998). Flooding in the region is servation of biodiversity (Biodiversity Project 1998). d i rectly associated with the loss of wetlands and other natural areas in the watershed that served to trap rain- The importance of one’s natural heritage cannot be esti- fall and store it, rather than dumping it in the river. mated in dollars. Nonetheless, there is value in the sense Another measure of the same problem is the cost associ- of discovery that comes to each new generation as it

14 Chapter 2. The Values of Biodiversity learns the essential facts of what came before. If that his- vation, will often find they can protect sites with biodi- tory includes a richness of color, shape, and form, so versity values at little or no additional cost. However, much the better. The people of this region can learn to pr otecting lands only for rec r eational purposes will not tre a s u r e remnant prairies, forests, lakes, and streams just s u ffice to protect biodiversity in the region or the full as they have learned from their parents and others to range of values it prov i d e s . tre a s u r e their cultural heritage of language, art, arch i t e c - tu r e, music, and rel i g i o n . 2.2.2 High replacement costs One approach to placing a value on a natural community 2.22. 2 is to calculate its replacement cost. Much of this reg i o n ’ s original flora and fauna and their corresponding habi- Issues in evaluating tats can be considered rare, a factor that normally influ- the costs and benefits of ences the price of any commodity. protecting biodiversity Consider whether it is even possible to replace the two most characteristic landscapes found in the region prior to European settlement: tallgrass prairies and wetlands in 2.2.1 Protecting a public investment their various forms. Those few remnants that are in already made something close to original condition are rare indeed, making up less than one percent of the region’s land- This region has already made a substantial investment scape. And though much has been learned about how to in preserving open space and in abating pollution in res t o r e or replicate original prairies and wetlands, effo r t s st r eams, rivers, and lakes. Sadly, these investments vary thus far have been less than fully successful. The mea- in their utility for sustaining biodiversity. In fact, natural su r es of success for such replications include both their communities are generally still declining, even on pub- natural sustainability and the extent of their biological licly owned, protected sites and in local streams and lakes. di v e r s i t y . To date, even the best manmade wetlands and This is partly because the importance of biodiversity, an d prairies have fallen short, especially by the yardstick of the means of preserving it, was only dimly understood species diversity. While this plan recognizes that res t o r a - when many of these public investments were made. tion of degraded habitats can go a long way toward returning and protecting the values associated with the Investments in public open space helped protect natural region’s biodiversity, it recognizes that the costs of doing communities from total destruction, but absent the mea- so are far more than protection would cost in the first s u res called for in this plan, those investments will place. Hence, protection of the region’s remnant natural steadily lose their value. For example, 100 years ago it ar eas can be viewed as a prudent economic measure. was a simple matter to walk through woodlands and, except in winter, enjoy flowering native plants. To d a y, the invasion of exotic plants such as buckthorn coupled 2.2.3 Value of competing uses with excessive grazing by deer make the same wood- Although our remnant natural communities may be irre- lands less accessible and much less appealing during placeable, the market value of the sites they occupy will most of the year. often be dictated by what they can command on the private market for such purposes as residential or commer- Major investments have provided an important founda- cial development. Fortunately, at least some types of tion for protecting the aquatic environment, including natural areas or habitats have not been considered highly bi o d i v e r s i t y , but much remains to be done. Public invest- suitable for suburban development or farming. These ments in wastewater treatment plants were intended to have included floodplains, some rural wetlands, and in s u r e clean streams and lakes throughout the region, but fragmented sites such as those found along rail lines. A other sources of pollution still prevail and even the mod- good example is the floodplain of the Des Plaines River ern local treatment plant can have adverse impacts on in both Cook and Lake Counties, much of which is now delicate and high-quality aquatic habitats. in forest pres e r v e s . Thus, a pragmatic argument for preserving biodiversity C o n v e r s e l y, lake and riverfront property not subject to is that it protects and enhances the value of large public flooding and sites with mature trees are often highly val- investments already made in public land and facilities. ued for urban development. Thanks to the foresight of pr evious generations, the tradition of preserving at least Agencies seeking property for permanent open space, some of these most attractive sites for public use has been with traditional goals of outdoor rec r eation and conser- well established. The best example is the extensive shore-

15 Biodiversity Recovery Plan line of Lake Michigan in Chicago, which is largely in pub- management program and to protect and manage large r lic ownership if not in its original, natural state. An o t h e r ar eas. The cost of not properly managing these same nat- outstanding example is the greenway extending along ural areas was suggested by the finding that 80% of the most of the Fox River in Kane County. These two cases county’s natural areas had declined to poor health since demonstrate that, in the public’s mind, the pres e r v a t i o n they had been originally studied 15–20 years earlier of important open space competes favorably with even (Applied Ecological Services, Inc. 1995). the most expensive private development. Lakes, streams, rivers, and wetlands can also be managed in various ways or left unmanaged. Tra d i t i o n a l l y , man- 2.2.4 Costs of land acquisition aging streams and rivers meant channelizing, dred g i n g , The two principal costs that would result from this plan’s and building various struc t u r es such as dams. This type recommended actions are for further land acquisition of management carries a high initial price tag and high and for increased site management. It is not possible to costs for maintenance and re p a i r, yet it provides fewer determine the exact costs of future acquisition because no benefits than management techniques that replicate nat- exact target has been set and because prices will change ural processes. When streams and rivers are managed in over time, generally upward, as further suburban devel- ways consistent with the goal of sustaining and enhanc- opment takes place. ing biodiversity, the benefits can include improved aesthetics, reduced flooding and flood damage, reduced soil In the spring of l999, three of the member counties er osion and sedimentation, improved fishing and other conducted successful ref e r enda on acquiring additional rec r eation opportunities, and the reduction of invasive, open space. Tog e t h e r , the three counties won authoriza- non-native species. These alternative methods also carry tion to spend up to $175 million to acquire an estimated a smaller initial price tag and req u i r e less annual main- 15,500 acres . tenance expenditure (Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission 1998). Both federal and state grants are expected to be available to assist local agencies in their land acquisition eff o r t s . Some sites will req u i r e substantial restoration efforts to Existing and potential grant programs are discussed in sustain or improve biodiversity. While each case is apt to Chapter 11 of this plan. Land preservation by less than have unique aspects, many successful projects to res t o r e fee-simple acquisition can also reduce costs. Various land lakes, wetlands, and prairies have already been under- pr eservation techniques are described in Chapter 8. taken within the Chicago Wilderness area, and the land- management agencies in the region can help pro v i d e The preservation and enhancement of biodiversity also general cost information. involves lands that remain in private ownership. In such cases, there is little or no acquisition cost to the public. 2.2.6 Evidence of public support Is maintaining biodiversity worth the cost? Both national 2.2.5 Costs of managing and local surveys consistently suggest that most people lands and waters think so. A study by the Brookings Institution rep o r t e d that 72% of the ref e r enda on the nation’s state and local The dollar costs of managing natural areas to sustain bio- parks and conservation won voter approval in Novem- diversity vary with the type and condition of the site and ber of 1998. These measures will trigger an additional with the availability of volunteers. These costs will also $7.5 billion in state and local conservation spending vary according to the phase or stage of restoration achiev- (Myers 1999). ed. For example, the initial or remedial phase may last th r ee to five years and cost substantially more than sub- The passage of three local county re f e renda allocating sequent annual maintenance. funds for land acquisition and management in the spring of l999 serves as the most recent direct evidence of pub- A consultant’s report to the DuPage County Fore s t lic support for spending public dollars to increase pro- Pr eserve District prep a r ed in 1995 estimated that the ten- tection of natural areas. The percentages of voters year costs for restoring and maintaining the County’s ap p r oving by Illinois county were: Kane County–65.6%; natural areas to good ecological condition would be Lake County–65.8%; and Will County–57%. about $20 million. The authors qualified their estimate by stating that it assumed no innovation or streamlining Two years earlier, a $75 million ref e r endum on behalf of of processes for remediation and maintenance over a the DuPage County Forest Preserve District passed by a ten-year period. Two effective means of lowering man- ma r gin of 57.4 to 42.6 perce n t . agement costs are to use volunteers as part of the

16 Chapter 2. The Values of Biodiversity

Neither the Cook County Forest Preserve District nor the Fi n a l l y , Chicago Wilderness sponsored its own survey of McHenry County Conservation District has held ref e r - the public’s willingness to spend public funds on behalf enda in recent years. However, other evidence suggests of biodiversity restoration. Kosobud (1998) summarizes that citizens in these counties would also support fur- the res u l t s : ther efforts to preserve and re s t o re natural areas. For The survey of a carefully selected, non-random sample of example, in the fall of 1998, the American Farmland Trus t residents revealed a significant willingness to pay for new sp o n s o r ed a study of public attitudes pertaining to farm- wilderness recovery and extension activities. The personal land and open space preservation in Kane, McHenry and interviews were carried out in a manner to acquaint the DeKalb Counties (Krieger 1999). Among the findings respondent with the topic and to prep a r e the respondent for we r e the following: a thoughtful answer. The sample mean willingness to pay • Buying open space to protect it from development was a $37.80 per year increase in annual property tax pay- ranked equal to spending for improved law enforce - ment, or equivalent increase in rent, all accruing to the ment, crime reduction, and schools, and it ranked sig- ap p r opriate government agencies for this effort. The mean nificantly higher than spending for roads, libraries, adjusted for the non-random sample was $19.67. Applied and more public rec r eational facilities. to the close to 3 million households of the region, this estimate indicates that up to 59 million dollars per year could • Of the actions off e red to protect open space, enlarg- become available for land acquisition, soil preparation, weeding forest/prairie preserves and wetlands/marshes ing, seeding, maintenance, and other measures. A p u b l i c far outranked buying farmland development rights or well informed about such activities is an essential prere q u i - building more hiking/biking trails, more state parks site for such a proj e c t i o n . or local park district parks, or more golf courses. • The most common reason cited for valuing prot e c t i o n of open space was wildlife habitat.

In a l996 survey sent principally to residents of Cook Co u n t y , more than 90% percent of the respondents said restoration of natural areas in around Chicago was good and beneficial (Barro and Bright 1998).

17 Chapter 3 The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region

3. 1 3.1.2 Human history The earliest evidence of human activity in the Chicago How we got where we Wilderness area dates to approximately 12,000 years ago, are today when highly nomadic Paleo-Indian clans came primarily to hunt larger animals at upland bogs and sloughs. The Paleo era lasted until 8000 B.C. and was followed by 3.1.1 Natural history the cultural periods called A rchaic-Indian (8000 to 600 B.C.), Woodland-Indian (600 B.C. to A.D. 900), and The natural history of the Chicago region prior to the Mississippian-Indian (A.D. 900 to1640). During these arrival of the European settlers in the 1800s is well told eras of pre h i s t o r y, people gradually shifted from total in the companion document to this plan, An Atlas of dependence on hunting and gathering (Paleo and Bi o d i v e r s i t y , published by Chicago Wilderness in 1997. It Ar chaic) to a more settled culture that incorporated agri- describes the geologic evolution of the Chicago reg i o n , c u l t u re (Woodland, and especially Mississippian). In emphasizing the impacts of past glacial periods, and the these prehistoric periods, the peoples necessarily lived evolution of natural communities following the last in total dependence on the local ecosystems. They helped glacial ret r eat about 13,000 years ago. shaped the character and health of natural communities t h rough practices, such as setting fires, that supported Of most significance for planning the recovery of the their pro c u rement of food, medicine, and materials region’s biodiversity is the fact that its early-history pro- important to their daily lives. duced a variety ecosystems, each raising its own distinct set of challenges for preservationists and land managers. About 1640, European and French-Canadian trade goods The current classification system, described in chapter 4, w e re incorporated into local cultures. By the 1670s, recognizes four main types of forested communities, two Fr ench-Canadian trappers and traders used the area. The of savanna, two of shrublands, four of prairie, and six of first re c o rded visitors were members of the Marq u e t t e wetlands, as well as cliffs and lakeshores. Each of these and Joliet expedition in 1673, who were on their way was largely shaped by a unique combination of geology back to Ft. Michilimackinac after “discovering” passages (including soils), climate (including variations in both to the Mississippi via both the Wisconsin and Illinois te m p e r a t u r e and moisture), and frequent exposure to fire rivers. In the 1680s, LaSalle and Tonti spent more time in (whether triggered by lightning or by Native Am e r i c a n s ) , the region and left the first extensive written description all of which had prevailed for thousands of years. of its flora and fauna. Another important factor was this region’s flat terrain, which made the area prone to surface and over- b a n k Although the region was visited in the 1700s by Fren c h flooding. This flooding, in turn, produced intermittent and British military personnel, continuous settlement by st r eams and wetlands, each supporting its own unique cu l t u r es other than the Native Americans began only in complex of native species. While the terrain was gener- 1779 with Du Sable. From this period until the early ally flat, subtle variations in topography pro d u c e d 1830s, many Pottawattomie, Sauk, and Winnebago peo- hy d r ologic diffe r ences that gave rise to diffe r ent hydric ple continued remnants of their previous, uninfluenced regimes of prairies, wetlands, savannas, and fore s t s . cu l t u r es. The incoming European-American-African cul- Wind patterns and the resulting water currents along the tu r e absorbed much indigenous knowledge of the uses of sh o r es of Lake Michigan produced a highly specialized dune ecology.

18 Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region plants, animals, and local materials. Throughout the 19th ing of crops or the construction of buildings. This prac- c e n t u r y, many vestiges of this knowledge were still in tice eventually led to the loss of over 95% of the reg i o n ’ s common use, but as agriculture transformed the land- wetlands. Meandering streams were viewed as a cause scape and native landscapes disappeared, most of it was of local flooding and a waste of valuable land, a pro b- lost or not in widespread practice. lem that could easily be solved by straightening or channelizing the streambed. Both techniques destro y e d In 1831, Cook County was incorporated. In 1833, 8,000 natural habitat. Native Americans were displaced to west of the Mississippi River. Between 1830 and 1835, the settlement Rivers, streams, and even lakes were considered part of a round the mouth of the Chicago River grew from 200 a cost-free disposal system. Untreated sewage and toxic to 3,265 people. By 1840, thousands lived in the city and wastes were routinely discharged into waters that had an increasing number settled the countryside. In 1838, pr eviously supported abundant fisheries and numerou s 100 bushels of wheat were shipped out; in 1842, this had other aquatic species. gr own to 600,000 bushels. Harbors and rivers were dredged and, in 1836, the The settlement and growth of Chicago has been attrib- Illinois and Michigan canal project began, spurring uted largely to its location at a national transportation another population boom. Even as the canal was begin- cro s s r oads. Indeed, regional and national canals and rail- ning operations in 1848, the railroad industry was tak- road systems generated commercial activity and spurred ing steps toward making Chicago the focal point for settlements throughout the Chicago region. But a rev o - operations serving the entire middle and far western lution in farming technology had an even greater impact regions of the country. on the vast surrounding prairies. During the 1840s, John D e e re and others began to produce a steel plow that The evolution of human interaction with natural com- finally made it possible for farmers to break up the soils munities has been paralleled by an evolution of under- of the deep-rooted tallgrass prairies. standing of that interaction. Settlers may not have intended to cause the local extinction of so many species, Farmers also felt compelled to suppress fires. They pe r haps only wolves, bears, and other animals that posed plowed fire b reaks and mowed fields that might other- a direct threat to their own lives or prop e r t y . It took sev- wise burn. Absent fire, woody plants and trees had the eral decades of rapid decline of the native landscape opportunity to spread into any lands not used for build- be f o r e local leaders recognized the need for a system of ings, crops, or pasture. Livestock grazed in re m n a n t fo r est preserves throughout Cook County. wooded areas, further altering the local ecology. In 1894, a nationally prominent landscape architect, Jens The loss of prairies and forests through fire suppres s i o n Jensen, began to pre p a re maps of what he thought and physical reduction by the plow and ax was acceler- should be preserved. In 1904, Cook County Board ated by the introduction of Old World plant species. Chairman Henry Foreman, Jensen, architect Dwight Species including buckthorn, honeysuckle, and multi- Perkins, and others published The Outer Belt of Fore s t flora rose successfully competed with native species, and P reserves and Parkways for Chicago and Cook County. I n the suppression of fire allowed some native species to 1913, the Illinois General Assembly passed enabling leg- expand into new areas. Prairies and savannas became islation authorizing the creation of forest preserve dis- filled with gray dogwood, hawthorn, and box elder; tricts in counties other than Cook. In 1915, the General woodlands and forests became dominated by box elder, Assembly finally enacted legislation establishing a sys- maple, ash, elm, and other fire-sensitive trees. The tem of publicly owned preserves in Cook County. in c r ease in both canopy and understory species grea t l y Another famous contributor to this campaign was arch i - reduced the available sunlight reaching species grow i n g tect and planner Daniel Burnham who, with fellow arch i - at ground level, including oak and hickory seedlings. tect Edward Bennett, published the Plan of Chicago. Graminoids and flowers also suffe r ed as shade increa s e d . Building upon the recommendations of Foreman, Jensen, As the composition of the vegetation changed, insect and Perkins, this work proposed, among other things, species were often adversely affected, in some cases caus- an extensive system of regional parks. The motivation ing losses in turn to both flora and fauna that depended behind this plan is revealed in the following passage upon specific insects. Finally, the loss of native, flamma- fr om the Plan of Chicago: ble underg rowth has even limited the ability of fire to The grouping of manufacturing towns at the southern end ef fectively remove understory brus h . of Lake Michigan, and the serious attempts that have been made (especially in Pullman and Gary) to provide excellent Farmers and their village cousins learned to drain or fill living conditions for people employed in larger operations, wetlands that would otherwise interfere with the plant-

19 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

cr eate a demand for extensive parks in that region; because drainage, fire—to survive and thrive. Cowles’s work also no city conditions, however ideal in themselves, supply the revealed what has been confirmed ever since: that the craving for real out-of-door life, for forests and wild flowers Chicago region is one of the most biologically rich areas in and streams. Human nature demands such simple and Am e r i c a . wholesome pleasures as come from roaming the woods, for rowing and canoeing, and for sports and games that req u i r e In the early 1900s, scientists, re c reationists and nature la r ge areas. The increasing number of holidays, the grow - enthusiasts recognizing the value and potential of the ing use of Sunday as a day of rest and ref r eshment for body Indiana Dunes area, fought to have the region pres e r v e d . and mind tired by the exacting tasks of the week, together In 1925, Indiana Dunes State Park was established, pro- with the constant improvement in the scale of living, all tecting 2,182 acres of the dunes ecosystem. In the 1960s, make imperative such means of enjoyment as the large park Illinois Senator Paul H. Douglas, fearing that commerce pr ovides. Theref o r e, adequate provision for the growing pop- would swallow the remaining lakefront and dunes, ulations that of necessity must live in restricted town area s joined the crusade to save the dunes in northwest req u i r es that in the region south and southwest of Chicago Indiana that had begun a decade earlier by Doro t h y all those marsh lands and wooded ridges which nature has Buell. As a result of these efforts, the Indiana Dunes thus far preserved from being taken for manufacturing pur- National Lakeshore was authorized by Congress in 1966. poses now should be secured for the parks that in the next The National Lakeshore today includes appro x i m a t e l y generation will be req u i r ed, but which will be beyond rea c h 15,000 acres . unless taken in the immediate future. By 1922, the Cook County Forest Preserve District had The development of a system of outlying large parks along ac q u i r ed 21,500 acres, roughly a third of its pres e n t - d a y the lines above indicated will give to Chicago bre a t h i n g holdings. Acquisition of preserves pro g ressed more spaces adequate at least for the immediate future; the phys- slowly thereafter until the national environmental move- ical character of the lands to be taken will insure a diver- ment of the l960s inspired a federal program of grants sity in natural features most pleasing and re f reshing to for open-space acquisition. All of the region’s forest pre- dwellers in cities; and the acquisition of the areas entirel y serve and conservation districts took advantage of this ar ound the present city will afford convenient access for all p rogram. Between l960 and l981, the inventory of state the citizens, so that each section will be accommodated. parks and county preserves in Illinois nearly doubled Mo re o v e r , the development of especially beautiful sections, fr om 64,123 acres to 123,101 acres. The l999 total stands such as the region about Lake Zurich, will give marked indi- at 165,724 acres, plus the 19,000-acre Midewin pres e r v e viduality to Chicago’s outlying park system. It is by seiz- and various sites in northwest Indiana and southeast ing on such salient features of a landscape and emphasizing Wisconsin. One outcome of the generous federal match- their peculiar features that the charm and the dignity of the ing grants for open space preservation, when combined city are enhanced. with the rapid rate of suburban development, was that local districts assigned a higher priority to land acquisi- Thus, the very process of metropolitan population tion than to land management. Moreo v e r , the rea l i z a t i o n g rowth during the early part of the 20th century estab- has only come recently that our natural communities lished the demand and, not so incidentally, the tax base deteriorate when left unmanaged. that were essential precursors to today’s system of fores t pr eserves and protection of the remnant natural commu- In the 1940s, University of Wisconsin professor John nities they contain. It follows that the demands of a Curtis began experimenting with the restoration of newly growing regional population for rec r eation, cou- native plant communities. But it was not until l962 that pled with growth in the tax base and loss of open space Morton Ar b o r etum biologist Ray Schulenberg launched (mostly to suburban development) make the attainment the world’s second major ecosystem restoration: a 100- of this plan’s goals most rea l i s t i c . a c re prairie that today contains 350 species of native plants. Schulenberg notes that while the prairie is now While Perkins, Jensen, Burnham, et al. were making their self-sustaining, it still lacks a number of plant and insect plans, a prof e s s o r , Henry Chandler Cowles, was initiat- species that would be found in a natural prairie. ing a new science of ecology at the University of Chicago. Christy (1999) writes: The national environmental movement begun in the l960s also featured federal grants for the abatement of water Co w l e s ’ s pioneering work over several decades established pollution, a vital factor in preserving aquatic habitat the concept that a native landscape is really a highly diverse th r oughout the region. It was also in the 1960s that local g roup of plant communities, the “residents” of each com- pr eservationists and planners began to explicitly evaluate munity adapted to one another and the community as a potential preservation sites according to the number of whole requiring specific physical factors—water, light, benefits presented, thereby increasing the return on the

20 Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region taxpayers’ investment. For example, a stream and its adjacent floodplain might offer opportunities for fishing 3. 2 while also rec h a r ging groundwater and precluding the Current status and future flood damages that would have resulted from urbanization. A s t ream in its natural state would also offer aes- of metropolitan-wide thetic benefits and enhance the values of adjacent p roperties. A site containing all these features would de v e l o p m e n t clearly outrank a site containing only cultivated fields. 3.2.1 Forecasts for growth in the An example of this kind of analysis can be found in the report pre p a red by the Northeastern Illinois Planning Chicago Wilderness region Commission for the DuPage County Forest Pre s e r v e Although recent years have seen the increasing use of Commission in 1965. The report recommended adding best management practices and best development prac- 19 sites totaling 8,714 acres to the 2,350 acres of existing tices to ease the negative impacts of metropolitan grow t h DuPage County forest preserves. Woodlands, marshes, on our valued natural res o u r ces, the continuing expan- and remnant prairies were among the landscape features sion of human development in the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s identified in that plan. Yet, even in a report so recent, the region still carries with it many threats to biodiversity. further loss of biodiversity in this region was not rec o g - Fo r emost among these is the sheer paving over of open nized as an impending threa t . space by new development. Subsequently, the Chicago Wilderness metropolitan region has experienced Another important step for our natural areas came with in c r eases in flooding, more contamination of streams due the establishment in 1963 of the Illinois Nature Pres e r v e s to urban run o f f, and a continuing encroachment on wet- system. The first nature preserve designation was given lands and other natural habitats. to the Illinois Beach Nature Preserve in 1964. There are c u r rently 105 designated sites in northeastern Illinois, O fficial forecasts to the year 2020 by regional planning many of which are lands owned by county forest pre- agencies paint a picture of substantial growth amidst serve or conservation districts. Once a site is designated, uneven growth pre s s u res in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s the Illinois Nature Preserves Commission and the region. Table 3.1 presents these forecasts, developed by Department of Natural Resources provide technical the regional planning commissions for Illinois, Wis c o n s i n assistance to the property owner to help preserve the nat- and Indiana. For the six-county northeastern Illinois area , ural communities contained therein. The identification of the population is expected to increase by 25% while ap p r opriate sites for designation has been an outcome of employment increases by 37%. The expected population the Illinois Natural Ar eas Inventory, completed in its ini- gr owth rate in Kenosha County, Wisconsin, is nearly as tial form in 1978. gr eat (24%), while the northwest Indiana counties should gr ow at a more modest level (9%). The forecasted employ- In Indiana, a state-wide Natural A reas Survey com- ment growth in Kenosha County (39%) is even gre a t e r menced in 1967, with a two year study to locate, describe, than that in northeastern Illinois. The northwestern Ind- and evaluate areas already in use as nature preserves and iana region’s employment growth is expected to be 19%. other natural tracts worthy of preservation by public agencies, conservation groups, or educational institu- It should be noted that LaPorte County, Indiana is tions. In that same year, the state legislature authorized included in the Chicago Wilderness region, as indicated the creation of the Indiana Nature Preserves System and on Table 3.1. Elsewhere in this plan, either on maps or in established a Division of Nature Preserves in the Depart- tables, if information is not presented for LaPorte County, ment of Natural Resource s . it is because information was not available or time did not allow its inclusion. Any update of this plan will include Americans have long expressed concern for the plight of pr oviding the relevant, available information for LaPorte African wildlife, the destruction of the Amazon rain Co u n t y , Indiana. fo r ests, and the uncertain fate of the American wilderness widely thought to exist only in the remotest parts of the Far West and Alaska. Yet the history of this re g i o n 3.2.2 Past patterns of t h roughout the twentieth century also demonstrates a regional decentralization pr evailing public interest in preserving nature here, however that term has been understood. The population of the six-county northeastern Illinois a rea between 1970 and 1990 increased by only 4% and employment increased by 21%, while the amount of land in urban uses increased by 33% during the same period.

21 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Table 3.1 Gr owth forecasts for the Chicago W il d e r ness reg i o n 1

PO P U L AT I O N 19 9 0 20 2 0 19 9 0 – 2 0 2 0 % Change

No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois2 Ch i c a g o 2, 7 8 3 , 7 2 6 3, 0 0 5 , 3 3 8 22 1 , 6 1 2 8% Surburban Cook County 2, 3 2 1 , 3 1 8 2, 5 8 9 , 0 6 1 26 7 , 7 4 3 12 % Du Page County 78 1 , 6 8 9 98 5 , 7 0 1 20 4 , 0 1 2 26 % Kane County 31 7 , 4 7 1 55 2 , 9 4 4 23 5 , 4 7 3 74 % Lake County 51 6 , 4 1 8 82 7 , 5 6 4 31 1 , 1 4 6 60 % Mc H e n r y County 18 3 , 2 4 1 36 1 , 5 9 8 17 8 , 3 5 7 97 % Will County 35 7 , 3 1 3 72 2 , 7 9 4 36 5 , 4 8 1 10 2 % Tot a l 7, 2 6 1 , 1 7 6 9, 0 4 5 , 0 0 0 1, 7 8 3 , 8 2 4 25 %

So u t h e a s t e r n Wis c o n s i n Kenosha County 12 8 , 2 0 0 15 9 , 6 0 0 31 , 4 0 0 24 %

No rt h w e s t e r n Indiana Lake County 47 5 , 5 9 4 50 9 , 2 2 9 33 , 6 3 5 7% Po r ter Conty 12 8 , 2 9 3 15 7 , 8 2 8 29 , 5 3 5 23 % La P o r te County 10 7 , 0 6 6 11 1 , 0 0 0 3, 9 3 4 4% Tot a l 71 0 , 9 5 3 77 8 , 0 5 7 67 , 1 0 4 9%

EM P L O Y M E N T 19 9 0 20 2 0 19 9 0 – 2 0 2 0 % Change

No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois2 Ch i c a g o 1, 4 8 2 , 3 8 1 1, 7 4 5 , 4 9 5 26 3 , 1 1 4 18 % Surburban Cook County 1, 2 9 3 , 6 5 2 1, 7 7 3 , 8 8 1 48 0 , 2 2 9 37 % Du Page County 53 0 , 3 2 2 81 5 , 1 7 8 28 4 , 8 5 6 54 % Kane County 14 5 , 2 0 5 22 3 , 0 4 0 77 , 8 3 5 54 % Lake County 22 8 , 6 0 6 39 3 , 6 4 1 16 5 , 0 3 5 72 % Mc H e n r y County 65 , 5 2 6 10 6 , 3 3 6 40 , 8 1 0 62 % Will County 99 , 3 9 3 22 2 , 4 2 9 12 3 , 0 3 6 12 4 % Tot a l 3, 8 4 5 , 0 8 5 5, 2 8 0 , 0 0 0 1, 4 3 4 , 9 1 5 37 %

So u t h e a s t e r n Wis c o n s i n Kenosha County 50,900 71,000 20 , 1 0 0 39 %

No rt h w e s t e r n Indiana Lake County 18 8 , 2 6 1 21 5 , 6 5 0 27 , 3 8 9 15 % Po r ter Conty 46 , 3 4 1 67 , 0 5 0 20 , 7 0 9 45 % La P o r te County 44 , 7 8 5 50 , 7 0 0 5, 9 1 5 13 % Tot a l 27 9 , 3 8 7 33 3 , 4 0 0 54 , 0 1 3 19 %

1 The source of the data in this table are the official forecasts of the regional planning agencies, the No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC), the Southeastern Wisconsion Regional Planning Commission, and the North w e s t e r n Indiana Regional Planning Commission.

2 The NIPC forecasts shown in this table are one of two forecast files adopted by NIPC. The forec a s t s shown assume all aviation demand to be accommodated by existing airports. A second file, not shown, assumes the addition of a new airport in the south suburbs.

22 Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region

The northwest Indiana experience

he goals of biodiversity rec o v e r y in northwest Indiana reflect a region of contrasts, dilemmas and hope.1 Rich and extensive natural res o u r ces such as dunes, marshes, and savannas are contrasted with an indus- Ttrial complex whose pollution discharges were relatively unchecked for decades. The region faces the challenges of recovering from the loss of high paying jobs and the decline of a productive industrial economic base. It also faces the pres s u r es of rapidly growing suburban communities at the same time that inner city neigh- bo r hoods are experiencing disinvestment and decline. Amidst these contrasts and dilemmas are a changing cu l t u r e that highly values environmental protection and an industrial community which has become more willing to work to balance environmental and economic development objectives.

No r thwest Indiana generally is bounded by the Kankakee River on the south, the Lake Michigan shoreline on the north, the Illinois State line on the west, and the Valparaiso Moraine on the east. The Calumet area in the west portions of northwest Indiana includes the watersheds of the Little Calumet and Grand Calumet Rivers. About one third of the 45 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline and its adjoining natural res o u r ces are publicly owned by the municipal, state or federal government. Included in this area are the Indiana Dunes National La k e s h o r e and the Indiana Dunes State Park which together pres e r ve over 15,000 acres of shoreline and large sand dunes. Most of the dunes are covered by deciduous forest while the ones closest to the lake are grass- co v e r ed or bare and wind-blown. Behind the dunes are interdunal ponds, marshes and wooded swamps. Mo r e than 1,300 native plants grow in the Indiana Dunes National Lake Shore, which has the third largest number of plant species in the entire national park system. The varying habitat of the dunes area and the pres - ence of Lake Michigan, with its influence on migration, provides regular resting, nesting and wintering areas for at least 271 species of birds .

Late in the 19th century, industry also found the lakeshore, rivers and land (inexpensive and non-agricultural) attractive for steel mills, refineries, chemical plants and hundreds of smaller fabricating and subsidiary industries. industrial development. In 1906, to build the U.S. Steel Gary Works on 9,000 acres of Lake Michigan shorel i n e , 1 they moved as much dirt as was moved for the Panama Canal, diverted a river ⁄2 mile from its natural course, laid a tunnel 80 feet deep and 9 miles out into Lake Michigan, and constructed a mile-long break-water that used mountains of concrete and 160,000 tons of steel. The National Steel Company Midwest Division and Bethlehem steel plants were built last in the 1960’s. Because of the industrial pollution that resulted from this industrial concentration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers this area to have the greatest concentration of environmental problems in the Midwest and initiated intensive enforcement action against violators of pollution co n t r ol laws. The U.S. EPA has also designated eight Superfund sites (toxic contamination) in northwest Indiana. Un f o rt u n a t e l y , there are far more concentrations of hazardous waste. For example, the Superfund sites do not include the Indiana Harbor and Ship Canal, where discharges of wastes by industry and municipal sewage trea t - ment plants have built up a 20 foot layer of toxic sediment totaling 3.5 million cubic yards .

During the 1990’s, through the effo r ts of both the federal, state, and local governments, with a strong parti c i p a - tion of citizen environmental groups, there has been a fundamental shift toward a more cooperative rel a t i o n s h i p between the economic interests in northwest Indiana and those striving to protect and res t o r e their natural re- so u r ces. Rather than simply fining or penalizing industrial polluters, a process has been initiated whereby joint, cooperative and integrated solutions are pursued on a comprehensive ecosystem basis. Lee Botts refers to this as a “cross-media” approach. It is a shift away from individual penalties for water or air or groundwater pollution to one considering the total environmental effect of an action. Where a diffe r ent industrial practice might curtail (as req u i r ed) direct discharge, an alternative waste disposal method could increase air pollution. Alternatives to air pollution control practices might have led to increased ground water contamination. Instead, an approach of examining and investing in comprehensive solutions to pollution problems is being pursued as a joint proc e s s among the industries, the U.S. EPA and citizen environmental groups. Some are formalized in “Consent Decree s ”

(Continued on next page.)

23 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

negotiated between enforcement agencies, the violators of pollution control laws and the courts. Tod a y , more actions are voluntary because industries have learned that waste prevention promotes production effi c i e n c y . The first major consent decree in 1992, USX corporation agree to spend $33 million for pollution control and for pollution prevention needed to comply with environmental standards. In a second Consent Decree in 1996, USX committed to spend $90 million for cleaner coke oven processes, removal of contaminated sediments from the Grand Calumet River and other clean-up necessary because of past practices. This time another $100 million was committed to go beyond what the letter of the laws req u i r es. With the growing agreement that prevention is cheaper than dealing with waste after it has been created and that production must become more sustainable, now more companies are forming partnerships with private groups and government agencies in voluntary restoration and pres e r vation projects.

1 The contrasts and dilemmas described here are well documented in The Environment of Northwest Indiana (PAH L ’s Inc., Valparaiso, Indiana, 1993). The facts about the Indiana Dunes and the industrial development impacts in the area were drawn mostly from The Indiana Dunes Story (Shirley Heinze Environmental Fund, Michigan City, Indiana, 1997). The hopes described he r e were derived from interviews in January, 1999 with Lee Botts (Indiana Dunes Environmental Learning Center) and Mark Reshkin (Northwest Indiana Forum Foundation, Inc. and former Chief Scientist at the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore) .

Thus, while regional population growth was moderate, since 1990. If the trend towards sprawl is coupled with its impacts were substantial because of the way the the population growth expected for the Chicago Wi l d- gr owth was distributed. The population of the grow i n g erness region in the first two decades of the 21st century, suburban areas in Illinois increased by 24% or almost 1 we will see many more people occupying much, much million, while the City of Chicago and 89 suburbs lost mo r e land. about 770,000 people. Similar patterns occurred in Wisconsin and Indiana. Sustainability becomes a critical issue when looking to the future growth of this region. Serving an increa s i n g l y Development in the Illinois six-county area from 1970 to dispersed population while maintaining the social and 1990 converted over 450 square miles of agricultural and economic fabric of established communities will req u i r e vacant lands to residential and employment uses. This substantial and increasing levels of public investment. high rate of land consumption, which also occurred in The threats to air, soil, and water quality implicit in this the Wisconsin and Indiana portions of the Chicago gr owth pattern are potentially severe. Both economic and Wilderness region, reflected the generally larger lot sizes en v i r onmental factors thus threaten the overall quality of that have characterized residential, commercial, and life in northeastern Illinois. Failure to address traff i c industrial development and redevelopment throu g h o u t delays, mismatch between the locations of jobs and the region. It also reflected a high rate of household for- housing, environmental quality, and the costs of disin- mation relative to population increase as household sizes vestment will pose risks to the region’s economic declined. The overall pattern was one of a few more peo- competitiveness. While not unduly limiting the choices ple occupying a lot more land. of location that households and business make in the marketplace, the region must seek ways to preserve both the natural and built re s o u rces it already has and to 3.2.3 The challenge of sustainability encourage new growth to take more sustainable forms. Recent information suggests that the pattern of sprawl- ing growth in the Chicago Wilderness region is continu- 3.2.4 Region-wide efforts for meeting ing. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that northeastern Illinois’s population has increased by as much since 1990 challenges from growth as it had in the preceding twenty-year period (1970– Concomitant with this Biodiversity Recovery Plan, 1990). The outer suburban areas throughout the Chicago region-wide planning efforts are underway in each of the Wilderness region are developing rapidly, adding hous- th r ee states included in the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n . ing at unprecedented rates and employment-based The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission is pur- development as well. At the same time, the City of Chic- suing a Regional Growth Strategy, which includes the ago and 65 close-in Illinois suburbs have lost population development and support of public policy that prom o t e s

24 Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region sustainable growth, with balanced development res p o n - sive to the limitations of the region’s natural re s o u rc e s 3. 3 and the need to improve environmental quality. This The impact of development g rowth strategy includes support for the Regional Gr eenways Plan, which preserves and enhances reg i o n a l on ecosystems biodiversity with 4300 miles of environmental corridors th r oughout the six-county northeastern Illinois area . 3.3.1 Introduction In Wisconsin, regional plans for land use and for the pro- Development of land for urban uses is the primary threa t tection and management of natural areas and critical to the remaining unprotected natural lands of our reg i o n , species habitats, products of the Southeastern Wis c o n s i n and in some cases it is causing serious degradation of Regional Planning Commission, have outlined detailed pr otected lands as well. strategies to moderate regional decentralization and to p reserve environmental corridors and other areas. The Impacts on biodiversity by the continuing growth and Wisconsin plan specifically identifies 474 square miles for decentralization of the greater Chicago region can be planned natural-area protection. The Northwestern visualized in several ways. One effective approach is to Indiana Regional Planning Commission is developing a p i c t u re the ecosystem in three layers, as illustrated in vision for the year 2020 that encompasses land-use pat- Fi g u r e 3.1. terns, the transportation system, the social and economic fabric of the area, and an environmental sensitivity that The top layer is ecological health of living communities, pr oduces a high quality of life for the region. Other dis- which can be measured by the long-term viability of the cussions underway and proposals for sustainable devel- species and ecological communities of the region, their opment in the Chicago Wilderness region include the genetic diversity and ability to re p roduce. This layer is 2020 Chicago Metropolis Project, the Strategic Open reflected in discussions of the status of communities con- Lands at Risk Project, the Campaign for Sensible Grow t h , tained in chapters 5 and 6. and the Illinois Growth Task Force. See sidebar describing northwest Indiana’s struggle for environmental quality. The second layer is the health of the supporting environ - ment, which can be measured by the integrity of physi- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s cal, chemical, and biological habitat and ecological ✔ Support the Regional Greenways Plan for northeast- p rocesses. This environmental layer contains the ele- ern Illinois and the Natural Ar eas Plan for southwest- ments that support life and also things that place stres s ern Wisconsin. These plans identify actions to prot e c t upon life. For example, water is essential for living and manage critical habitats for plants and animals things, but too much water can be stressful and even and generally to improve ecosystems. They comple- fatal. The key stressors that threaten our ecological com- ment and support the objectives of this Recovery Plan. munities are discussed in chapters 5 and 6 ✔ Participate in the discussions of the Campaign for The third layer is human activity that places stress on Sensible Growth and Metropolis 2020 as they relate to habitat and natural processes. For thousands of years, biodiversity conservation. The Campaign pro m o t e s humans were a compatible part of the ecosystems of our principles of economic development, red e v e l o p m e n t , region, but in the last 200 years, human activity has and open space preservation. Metropolis 2020 has pro- i n c reased and is now so pervasive that no aspect of posed actions to help the region develop in a manner na t u r e is left untouched. Nature can no longer freely take that protects its economic vitality, while maintaining its course in our region. Our actions determine what will its high quality of life. survive and what will not. ✔ Support implementation of regional growth strategies by the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commis- To understand what is happening to the region’s natural sion, the southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning communities, it is first necessary to understand the Commission, and the Northwest Indiana Regional p rocesses that supported them for thousands of years. Planning Commission, insofar as these plans seek to Next it is necessary to understand how modern humans’ reduce the region’s excessive rate of land consump- activities have altered these processes and what can be tion, preserve important open spaces, and pro m o t e done to res t o r e them or compensate for the alterations. im p r oved water quality.

25 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

LIVING COMMUNITIES biodiversity and biological health

HABITAT / ENVIRONMENT physical chemical biological

HUMAN ACTIVITY

Fi g u r e 3.1 Ecosystem health and human activity

The health of the various living communities in our • Soil: struc t u r e, fertility, permeability, erosion and sed- region is discussed in Chapters 5 and 6, together with im e n t a t i o n the status of needed habitats and the factors that aff e c t • Sunlight and microclimates: shade, shelter, weather, them. Chapter 9 describes management tools available to and climate ov e r come problems discussed below. • Fi r e: its inhibition or promotion of various species 3.3.2 Natural processes and habitats • Competition and natural balances: food-webs, her- bi v o r y , and pred a t i o n The central theme of this plan is that truly durable and resilient populations of all living organisms inhabiting • Habitat size and connectivity: genetic flow and sur- the Greater Chicago Region re q u i re, above all else, the vival, corridors for migration and dispersal, and habi- p rotection and rehabilitation of ecological habitats and tat diversity the natural processes that sustain them. These natural • Pollination and seed dispersal pr ocesses provide the dynamic mix of nurture and stres s needed to maintain ecological health. Many of the above elements and processes have been substantially altered by human activity since Europ e a n In the region, the key processes and related factors are: settlement. They all still support or adversely affect the •Wat e r remnant natural communities that survived conversion of our landscape to farming and urban uses. Of grea t e s t • Gr oundwater and soil moisture importance today are continuing changes in h y d ro l o g y • Watershed and stream hydrol o g y and water quality, the suppression of fi r e, and changes in c o m p e t i t i o n, primarily the impact of invasive species • Floodplain processes of inundation, channel move- resulting from human alteration of the environment and ment, etc. natural proc e s s e s . • Water quality, including chemistry, nutrient content, cl a r i t y , etc.

26 Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region

3.3.3 Hydrology and groundwater Urban wastewater disposal has also been a major factor in the degradation of the region’s streams, rivers, and Each of the region’s natural communities has, over the lakes. Current federal and state standards governing the course of several millennia, adapted to its own moisture quality of wastewater discharges from point sourc e s en v i r onment. The Midwestern seasonal weather patterns have helped to upgrade conditions throughout the include sporadic heavy rains, drought, freezing, and region by removing pollutants. However, increases in the thawing. The effect of rain or snow varies with the per- quantity of wastewater due to growth can cause adverse meability of the soil as well as the local topography. ef fects on aquatic communities.

Little of the rainfall on the original landscape of the area Pollution is a well-documented, major stressor of aquatic ran directly into streams, because most of it was absorbed systems in the form of sediment, excess nutrients, and by the soil aided by the native vegetation. The landscape toxic substances. Sediments can create problems such as included many wetlands, seasonal ponds, and areas with burying spawning areas, choking small organisms, inter- high grou n d w a t e r . The streams were wide and shallow, fering with feeding, and blocking light from aquatic fed by grou n d w a t e r . Flow varied seasonally and in many plants. Excess nutrients can cause excess plant grow t h , cases ceased altogether during dry seasons. Wa t e r followed by oxygen depletion when algae or plants drained slowly from the relatively flat and heavily vege- de c a y . Toxic substances can have both acute and chron i c tated landscape, and much of it was transpired by plants e ffects ranging from poisoning to long-term endocrine without reaching streams at all. Streams rose and fell d i s ruption including feminization of male org a n i s m s . slowly and did not cut deep channels. Aquatic plants I m p roved sewage treatment has greatly reduced acute w e re more abundant than they are today and aquatic af fects, but many chronic effects linger and storm water habitat was diverse. Living components of the re g i o n still washes toxins into our streams. Roadway salt spray we r e adapted to, and dependent upon, the varying pat- and salt ru n o ff cause problems and possible adverse terns and degrees of wetness produced by the hydro l- e ffects. Pollution effects on terrestrial systems are less ogy of the area . well known. Increasing nitrogen deposition from airborne sources is an important res e a r ch issue. Draining the land for both agricultural and urban purposes resulted in vast changes. Draining lowered water Farming has had major adverse impacts on natural tables and eliminated wetlands, ephemeral ponds, sedge communities in the past, including increasing the meadows, and wet prairies. The amount of grou n d w a - amounts and rates of storm flow from cultivated fields. ter available, its depth, and the timing of moisture cycles Ho w e v e r , agricultural land use generally supports bet- changed, altering both soil moisture and the flow of ter water quality and stream habitat than urban uses, g roundwater into streams. These changes reduced the in large part because agriculture leaves stream buff e r s diversity of both terrestrial and aquatic habitats. and creates fewer impervious areas. Pollution from agricultural sources has been reduced as a result of pes- As watersheds become urbanized, the incre a s i n g ticide regulation and voluntary adoption of impro v e d amounts of impervious surface and added drainage facil- management practices. Good farm practices can help to ities make water flow “flashier.” This adds to peak storm p rotect stream quality while poor practices can result flows and adds erosive energy , which changes the phys- in degradation. ical form of the stream and its suitability as habitat. The pr evention of natural infiltration reduces grou n d w a t e r while increasing stream volumes. The addition of waste- 3.3.4 Soil formation, fertility, water may also maintain stream levels during periods structure, permeability, erosion, when they formerly would have been wetlands contain- and sedimentation ing little or no flowing water. Urban ru n o ff also has a negative effect on water quality, bringing with it increa s - The soil of the region has formed since the melting of the ed nutrients, sediment, pesticides, and other toxic sub- Wisconsinan glaciation approximately 13,000 years ago. stances. Stream flows also have been substantially The raw material left by the glaciers consisted primarily af fected by construction of dams and dredging of chan- of clay and sand from the bottom of glacial Lake Chicago nels, affecting both stream flows and groundwater levels. and glacial till left in moraines and other glacial forms. The rich black soils of our area were formed by prairie Restoration and maintenance of groundwater and strea m plants with their deep and prolific root systems. Other flows are essential to protecting natural areas and the few soils formed under the influence of forests. Soil is formed high-quality stream segments remaining in the reg i o n . over periods of time far beyond the reach of this plan, but changes in the soil caused by humans can occur r a p i d l y. Soil compaction and loss of stru c t u re and per-

27 Biodiversity Recovery Plan meability decrease the groundwater supply and increa s e prairies, shrublands, savannas, woodlands, and dry- ru n o ff and flooding. Compaction can also destroy soil mesic upland fores t s . m i c ro o rganisms, eliminate many native plant species, and make restoration difficult. Erosion is a visible prob - F i re suppression following settlement has gre a t l y lem in the form of new gullies in a few areas, but grad- reduced the extent of fire-dependent communities and ual loss of soil is a greater long-term concern because new the former rich variety of habitats. Prairies, shrub l a n d s , soil forms so slowly. and savannas have mostly disappeared, even from protected areas, while the surviving woodlands tend to be Er oded soil causes major problems downstream, where it choked with brush and fire-intolerant trees, both native causes water turbidity and settles as sediment in wet- and exotic. The simplified and homogenized landscape lands, ponds, and rivers. Sedimentation is a major cause of fers little of the complex habitat needed by a wide vari- of habitat degradation in streams and wetlands. It clogs ety of plants and animals native to the area. In wood- and buries essential habitat and makes restoration diffi - lands and forests, secondary effects from fire suppres s i o n cult. Also, invasive aquatic plant species often move into and invasion by “weedy” species include shading out of aquatic systems as a result of increased sedimentation. the ground flora and erosion where soil is exposed.

Fi r e suppression is obviously needed in non-natural area s 3.3.5 Sunlight and microclimates to protect prop e r t y , but wisely planned and managed fire Each species is adapted to a range of intensity and dura- is essential to res t o r e and maintain the health of the fire- tion of sunlight. Many of the native species of the reg i o n dependent communities of Chicago Wilderness. Return- ar e adapted to the full sunlight of prairies or the scattered ing fire to natural areas in the form of prescribed burns shade of open woodlands. Others are adapted to the o ffers the opportunity to return an essential natural heavier shade of closed forests. These various patterns pr ocess and major force of nature to the landscape. of sunlight were maintained primarily by the forces of climate, fire, and browsing. The availability of sunlight at 3.3.7 Competition and natural balance, various levels within terrestrial communities and in aquatic communities is a powerful factor in their survival food chains and predation and is a key consideration in protection and res t o r a t i o n . Each organism competes for habitat including the water, Many management and restoration activities are aimed nutrients, light, and other ingredients necessary to at ensuring the availability of the diverse mix of sunlight gr owth and rep r oduction. The species found in the native and shade needed to support the full range of species in communities of the region compete among themselves each ecological community native to our reg i o n . but are able to persist and even create conditions that are favorable for each other. Some species depend on the 3.3.6 Fire p resence of others in a variety of relationships ranging f rom parasitism to symbiosis. Competition is seldom a F i re is an essential force that shaped and sustained the matter of overwhelming advantage, but rather a matter natural ecosystems of the region. Whether started by of slightly better ability to make use of the habitat. lightning or native people, it favored vegetation that had Species within a community are usually in dynamic bal- evolved with fire and limited the extent of fire- s e n s i t i v e ance, changing in vigor and abundance as conditions tr ees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants, which would have change from year to year. In healthy communities, dis- otherwise out-competed most of the fire-adapted species. turbance can be absorbed without permanent loss, For example, most of the region’s naturally dominant although the diversity within the community may be t ree species need ample sunlight in their early stages. reduced if some species no longer find the habitat they Their seedlings and saplings grow only when fire sup- need. Over time, the needed conditions may re a p p e a r, pr esses shade-producing vegetation. Sun-loving prairie allowing the missing species to return, or the new condi- communities also depend upon fire to suppress woody tions may admit previously excluded species. In either plants, which would otherwise produce ever-i n c re a s i n g case, complexity is res t o r ed. In this sense the communi- shade. Fire also favors some species by providing condi- ties tend to be self-organizing within a dynamic balance. tions that stimulate their seed germination or grow t h . As species from outside of the region and around the The varying intensities and frequencies of natural world are introduced into the area, they compete for f i res contributed to the rich mosaic of the landscape. habitat. In most cases, they either fail to survive or find a Virtually all of the regional landscape was influenced by niche without disrupting the native communities. In a f i re to some extent and burned at least occasionally. few cases, they find major advantage over the native Communities that are highly fire-dependent include species and become invasive, choking out the native

28 Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region species and unbalancing the native community. This is For long-term viability, a population must maintain the current situation with species such as buckthorn, gar- genetic diversity. Otherwise, it can become inbred, losing lic mustard, and purple loosestrife. its ability to adjust to change, to survive a disease, or to re p roduce. A population must also be large enough so Invasive species, many of them exotic, are having a huge that it is not simply wiped out by an event such as an adverse impact on native flora and fauna in both unpro- unusual storm. In addition to genetic diversity and size, a tected and protected areas. In many cases, the effect is population needs access to diverse habitat. Some species magnified by the disruption of natural processes, but need diffe r ent habitats during diffe r ent life stages. Al s o , some exotic species successfully invade even in the habitat itself can vary from year to year due to weather absence of major disruption, e.g., wood-boring beetles, or other disturbances. Partial compensation for small size Dutch elm disease, and carp. The short-term need is to can be made by connections between populations. c o n t rol and eliminate invasive exotics before they Ho w e v e r , corridors can also have disadvantages such as become widespread. The long-term need is to pre v e n t pr oviding avenues for movement of exotic species. f u t u re introductions of new exotic species and to take quick action to control any new invasions. Some species req u i r e a large area as a home range. In the Chicago Wilderness area, these included large pred a t o r s Native species can also become invasive and have such as bears and wolves and large herbivores such as elk adverse impacts on natural communities if ecological and buffalo. The interactions among such animals and pr ocesses are disrupted. A prime example is the sprea d - their food (plants or prey) are only partially understood, ing of fire-intolerant trees such as maples into oak grov e s but the large animals no doubt had substantial effects on and prairies as a result of fire suppression. Native species food chains, habitat, and species abundance. Some rel a - can also become invasive if natural predators are absent. tively large predators such as marsh hawks and short- Pe r haps the best example of this is the white-tailed deer. e a red owls are now rare, but could be re s t o red by In the absence of predators, the herds have grown far restoring needed habitat. beyond the carrying capacity of the land and are adversely affecting native plant species and communities The study of island biogeography has brought cleare r t h roughout much of the region. Raccoons, opossums, understanding to the limits of relatively small areas and and cats are also abundant due to human activities and populations. In many respects, knowledge of island bio- a lack of predators, and they are adversely affecting pop- geography applies to the remnant natural areas of the ulations of small animals and ground-nesting birds . Chicago Wilderness region because they are an arch i p e l - ago of biological islands. They have become islands as the The loss of a species can break a food chain, leaving other land around them is used for agriculture or urban devel- species without food or without a consumer to limit their opment. But they are also being further divided into sp r ead. Loss of large predators has contributed to exces- smaller islands as essential habitat is lost due to interrup - sive populations of smaller predators and deer, as noted tion of natural processes and displacement by invasive above. The endangered Karner blue butterfly is an exam- species. From this perspective, the natural areas of ple of a species that can be left stranded on a broken food Chicago Wilderness are not only islands that are losing chain. This butterfly relies exclusively on the wild lupine species according to the natural laws that apply to as a food plant during its larval stage, a factor that con- islands; they are shrinking islands that will support pro- tributes to its rarity. Many other species depend on plants g ressively fewer species and biodiversity in the future . that occur only, or primarily, in remnant natural area s . The realization that biodiversity is being lost due to fragmentation of habitats is relatively recent, as is the rea l i z a - tion that management can res t o r e natural communities. 3.3.8 Habitat size The size of available habitat is an essential factor for long Many aspects of island biogeography apply where v e r term health and survival of species and ecological com- habitat is shrinking or being divided. This includes even munities. The many aspects of habitat size are encapsu- aquatic habitats. Although water connects stream habi- lated within the concept of island biogeography. These tats, both physical and chemical changes can act as bar- aspects include patch size, habitat diversity, connected- riers that divide streams into smaller pieces of habitat. ness, genetic flow, migration, dispersal, and survival of keystone species. The theory of island biogeography has A major finding of this plan is that the remnant popula- become well developed and reported in scientific litera- tions of native plants and animals of the region are in t u re. For an easily read, but thorough presentation, see gr eat danger of being lost, in part because critical habitats Quammen (1996). in our natural areas have become shrinking islands. This

29 Biodiversity Recovery Plan t h reat can be addressed through twin activities of pro- Human activities that affect natural processes tecting more natural areas and managing the land to S t ressors from human activities that reshape natural res t o r e habitat. pr ocesses and are most threatening to the sustainability of ecological communities include: As discussed in Chapter 5, there is a great need for large sites with varied habitat. However, some of the need can • Development that fragments habitats and isolates be met by connecting fragmented habitats with corridors po p u l a t i o n s adequate for migration and dispersal. • Urban development: soil compaction, accelerated run o f f, eros i o n 3.3.9 Pollination and seed dispersal • Poor farming practices: soil compaction, accelerated run o f f, eros i o n For a plant population to survive, pollen must reach flowers and seed must be dispersed. Wind disperses pollen • H y d rological modification of streams and drainage and seeds for some species, but many others rely on far of land m o re specific vectors, such as insects, birds, and mam- • Dr edging and filling of wetlands mals. For example, the prairie white fringed orchid rel i e s on the rare sphinx moth for pollination. As another exam- • Fi r e suppression and resulting excessive shade ple, seeds of some plants need to pass through the diges- • In t r oduction of non-native species tive system of a bird or mammal in order to germinate. • Pollution by toxic substances, excess nutrients, and se d i m e n t 3.3.10 Stresses on • In c r ease in animals favored by urban conditions, e.g., ecological communities d e e r, raccoons and cats, leading to excessive bro w s- Section 3.3 has discussed both natural processes and the ing or pred a t i o n human activities that exert stress on natural communi- • Removal of native vegetation ties. Chapters 5 and 6 discuss the status of each type of natural community in our region and the stressors that • Excessive collection of plants, seed, and animals af fect that community type. In considering how to pro- including reptiles and amphibians tect and res t o r e ecological communities and their species, • Nighttime lighting, which disrupts normal behavior it is often useful to analyze the processes involved, and draws migrating birds to collide with struc t u re s including stressors and their sources (which are often human activities). For example, the hydrological cycle (a • Climate change: Climate change is of concern for the pr ocess) now includes reduced groundwater (a stres s o r ) Chicago Wilderness area but differs from the other and farm tiles (a major source of the prob l e m ) . st r essors in time and spatial scale. It occurs naturally over very long periods of time, usually measured in St r essors are summarized below. terms of millennia. During the slow process, living systems respond by gradually moving to areas best Ecological processes exert stress on populations, but suited to their survival and through selection of traits native organisms have been subject to those stresses for best suited for survival under the new conditions. such a long time that they are adapted to them. Such Atmospheric changes due to human activities now st r esses may be beneficial and even necessary for some appear to be causing changes in climate far faster than species and communities. By comparison, stresses from natural processes and probably faster than natural our industrial society have been present for decades communities can respond. A complicating factor is rather than millennia. Where land has been developed that because of habitat fragmentation, the movement for agricultural and urban uses all, but a few of the thou- of at least some organisms will be blocked. The stres s sands of native species have been eliminated except in of climate change may also reduce the ability of native remnant natural areas. Even in the remnant areas, native communities to resist invasion by plants from other species and communities will not survive unless natural parts of North America and the world. Maintaining a p rocesses are re s t o red or simulated through manage- full stock of genetic variability is one way in which ment. Humans are part of the ecosystem, but unless we the species of the region can be aided in surviving manage our activities intelligently, we will find ourselves changing climate. Larger protected areas, and func- in an impoverished landscape. Instead of the former rich tional connections between natural areas will also help tapestry of life, our surroundings will be a small number species and communities respond to changes in cli- of weedy species that can survive frequent disrup t i o n . matic factors.

30 Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region

Direct loss of natural areas F o rest preserves and other passive re c reational are a s , The most direct threat to many natural communities together with natural areas left undeveloped for a variety remains the common bulldozer. While many of the of reasons, have provided a refuge for native biodiversity. remaining natural communities are located on prot e c t e d The biodiversity surrounding Chicago far exceeds that lands, others are still subject to development and typi- found in the Midwest’s agricultural areas, where essen- cally lack adequate protection, whether by cooperative tially all land is used for crop production. It was the a g reements or by local, state, or federal authority. The urban economy and value system that made prot e c t i o n identification of still-unprotected natural communities of natural areas possible. Now we must ensure that and arrangements to protect them are work in prog re s s . essential further acquisition and management take place. Once identified, the preservation of unprotected sites will merit very high priority. Although the remnants of the original Chicago Wil d e r - ness are declining, it is not too late to res t o r e and prot e c t their beauty and biological integrity; it is not too late to 3.43. 4 e n s u re survival of a complete spectrum of the original natural communities of the region. The heritage of invest- Urban biodiversity ments made during earlier development, together with the vast res o u r ces of the urbanizing region, provides the The seeming oxymoron of “urban biodiversity” lies at the platform enabling us to make a choice. heart of the situation and the opportunity in the Chicago Wilderness region. Trea s u r es remain, yet the trea s u r es are at risk. The greatest risks are the result of human activ- it y , yet the means of protection lie in the res o u r ces of the urban population and its institutions.

While development has had widespread adverse impact on natural communities and biodiversity, it has also pr ovided the financial and human res o u r ces for prot e c t - ing and restoring what remains. The question is whether the people and institutions of the region will take the needed action. There are reasonable yet powerful ways of getting this done and this plan has nearly 150 re c o m- mendations for doing this. In particular, county and municipal governments are specifically directed (Section 8.3) to use their development review and implementation pr ocesses for limiting impacts of development on the natural habitats needed to sustain biodiversity.

31 Chapter 4 Overview of Assessment Processes and Findings for Natural Communities and Species of the Region

landscape defined by a combination of geology, phys- 4. 1 io g r a p h y , soils, hydrol o g y , pre-settlement vegetation, and Terrestrial communities characteristic fauna (Swink and Wilhelm 1994). While the Chicago Wilderness classification system was 4.1.1 Terrestrial classification the basis for this plan, it is important to be able to rel a t e this system to national efforts to classify community An important step in developing creating a recovery plan types. Appendix 2 includes a cros s - re f e r ence to the pre- for the region’s biodiversity was the development of a vailing national standard for community classification system for classifying the region’s natural communities. ( G rossman et al. 1998, Anderson et al. 1998, Federal While many of the region’s land managers were using Geographic Data Committee 1997). One benefit of this community classifications based on one developed by translation is that it allows comparison of Chicago the Illinois Natural Ar eas Inventory (INAI) (White 1978), Wilderness community classifications to The Nature t h e re were some diff e rences among the many systems. Conservancy’s database of globally threatened commu- The primary shortcoming of the INAI system is that it nity types (Faber-Langendoen 1996). Table 4.2 shows the does not identify woodlands as a separate community natural communities in the Chicago Wilderness re g i o n type, whereas scientists today recognize this commu- that are ranked as critically imperiled, imperiled, or rare nity’s distinctiveness and importance. Scientists and land at the global level. See Appendix 2 for an explanation of managers within Chicago Wilderness worked together to the entries in this table. develop a standardized system for the region to serve as a tool for region-wide efforts, although classification sys- While natural communities are defined mainly accordi n g tems in place at the local level are still used for specific to plant associations, each community has associated ani- management actions. mal species. Chicago Wilderness scientists and land managers developed a list of the major animal associations The classification scheme includes seven basic commu- found in the terrestrial communities (Table 4.3). The ani- nity classes. Within each community class are several mal assemblages do not coincide exactly with plant com- community types, and often there are subtypes within munities, and some diff e rences in nomenclature arise types. Table 4.1 gives the complete listing of terre s t r i a l fr om this. Some animal assemblages occur in more than community types. Complete scientific descriptions of the one community type. This plan evaluates these animal various communities can be found in the Chicago assemblages in terms of their status and the importance Wilderness Community Classification System (Appendix of the Chicago region to their global conservation. 1). Summarized descriptions may be found in the Considering animal assemblages, rather than just indi- Chicago Wilderness Atlas of Biodiversity (w w w. e p a . g o v / vidual species, allows a better understanding of tren d s glnpo/chiwild) and at the beginning of each of the sec- due to widespread habitat loss and degradation. The tions in Chapter 5. This classification system was devel- region’s mammal species, for the most part, use a range oped for regional purposes. It should be noted that the of habitats and do not aggregate readily into diff e re n t region is part of three natural divisions: Morainal, Lake habitat-based assemblages. We have not yet described Plain, and Grand Prairie. Natural divisions are units of

32 Chapter 4. Overview of Assessment Processes and Findings for Natural Communities and Species of the Region

Table 4.1 Ter restrial community types in the Chicago W il d e r ness classification system

Fo r ested communities Sh r ubland communities Wetland communities • Upland fores t • Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil shrub l a n d • Ma r s h Dry - m e s i c Dry - m e s i c Ba s i n Me s i c Wet - m e s i c St re a m s i d e Wet - m e s i c • Sand shrub l a n d • Bo g • Floodplain fores t Dry - m e s i c Graminoid Wet - m e s i c Wet - m e s i c Low shrub Wet Fo re s t e d Prairie communities • Fl a t w o o d • Fe n No rt h e r n • Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie Ca l c a r eous floating mat Sa n d Dr y Gr a m i n o i d Mesic Fo re s t e d •Woo d l a n d Wet Dry - m e s i c • Sedge meadow Me s i c • Sand prairie Wet - m e s i c Dr y • Pa n n e Mesic • Seep and spring Savanna communities Wet Ne u t r a l • Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil savanna • Gravel prairie Ca l c a re o u s Dry - m e s i c Dr y Sa n d Me s i c Mesic Wet - m e s i c Cl i f f communities • Dolomite prairie • Sand savanna Dr y • Er oding cliff Dr y Mesic • Dolomite bluff Dry - m e s i c Wet Me s i c La k e s h o r e communities • Be a c h • Fo re d u n e • High dune

or evaluated animal assemblages associated solely with Illinois portion of the region (Table 4.4). These sites may aquatic communities, although key species and features be publicly protected or they may be on private land. of concern were part of the evaluation process for these S i m i l a r l y, the Indiana Natural Heritage database pro- communities. vides information on the quantity and quality of community types found in Indiana, but the coverage is not Full reports from the animal workshops are available on- nearly as complete as it is in Illinois. For many sites, the line at www.c h i w i l d . o r g. Scientific names for the species quantity and quality are not known. mentioned in this plan are listed in Appendix 3. To develop a more complete picture of the re m a i n i n g extent of natural communities in the entire Chicago 4.1.2 Overview of existing information Wilderness region, we compiled data on protected land on natural-area extent of each community type from a variety of sources (Tab l e 4.5). While these data rep r esent the best available com- Originally based on the Illinois Natural Ar eas Inventory, pilation, the method of collection imposes many limits the Illinois Natural Heritage database includes informa- to their interpretation. The Forest Preserve and Cons- tion about amounts and quality of remaining high-qual- ervation Districts vary greatly in the extent and type of ity sites for each community type. These data provide a information they have on their lands. good re p resentation of the high-quality sites in the

33 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Table 4.2 Cro s s w a l k 1 between Chicago Wil d e r ness communities and national standard for community types for those communities which are globally rare 2

Chicago Wil d e r ness name The Nature Conservancy name G- r a n k

Dr y-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna ...... No r th-central bur oak openings* ...... G1 Mesic fine-textured-soil savanna ...... No r th-central bur oak openings* ...... G1 Wet-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna ...... Bur oak terrace woodland ...... G1 Dr y-mesic fine-textured-soil shrub l a n d ...... Hazelnut barren s ...... G1 ? Wet-mesic woodland ...... Swamp white oak woodland ...... G1 Wet-mesic sand shrub l a n d ...... Ha r dhack shrub prairie ...... G1 No rt h e r n flatwood ...... No rt h e r n (Great Lakes) flatwood ...... G2 Mesic fine-textured-soil prairie ...... Central mesic tallgrass prairie ...... G2 Mesic sand prairie ...... Mesic sand tallgrass prairie ...... G2 Midwest dry-mesic sand prairie* ...... G3 Wet sand prairie ...... Lakeplain wet-mesic prairie ...... G2 Central wet-mesic sand tallgrass prairie ...... G2 G 3 Lakeplain wet prairie ...... G2 G 3 Central cordgrass wet sand prairie ...... G3 ? Dr y gravel prairie ...... Midwest dry gravel prairie ...... G2 Mesic gravel prairie ...... Midwest dry-mesic gravel prairie ...... G2 Dr y dolomite prairie ...... Midwest dry limestone-dolomite prairie ...... G2 Dr y-mesic sand savanna ...... Lakeplain mesic oak woodland ...... G2 Black oak/lupine barren s * ...... G3 Sand flatwood ...... Pin oak-swamp white oak sand flatwood ...... G2 ? Mesic dolomite prairie ...... Midwest dry-mesic limestone-dolomite prairie ...... G2 ? Wet dolomite prairie ...... Midwest wet-mesic dolomite prairie ...... G2 ? Pa n n e ...... In t e r dunal wetland ...... G2 ? Sand seep ...... Midwest sand seep ...... G2 ? Dr y fine-textured-soil prairie ...... Midwest dry-mesic prairie ...... G2 G 3 Wet fine-textured-soil prairie ...... Central wet-mesic tallgrass prairie ...... G2 G 3 Central cordgrass wet prairie ...... G3 ? Dr y sand prairie ...... Midwest dry sand prairie ...... G2 G 3 Be a c h ...... Gr eat Lakes sea-rocket strand beach ...... G2 G 4 Dr y sand savanna ...... Black oak/lupine barren * ...... G3 Dr y-mesic sand shrub l a n d ...... Midwest dry-mesic sand prairie* ...... G3

1 Based on community descriptions, The Nature Conservancy community types have been matched to Chicago Wil d e r ness Community types. It should be noted that this is not a simple one to one match; often a Chicago Wil d e r ness type covers more than one TNC type and vice versa. 2 The Nature Conservancy has developed a system to reflect global rarity of the communities. The first th r ee categories here are defined as follows: G1 = Critically imperiled globally (typically 5 or fewer occurren c e s ) G2 = Imperiled globally (typically 6 to 20 occurren c e ) G3 = Vulnerable (typically 21 to 100 occurren c e s ) G#G# = range of ranks; insufficient information to rank more prec i s e l y ? denotes inexact numeric rank * Signifies that the TNC community type corresponds to more than one Chicago Wil d e r ness community type and theref o r e is found elsewhere in the cros s w a l k .

34 Chapter 4. Overview of Assessment Processes and Findings for Natural Communities and Species of the Region

The McHenry County Conservation District (1998) recently conducted a natural-areas inventory for the Table 4.3 en t i r e county. This report provides information on each Ter restrial animal assemblages site’s community types and its quality but does not identified for conservation planning include any acreage for the community types. To t a l ac r eage of each site is given. This study is useful in that it covers the entire county, not just Conservation District Bi rd s lands, but it is limited in that it does not include amounts Moist grassland birds (with and without shrub s ) of land for each community type. Dr y grassland birds Savanna birds The DuPage County Forest Preserve District has a com- Open woodland birds plete database covering all of its holdings, which includes Hemi-marsh birds both quality and quantity of each community type on Sh o r eline birds each of its sites. The DuPage community-classification Closed upland woods birds system differs more than any other from the Chicago Closed bottomland woods birds Wilderness system, and a comparison of the types was Pinewood birds re q u i red before the data could be compiled with those fr om the other counties. Reptiles and amphibians For the Recovery Plan process, the Lake and Kane Savanna reptiles and amphibians County Forest Preserve Districts estimated the number of Sedge meadow, fen, and dolomite prairie ac r es of each community type from aerial photographs of reptiles and amphibians their sites. Lake County Forest Preserve District staff out- Fo r est and woodland reptiles and amphibians lined each community type on the photographs and used Grassland reptiles and amphibians a planimeter to calculate the areas. For Kane County, the Sand savanna and sand prairie reptiles ar eas were roughly estimated from the photographs. In and amphibians both cases, the land managers assessed quality based on Marsh reptiles and amphibians their experience with the lands in question, not on quan- Panne reptiles and amphibians titative surveys. High gradient stream reptiles and amphibians Ri v e r , lake, and pond reptiles and amphibians Both the Cook and Will County Forest Preserve Districts have data on quantity and quality only for certain sites. These sites include Nature Preserves and a few sites for In s e c t s which there are detailed management schedules. The Dr y and mesic blacksoil prairie insects data come from the original Illinois Natural A re a s Dr y and mesic sand prairie insects I n v e n t o r y, nature - p reserve dedication proposals, and Dr y and mesic gravel prairie insects county management schedules. The data do not portray Wet prairie insects the complete picture of the natural areas in either county. Dr y blacksoil savanna and woodland insects Wet blacksoil savanna and woodland insects To add to the data available at the beginning of the Sand savanna insects Recovery Plan process, a current Chicago Wilderness pro- Fen insects ject is using satellite imagery to develop a vegetation map Marsh insects for the entire region, including unprotected lands. From Sedge meadow insects the satellite images, it is possible to identify vegetative Bog insects cover for eleven land-use categories, including eight nat- Floodplain forest insects ural or semi-natural categories. The accuracy of these clas- Upland forest insects Fo r edune insects sifications is adequate within protected lands in Illinois to pr oduce preliminary results (Table 4.6). These data help pr ovide a more complete picture of the natural communi- Ma m m a l s ties currently included in our preserve system. Anext step in the process will be to improve the accuracy of the clas- The mammals of Chicago Wil d e r ness do not sifications of lands outside the preserves and in Indiana. ag g r egate into assemblages. Mammals of Ul t i m a t e l y , remotely sensed data will provide a baseline co n c e r n are listed in Table 4.8. for monitoring prog r ess toward achieving the goals of this recovery plan, for measuring amounts and quality of natural communities, and for assessing the impacts of fragmentation and increased suburban development.

35 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Table 4.4 Sum of acres from Illinois natural areas inventory by community type and grade (Data are from Illinois Natural Heritage database for six county area of north e a s t e r n Illinois)

CW category INAI community type Total no. of acr es % Grade A % Grade B % Grade C La k e s h o r e...... Beach 63 76 24 0 Fo r edune 10 2 84 16 0 Cl i f f ...... Dolomite cliff 7. 5 73 27 0 Dr y-mesic barren 6 0 0 10 0 Er oding bluff 11 . 4 91 9 0 Fo re s t e d...... D r y-mesic upland forest 12 3 6 . 5 15 46 25 Mesic floodplain forest 24 3 2 29 63 Mesic upland forest 98 0 19 50 26 No rt h e r n flatwood 92 . 9 0 93 2 Sand flatwood 26 1 0 8 87 Wet floodplain forest 32 0 10 0 0 Wet-mesic floodplain forest 34 0 76 24 Wet-mesic upland forest 50 0 10 0 0 Pr a i r i e...... D r y gravel prairie 29 10 31 10 Dr y sand prairie 17 9 . 2 68 9 23 Dr y-mesic dolomite prairie 27 7 10 56 Dr y-mesic gravel prairie 3 33 33 33 Dr y-mesic prairie 19 26 53 21 Dr y-mesic sand prairie 37 0 . 3 63 12 17 Gravel hill prairie 5. 6 0 10 0 0 Mesic dolomite prairie 18 11 33 56 Mesic gravel prairie 22 41 41 14 Mesic prairie 41 7 . 9 9 44 39 Mesic sand prairie 47 7 . 1 22 18 39 Wet dolomite prairie 5 0 10 0 0 Wet prairie 21 4 . 1 7 33 57 Wet sand prairie 29 3 27 25 33 Wet-mesic dolomite prairie 91 0 16 65 Wet-mesic prairie 27 7 . 5 11 22 58 Wet-mesic sand prairie 69 . 4 25 12 63 Sh ru b l a n d...... S h r ub prairie 78 . 5 0 38 12 Sa v a n n a...... D r y sand savanna 27 7 40 4 23 Dr y-mesic sand savanna 38 8 11 27 42 Dr y-mesic savanna 3 0 0 10 0 Mesic savanna 20 0 10 0 0 Wetland ...... Acid gravel seep 7 0 10 0 0 Ca l c a r eous floating mat 16 9 62 36 2 Ca l c a r eous seep 19 . 1 63 11 0 Fo r ested bog 10 7 29 64 0 Fo r ested fen 22 . 5 0 64 36 Graminoid bog 7 71 29 0 Graminoid fen 27 7 . 8 24 26 32 Low shrub bog 34 62 24 0 Low shrub fen 0. 4 10 0 0 0 Marsh 20 9 8 14 70 13 Panne 67 81 4 15 Sedge meadow 10 1 8 . 3 16 31 42 Seep 28 . 6 41 35 10 Sh r ub swamp 12 42 8 50 Tall shrub bog 16 0 88 13

36 Chapter 4. Overview of Assessment Processes and Findings for Natural Communities and Species of the Region

Table 4.5 Sum of acres in protected or other significant natural areas by community type (Data are from Illinois and Indiana Departments of Natural Resources and County Forest Pres e rv e / C o n s e r vation Districts) (Only includes lands that have been identified to community type. These data are not complete and lack of acreage in a column does not imply zero acreage of a community type in a county.)

LA K E , IL 2 CO O K 1 DU PA G E 2 KA N E 2 LA K E , IN 3 MC H E N R Y1 PO RT E R 3 WI L L 1 FORESTED COMMUNITIES Upland fores t Dr y-mesic 73 9 37 4 10 1 5 20 49 6 Mesic 11 5 7 35 0 45 2 18 22 75 35 0 Wet-mesic 32 10 30 Unclassified 30 . 0 94 6 Tot a l 19 2 8 73 4 45 2 10 1 53 22 95 18 2 2

Floodplain for es t Wet-mesic 34 59 10 20 30 4 Wet 54 4 80 76 6 43 Unclassified 60 5 78 17 9 Tot a l 11 4 9 11 3 82 5 88 20 52 6

Fl a t w o o d No rt h e r n 48 0 21 3 38 9 40 Sa n d 13 5 Unclassified 33 Tot a l 51 3 34 8 38 9 40

Woo d l a n d Dr y-mesic 38 6 42 8 13 6 8 3 83 Mesic 31 8 21 4 13 0 8 Wet-mesic 12 7 Unclassified 90 9 76 10 3 55 Tot a l 17 4 0 71 9 13 6 8 14 1 4 83 55

TO TA L 53 3 0 19 1 3 30 3 4 16 4 2 73 10 5 95 24 0 3

SA VANNA COMMUNITIES Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil savanna Dr y-mesic 14 0 11 1 1 44 20 24 Mesic 22 4 9 45 34 Wet-mesic 14 Unclassified 38 1 23 6 2 10 35 Tot a l 75 9 11 2 0 23 6 2 99 34 20 59

Sand savanna Dr y 27 7 18 20 0 Dr y-mesic 14 2 20 2 45 0 31 60 Mesic Unclassified 13 0 79 Tot a l 41 9 20 2 59 8 23 1 13 9

Unclassified savanna 45 7 31 Tot a l 45 7 31

TO TA L 11 7 8 13 2 1 23 6 2 55 6 63 2 20 22 9

37 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

LA K E , IL 2 CO O K 1 DU PA G E 2 KA N E 2 LA K E , IN 3 MC H E N R Y1 PO RT E R 3 WI L L 1 SHRUBLAND COMMUNITIES Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil shr ub l a n d Wet-mesic fine-textured-soil 1

Unclassified shr ub l a n d 2 41 0 44

TO TA L 3 41 0 44

PRAIRIE COMMUNITIES Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie Dr y 82 20 3 2 Mesic 32 9 37 7 97 4 83 73 23 33 Wet 96 17 0 31 5 10 5 19 5 Unclassified 19 8 58 3 59 Tot a l 70 5 54 7 14 9 1 15 3 78 45 97 Sand prairie Dr y 17 9 22 25 Mesic 60 3 14 7 27 33 95 Wet 37 5 17 8 18 3 26 Unclassified 14 1 30 Tot a l 11 5 7 32 5 37 3 33 17 6

Gravel prairie Dr y 28 6 9 30 Mesic 21 Unclassified Tot a l 49 6 9 30

Dolomite prairie Dr y 1 2 Mesic 11 8 Wet 49 14 Unclassified 2 11 5 Tot a l 49 3 24 9

TO TA L 18 6 2 92 1 15 4 7 16 5 45 1 75 33 52 2

WETLAND COMMUNITIES Ma r s h Basin 13 7 5 55 4 St r eamside 96 5 19 0 Unclassified 91 3 12 0 24 8 1 37 7 30 1 10 0 47 1 Tot a l 32 5 3 12 0 24 8 1 37 7 30 1 74 4 10 0 47 1

Bo g Fo r ested 14 9 Graminoid 4 8 Low shrub 12 10 Unclassifed Tot a l 16 5 18

38 Chapter 4. Overview of Assessment Processes and Findings for Natural Communities and Species of the Region

LA K E , IL 2 CO O K 1 DU PA G E 2 KA N E 2 LA K E , IN 3 MC H E N R Y1 PO RT E R 3 WI L L 1 Fe n Ca l c a r eous floating mat 76 51 Fo r ested 6 12 0 23 10 1 Graminoid 65 44 78 10 63 2 Unclassified 8 37 35 27 1 Tot a l 15 5 44 19 8 70 35 11 3 37 4

Sedge meadow 35 5 31 7 52 0 25 4 40 41 7 89

Pa n n e 67 73 1

Seep and spring Neutral 4 Ca l c a r eous 11 7 1 Sand 1 Unclassified 10 12 3 Tot a l 10 12 19 5 3 2

TO TA L 40 0 3 49 3 32 7 2 71 9 37 7 12 9 7 14 0 56 6

CLIFF COMMUNITIES Er oding bluff 5 Dolomite 2 6

TO TA L 5 2 6

LAKESHORE COMMUNITIES Be a c h 63 Fo re d u n e 10 2

TO TA L 16 5

CU L TURAL COMMUNITIES Cro p l a n d 22 5 8 10 7 1 85 4 5 14 9 Tree plantation 46 9 3 67 7 14 6 Tur f grass 24 3 14 25 1 10 Unassociated grow t h – g r a s s 29 3 4 60 1 24 3 2 16 0 8 28 29 1 Unassociated grow t h – s h ru b 60 4 16 23 3 1 39 Unassociated grow t h – t re e 79 4 22 7 8 60 Unclassified unassociated grow t h 50 8 65 Unclassified cultural 14 0

TO TA L 73 0 1 63 4 92 9 7 29 1 9 21 2 51 5

1 Data do not rep r esent all natural areas in county. Data include IN A I sites and some forest pres e rv e / c o n s e r vation district sites. 2 Data include all FP D sites and IN A I si t e s . 3 Data do not include all natural areas in county.

39 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Table 4.6 Sum of acres in protected areas in Illinois counties by community type (Data are from Satellite Imagery; sites include Forest Pres e rv e / C o n s e r vation Districts, IL DNR, and IN A I Si t e s )

Community Typ e 1 Co o k Du P a g e Ka n e La k e Mc H e n r y Wil l Tot a l Savanna (oak woodland) 5, 8 3 2 1, 7 0 7 57 7 3, 0 8 7 85 0 1, 6 1 0 13 , 6 6 3

Floodplain fores t 5, 6 8 6 95 6 58 9 1, 7 5 7 67 8 2, 0 6 1 11 , 7 2 7

Upland fores t / w o o d l a n d 12 , 1 7 8 3, 6 6 7 74 0 2, 1 6 0 71 4 4, 7 1 8 24 , 1 7 7

Pr a i r i e 5, 4 1 1 1, 9 8 9 15 8 2, 2 0 7 26 7 3, 8 9 0 13 , 9 2 2

Wet l a n d 5, 5 1 2 3, 2 3 6 1, 0 9 5 8, 3 0 7 4, 8 0 1 3, 5 7 6 26 , 5 2 7

Open water 5, 1 3 6 1, 1 3 9 28 3 4, 2 4 0 75 0 1, 8 3 7 13 , 3 8 5

Unassociated woody 11 , 6 0 9 1, 7 7 2 52 3 25 5 91 3 2, 4 2 5 17 , 4 9 7

Unassociated grassy 11 , 7 7 3 7, 2 2 2 2, 6 8 3 4, 4 4 8 2, 6 8 2 14 , 9 0 0 43 , 7 0 8

1 These community types are not strictly parallel to those in other tables. They rep re s e n t the level of detail for which there is confidence in the correlation between satellite image classifications and grou n d - t r uthing and the knowledge of land managers.

4.1.3 Methodology for p rocess, land managers and scientists covered the four community assessment main community groupings: forested, savanna, prairie, and wetland. Prior to the workshop, we gathered data To generate information for this Recovery Plan, the fr om the Illinois Natural Heritage Database, the Indiana Science and Land Management Teams developed a two- Department of Natural Resources, and the Fore s t stage process to assess the status of biodiversity in the Pr eserve or Conservation Districts of the six northeastern region and to make recommendations for conserving Illinois counties, as described in section 4.1.2. There are regional biodiversity. still major gaps in the data on how much of each natural community type exists in the region. Thus, the informa- The first stage in this evaluation process was to examine tion available for the development of this plan only the status and conservation needs of the region’s animal allowed relative assessments across community types. assemblages. This assessment was conducted in a series The workshops relied primarily on the expert knowledge of four workshops, each focusing on a major taxonomic of the scientists and land managers from the reg i o n . g roup (birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, and invertebrates). These workshops brought together The community-status evaluation in this second stage experts on these species to develop consensus on the had two parts. The first part developed a measure or level identification of the species assemblages, their status, and of concern about how much of the community type cur- the region’s contribution to the global conservation of rently remains in the region, using the following criteria: the species. • Number of acres rem a i n i n g The second stage in the process was to examine the status • P e rcent remaining from extent before European of each terrestrial community type, its biological impor- se t t l e m e n t tance, and the region’s contribution to its global conservation. In four workshops, using a consensus-building • Number of occurren c e s

40 Chapter 4. Overview of Assessment Processes and Findings for Natural Communities and Species of the Region

• Number of sufficiently large occurrences 4.1.4 Overall priorities and condition • Amount under formal prot e c t i o n The assessments conducted in the workshops have been used to rank each of the community types and each of the The second part developed a measure of level of concern species assemblages. The rankings on status, biological based on the condition of the remaining examples and importance, and contribution to global conservation have used the following criteria: been combined together for each community type to • Pe r centage remaining of good quality come up with a tiered ranking of conservation targ e t s for the region (see Table 4.7). These tiers rep r esent rel a t i v e • De g r ee of fragmentation and isolation priorities for increased conservation attention to the com- • Extent and effectiveness of current management munity types. Those in the highest tier are of the highest eff o r t s concern, because these communities are at high risk of loss (due to the small amount remaining or its degraded condition), have high biological importance, and rep r e- Each community type received a relative ranking for sent some of the best opportunities in the world to con- each factor and a combined ranking to rep r esent an over- serve the community type. Lower tiers have some all level of conservation concern (very high, high, mod- combination of these factors, but are not at a high level erate, or low). It is important to stress that there are of concern or importance in all categories. This tiered sys- in s u f ficient data for any of these criteria to allow a quan- tem does not imply that efforts in place to protect and titative assessment. The criteria, and available data, were manage those communities falling in lower tiers should used only as guides in reaching consensus among be halted or diminished. Often, it means the opposite: Chicago Wilderness scientists and land managers about these conservation measures are having the desired effe c t the relative status of the communities. A high priority and these communities are at less risk of complete loss. for work in Chicago Wilderness is to continue to develop All the community types are important components of mo r e precise assessments of the quantity and quality of the region’s biodiversity, and all are at some risk of being natural areas in our reg i o n . lost. Those in the higher tiers are more likely to be lost or degraded substantially if they do not receive more con- Relative biological importance for each community type servation attention. In no way should lower rankings in was determined with the criteria of species richness, this scheme be used to justify non compliance with exist- numbers of endangered and threatened species, levels ing laws, rules, and regulations designed to protect these of species conservatism, and presence of important eco- communities and parcels of land. logical functions (such as the role of wetlands in improv - ing water quality in adjacent open waters). Information The rankings in Table 4.7 should not be the sole basis for f rom the workshops focusing on major taxonomic determining priorities for land management and land gr oups provided the basis for this discussion. acquisition. As discussed in chapter 5, there are several other factors to consider in prioritizing actions for biodi- Workshop participants then judged the role of the v e r s i t y. These include the need to address threats that Chicago Wilderness region in the global conservation of a ffect many species and communities, such as the im- each of the community types. For some communities, the pacts of fragmentation or the disruption of natural Chicago Wilderness region is on the edge of the range; for pr ocesses at the landscape level. Further, the plan clearly some, the region contains important examples but the recognizes the functional value of mosaics of diff e re n t community type is also well-rep r esented in other reg i o n s ; community types in sustaining biodiversity. The targe t s and for others, the region is central to the community’s in Table 4.7 should be one element in developing man- global conservation. agement plans and monitoring plans. In addition to these assessments, the workshops dis- The workshops evaluated each terrestrial animal assem- cussed threats to species and communities, and oppor- blage in terms of whether it was declining or of concern tunities and needs for action. A th i r d series of workshops, for other reasons, as well as in terms of the Chicago o rganized by major community class, helped to re f i n e region’s contribution to the global conservation of the vision statements for each of the communities. These species involved. The results are presented in Tables 4.8 visions help to define what scientists say the landscape and 4.9. Again, assemblages of greater global significance should look like fifty years from now if we are to con- or of greater concern due to their status should be a pri- serve all of the region’s current biodiversity. All of these ority for increased conservation attention, but all curren t discussions together provided a basis for identifying conservation efforts should be maintained. recovery needs and actions for the community types presented in Chapter 5.

41 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Table 4.7 Table 4.8 Co n s e r vation targets for r ec o v e r y based Ter restrial species assemblages on status, importance, and distribution (or species in the case of mammals) of concern or in an overall First (highest) tier Woodland (all moisture classes) declining condition Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil savanna (all moisture classes) Mesic sand savanna Sand prairie (all moisture gradients in dune Bi rd s and swale topography) Poor condition Dolomite prairie (all) Moist grassland birds (without shrub s ) Pa n n e Graminoid fen Suboptimal conditions 1 Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie (all moisture classes) Moist grassland birds (with shrub s ) Dr y grassland birds Second tier Savanna birds Dr y sand savanna Open woodland birds Gravel prairie (all) Hemi-marsh birds (without shrub s ) Basin marsh2 Sh o r eline birds Ca l c a r eous floating mat Ca l c a r eous seep Reptiles and amphibians Sand prairie (other than those in dune and swale topography) De c l i n i n g No rt h e r n flatwood Savanna reptiles and amphibians St r eamside marsh3 Sedge meadow, fen, and dolomite prairie reptiles and amphibians Th i r d tier Fo r est and woodland reptiles and amphibians Sand flatwood Grassland reptiles and amphibians Dr y-mesic sand savanna Sand savanna and sand prairie reptiles Fo r ested fen and amphibians Sedge meadow High gradient stream reptiles and amphibians

Fo u r th tier In s e c t s 4 Upland forest (all) Of concern Dr y and mesic blacksoil prairie insects Fifth tier Dr y and mesic sand prairie insects Floodplain forest (both) Wet prairie insects Bogs (all) Sand savanna insects Sand and neutral seep Fen insects Dr y and mesic gravel prairie iInsects 1 Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie is in the highest tier because 1) CW Marsh insects has so many relatively large high quality examples and so Dr y and blacksoil savanna and woodland insects much adjacent land that is restorable, and in many cases being res t o r ed, 2) that CW has so many and such large Ma m m a l s restoration areas, 3) that this community type has suffe re d the highest prop o r tional loss of high quality acreage, and 4) Of concern this community type is especially important as a gene pool Ea s t e r n mole for agriculture, since it produced the soils which are prob a - bly the Midwest’s long term most important natural res o u rc e . Pygmy shrew Least shrew 2 Basin marsh has been placed in a higher tier than would be Little brown myotis the case based on status and importance alone, because it Indiana myotis is receiving significant conservation attention in the reg i o n and there is great opportunity to do more. No rt h e r n long-eared bat Ea s t e r n pipistrel l e 3 St r eamside marshes are very difficult to res t o r e in the curren t Evening bat al t e r ed hydrological conditions. Theref o r e, the priority is to Least weasel res e a r ch ways to improve their condition before underta k i n g extensive restoration actions. Ba d g e r Gray fox 4 Though not separated in the CW Classification system, up- Fr a n k l i n ’ s ground squirrel land forests dominated by oak stands are of higher concern So u t h e r n flying squirrel than those dominated by maple stands. In addition, certa i n fe a t u r es of upland forests, particularly vernal ponds, are of Woodland vole high concern from a conservation perspective.

42 Chapter 4. Overview of Assessment Processes and Findings for Natural Communities and Species of the Region

Table 4.9 Table 4.10 Ter restrial species assemblages which Su m m a r y of the aquatic community ar e critical or important to the global types in the Chicago Wil d e r ness co n s e r vation of the assemblages classification system

Globally critical St re a m s La k e s Moist grassland birds (with and without shrub s ) Headwater str ea m s • Natural lakes • Continuous flow • Lake Michigan Coarse substrate • Glacial Globally impor ta n t Fine substrate Ke t t l e Savanna birds (with and without shrub s ) Flow throu g h • In t e r mittent flow Open woodland birds (with and without shrub s ) • Bo t t o m l a n d Coarse substrate Savanna reptiles and amphibians •Ver nal pond Marsh reptiles and amphibians Fine substrate • Manmade Sedge meadow, fen, and dolomite prairie reptiles Na t u r a l i z e d and amphibians Low orde r Ot h e r Dr y and mesic blacksoil prairie insects • High gradient Dr y and mesic sand prairie insects • Low gradient Wet prairie insects Sand savanna insects Wet blacksoil savanna and woodland insects (??) Mid orde r Dr y blacksoil savanna and woodland • High gradient • Low gradient

Appendix 4 includes lists of the rankings on diffe r ent fac- bodies of water. The categories used inform the re a d e r tors that led to the overall rankings on conservation con- of the relative quality of the lake, river, or stream, and cern for the communities. The findings are discussed in they also give an indication of what some of the re c o v- detail in Chapter 5. More detailed reports on natural ery goals should be. In both cases, as more information communities and animal assemblages are available on- becomes available and or conditions change, the lakes, line (www.c h i w i l d . o rg ) . rivers, and streams will move between categories. A fu l l description of the assessment process is in Chapter 6.

4. 2 4.2.2 Overall priorities Aquatic communities Each stream has a recovery goal based on its current condition or the presence of features of special concern. The 4.2.1 Process for assessing recovery goals are protection, restoration, reh a b i l i t a t i o n , and enhancement. The streams with goals of prot e c t i o n aquatic communities and restoration are of higher quality and are of very high A classification system for the aquatic communities was and high priority respectively for conservation action. developed, using primarily physical characteristics. A Complete results for the streams assessed are included summary is presented in Table 4.10 and the complete ver- in Figure 6.1. Of the streams assessed, 37% are of high or sion is in Appendix 5. Two diffe r ent groups of Chicago very high priority. Wilderness scientists and land managers evaluated the aquatic communities of the region. One group looked at The lakes were organized into the following four cate- rivers and streams and the other at inland lakes. While gories: exceptional, important, restorable, and other. the two groups used diffe r ent methods for evaluating the Again, priority is placed on the exceptional and impor- communities, both used various criteria to place specific tant lakes, which are currently of higher quality. Twe n t y - lakes, rivers, and streams into diffe r ent categories. In both t h ree lakes were identified as exceptional lakes and cases the emphasis was on the existing quality of these twenty-five as important lakes. The results are shown in Tables 6.1 and 6.2.

43 Chapter 5 Terrestrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

th r ough fire and other natural disturbances. Within the 15. 1 f o rested community class there are four community In t r o d u c t i o n types: upland forest, floodplain forest, flatwoods, and wo o d l a n d s . This chapter describes the status and significance of each community type and gives a vision of the condition of the Upland forest has a canopy cover of 80–100%. Canopy community class in the long term in order to sustain bio- t ree species are well re p resented in varying age classes di v e r s i t y . Following this are sections on threats, rec o m - f rom seedling to canopy-sized individuals. The fire mended actions, and res e a r ch needs. Many community return period is presumed longer for this community types suffer from similar stressors, and actions are type than for woodlands or savannas. The longer fire needed at the landscape level. For this reason, discus- return period and lower fire intensities would result from sions on threats, actions, and res e a r ch needs are grou p e d fi r e barriers provided by woodlands, savannas, and large together for all community types. rivers or lakes on the south and west sides of these communities. Three subtypes of upland forest are based on The information presented in this chapter is based on the soil moisture: dry-mesic, mesic, and wet-mesic. opinions of Science and Land Management Team members, gathered through a number of workshops and Floodplain forests a re located on the floodplains of review processes. Many statements are based on prof e s - rivers and streams. These communities are shaped by the sional experience, rather than published literature, and fr equency and duration of flooding, by nutrient and sed- ar e presented to give an indication of priority and direc - iment deposition, and by the permeability of the soil. The tion for future conservation work. Complete workshop canopy cover (80–100%) is similar to that of upland reports from which this chapter was written can be found f o rests, but the understory is more open due to the fre- on the Chicago Wilderness Web site (www.c h i w i l d . o rg ) . quent flooding. The subtypes, based on soil moisture , range from wet-mesic to wet.

Fl a t w o o d s have a canopy cover of 50–80% and occur on 15. 2 level or nearly level soil that has an impermeable or Forested communities—status slowly permeable layer that causes a shallow, perc h e d water table. Because soil moisture fluctuates so widely by and recovery goals the season, the moisture gradients do not define the subtypes. Rather, the two subtypes are defined by geography and soil type. Northern flatwoods are associated with the 5.2.1 Description of communities Valparaiso, Ti n l e y, and Lake Border morainal systems, The forested community class includes all the commu- while sand flatwoods have a meter or more of acidic sand nity types that are dominated by trees, with an average over silty clay and are found in the more southern parts canopy cover of greater than 50%. Forested communi- of the reg i o n . ties have a multi-layered stru c t u re composed of the c a n o p y, sub-canopy, shrub, and herbaceous layers. Woo d l a n d s developed under a canopy cover of 50–80%, Hi s t o r i c a l l y , this multi-layered struc t u r e was maintained intermediate between that of savanna and forest. Tod a y ,

44 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals many original woodlands have canopy cover gre a t e r 5.2.3 Status than 80% due to years of fire suppression. Such sites can be recognized by the failure of the canopy tree species to Upland forests rep r oduce, with few, if any, canopy species rep r esented in Upland forest, particularly areas not dominated by oak, the seedling or sapling layer. Based on soil moisture , was probably much less common historically than wood- woodland subtypes are dry-mesic, mesic, and wet-mesic. land, savanna, or floodplain forest (Bowles et al. 1998a).

M o re detailed descriptions of the forested community Th e r e are comparatively greater amounts remaining of types may be found in Appendix 1. Associated animal dry-mesic upland forest than of other subtypes. Dry- assemblages may be found in Table 4.3. mesic upland forest is mostly fragmented, but some large blocks still exist, such as in Busse Woods. There has been much less loss of both dry-mesic and mesic upland for- 5.2.2 Findings and priorities est than of other community types. Of the forested community types, the woodlands are of the highest conservation concern. All moisture classes of Upland forests are more secure because a relatively high woodland are in the first tier of conservation targets for pe r centage of their original acreage has been prot e c t e d . the Chicago Wilderness region. Wet-mesic woodland is Mesic upland forest was an initial target of the Fore s t c o n s i d e red critically imperiled at the global level (G1) P reserve Districts when they first started acquiring by The Nature Conservancy (which calls this community land. However, many occurrences are still in private swamp white oak woodland). A substantial number of hands, and others are threatened by development. ac r es of woodlands remain, providing opportunities for Management options are more limited on upland fores t s their conservation, but remaining sites are generally in on private prop e r t y . very poor condition. The healthy woodlands in the Chicago Wilderness region tend to be species-rich, indi- In general, drier upland forests are considered to be in cating that they are biologically important. The Chicago better condition than wetter upland forests due to less Wilderness region also has a unique landscape setting of impact from invasive species. There are few or no woodlands, including those originally interspersed with remaining high-quality examples of wet-mesic upland pr a i r i e s . f o rest. However, the quality of drier sites is declining ra p i d l y , primarily through the ongoing loss of the shrub The flatwoods of the region are of high concern, because la y e r . Many of the remaining acres of mesic upland fores t the remaining examples are both degrading rapidly and have significantly impaired ecosystem function, includ- disappearing due to development or conversion to other ing quality of wildlife habitat. Diffe r ent types of upland land uses. In The Nature Conservancy’s global ranking f o rest are affected diff e rently; oak stands are curre n t l y system, both northern flatwoods and pin oak-swamp deteriorating more rapidly than maple stands (Bowles et white oak sand flatwoods, which correlate to Chicago al. 1998b). In some parts of the region, both are rapidly Wilderness’s sand flatwoods, rate as imperiled globally deteriorating. It would be valuable to have more inven- (G2). The primary conservation concern for upland fores t tory and monitoring to determine the full extent and rate and floodplain forest is their current degraded condi- of degradation. Significant threats to upland fore s t s tion. All of the forested communities are important as include lack of fire, fragmentation, browsing by deer, and wildlife habitat, and they are key areas for human rec r e- invasive species, particularly buckthorn. ation. The primary req u i r ement for their conservation is significantly increased management effo r t s . H i s t o r i c a l l y, moisture gradients and community types varied with subtle changes in the landscape. Tod a y , we mainly have fragmented remnants that do not incorporate these landscape-scale variations. Complexity in the FORESTED COMMUNITIES landscape is important for animals, as they respond to Co n s e r vation targets in top tiers st ru c t u r e and community mosaics, not to one community First tier type. Succession toward more closed forests is occurring Woodland (all subtypes) due to the lack of fire, and species diversity is being lost in the process. In the remaining fragments, most animal Second tier communities are not doing well, primarily due to the No rt h e r n flatwood e ffects of isolation and loss of key habitat feature s . Th i r d tier Amphibians, in particular, are doing very poorly and are Sand flatwood declining precipitously in places, due to fragmentation. Individual populations are at risk because they are no longer functioning as part of metapopulations, with gene flow between separate subpopulations (Mierzwa 1998).

45 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Floodplain forests drainage ways and depressions associated with glacial Floodplain forests have always been relatively rare in moraines. Theref o r e, northern flatwoods survive better the Chicago Wilderness region, occurring along the when they are imbedded in a large preserve. In the major river courses. The region has lost some original smaller preserves, altered hydrology will remain a sig- floodplain forests to conversion to agriculture and other nificant prob l e m . development, but many acres are protected in forest preserve holdings. Because of lack of fire, trees are appearing Woo d l a n d s in some floodplains that were sedge meadow and wet In the absence of fire, canopy cover in woodlands prairie historically. Ad d i t i o n a l l y , with increased hydro- i n c reases and biodiversity declines. Before larg e - s c a l e logical inputs, areas along rivers now experience longer s u p p ression of fire, woodlands were extensive in the and more frequent flooding. This combination of hydro- region. Unfortunately, good-quality examples are hard to logical change and lack of fire has allowed certain species find today. All of the woodland subtypes are suff e r i n g to become more abundant, changing the stru c t u re and the same threats, most significantly lack of fire, invasive species make-up of floodplains. These more re c e n t l y species, impacts from overabundant deer, and loss due to developed floodplain forests do not seem to have high de v e l o p m e n t . levels of floristic diversity, although they do have some limited wildlife values. A fairly large amount of degraded woodland still remains on protected land, providing opportunities for The quality of original floodplain forests suffers fro m restoration and conservation. The woodlands that were al t e r ed hydrology and increased sedimentation. The sen- originally interspersed with prairies in the southern and sitive amphibian species have been lost, and those that western areas of the region have been lost to a gre a t e r remain are tolerant of flooding. Further study of the extent than woodlands more closely associated with for- c a u s e - a n d - e ffect relationships in the development and est communities. Woodlands, along with forests, are degradation of floodplain forests would lead to a better found more often in protected areas than other commu- assessment of their status. nity types, because originally they were a focus of Fores t Pr eserve District acquisition. However, much woodland Fl a t w o o d s that was not protected has been lost to development. Both types of flatwoods occurring in the Chicago Hi s t o r i c a l l y , across the landscape, woodlands were a part Wilderness region, sand and northern flatwoods, are of a shifting mosaic of communities; this dynamic has e x t remely rare and are considered globally imperiled been lost in our fragmented landscape. (G2). Unlike the other forested community types, the dif- f e rences between the two subtypes are substantial and Virtually all of the woodlands remaining in the Chicago ar e not based on moisture. Overall, both flatwood types Wilderness region are in very poor condition. In some ar e in fair condition compared to other forested commu- a reas, considerable management is devoted to wood- nities, but they are degrading rapidly in the absence of lands, and in these areas their condition is impro v i n g . management. Lack of fire, invasive species, and over- Ho w e v e r , the majority of woodland acres are not man- abundant deer are primary threats. Flatwoods have a aged. The last twenty years have seen significant very delicate moisture balance, so their condition is sen- i m p rovement in management attention for these com- sitive to changes in hydrol o g y . Surrounded by develop- munities, but considering the significance of this ment, flatwoods can experience raised water levels, community type to the region’s biota, and its rarity else- which damages them through excess flooding. Thus, the wh e r e, there is still a long way to go. lo w e r -lying flatwoods are more prone to loss. Converse- l y, in some areas, flatwoods are drying up as water in Woodlands can maintain some of their values better than their watershed is diverted away from them. upland forests in a fragmented state, since they have always occurred in smaller patches interspersed with Most sand flatwoods in the region occurred in southeast- other community types. This provides greater opportu- ern Cook County and in Indiana around the edge of Lake nities for successful restoration of this important com- Michigan. Occurring primarily in the Lake Plain Div- munity type. ision, sand flatwoods are naturally rare in the re g i o n . Many sand flatwoods have been lost to agriculture, and others have succumbed to development and drainage. 5.2.4 Biological significance Upland forests A few good-quality examples of northern flatwoods Because of the degraded state of upland forests, it is likely remain today, and more remnants are of degraded qual- that the current richness of plant species is comparatively i t y. Northern flatwoods are generally found in and lo w , although comparisons to historical conditions have amongst upland forests and woodlands and occur in the

46 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals not been made. In most upland forests, much of the orig- Fl a t w o o d s inal floral diversity has certainly been lost, especially the Flatwoods are key amphibian breeding grounds. In summer and fall herbaceous species, the shrubs, and the p a r t i c u l a r, the blue-spotted salamander is abundant in graminoid fuel matrix. Oaks historically dominated most good-quality flatwoods. Ad d i t i o n a l l y , massasauga and of our upland forests, but now maple and ash are becom- Kirtland’s snake may rely on flatwoods, although both ing more common. species occur only in the more open parts. Flatwoods provide habitat for a number of endangered and threa t e n e d For the region’s mammals, upland forests and wood- plant species. Plant species of concern include purple- lands are the most important community types, although fringed orchid and dog violet. Good-quality flatwoods these mammals benefit most from a complex of diffe re n t generally have higher levels of plant diversity than other communities in an area. Many mammals depend on both fo r ests and harbor a number of conservative species. As f o rests and woodlands. Mammals of concern found in for insects, species such as the mouse-colored lichen fo r ests include the federally endangered Indiana bat, the moth, fern moths, the royal fern bore r, sensitive fern eastern pipistrelle (a type of bat), and the woodland vole. bo re r , the northern fern geometer, and a variety of millers and cutworms appear to be associated with flatwoods. Upland forests, along with the other forested community The temporary ponds have unique communities of types, provide important habitat to amphibians and rep - aquatic invertebrates since they are fishless and seasonal. tiles, including the eastern box turtle, the eastern newt, the eastern rat snake, and the spring peeper. The overall Woo d l a n d s assemblage of forest and woodland reptiles and amphib- Woodlands are particularly important for biodiversity. ians is considered to be in decline. Upland forests also The larger and better examples of woodlands can be serve a critical need as migratory pathways for migrating species-rich in amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. bi r ds. The remaining forest blocks in the region are likely The more diverse sites are those in larger savanna/wood- too small to sustain viable breeding populations of fores t - la n d / f o r est complexes or woodland/wetland complexes. interior birds. This is due to greatly increased rates of pre- Woodlands provide important habitat for many species dation (from raccoons, feral cats and other animals) and of conservation concern, such as the declining re d - nest parasitism (from brown-headed cowbirds) in the headed woodpecker. Forest and woodland reptiles and fragmented forests of the region (Robinson et al. 1995). It amphibians are in decline overall. is most important to protect the largest blocks of rem a i n - ing forest from additional fragmentation to increase the For birds, the woodlands are the most important of the chance of some successful rep r oduction by these species. region’s forested communities. Sensitive bird species include yellow-billed cuckoo and whip-poor-will. The Floodplain forests open-woodland bird assemblage is in suboptimal condi- Floristic diversity in floodplain forests is maintained by tion and is considered globally important. Wo o d l a n d s , regular patterns of flooding. Floodplain forests have like the other forested communities, also serve as impor- always been dominated by disturbance-tolerant species. tant pathways for migratory birds . Along with other forest types, floodplain forests are important for mammals, particularly as feeding are a s , Woodlands harbor a number of endangered and threa t - and they serve as important migratory corridors for ened plant species of concern, including northern cranes- bi r ds. Breeding birds, including Cerulean warbler, red - bill, shadbush, false bugbane, pale vetchling, and buffa l o sh o u l d e r ed hawk, American redstart, and prot h o n o t a r y cl o v e r . wa r b l e r , also depend on floodplain fores t s . The woodland and savanna insect communities are Floodplain forests of the Chicago region are important potentially globally significant, yet more remains to be as insect habitat because of the rich assortment of plants. learned about these communities. The insect assemblage P a w p a w, yellow birch, black walnut, sycamore, and of dry blacksoil savanna and woodlands is of concern. many others are typically found only in high-quality Sensitive insects found in woodlands and savannas floodplain forests. Insect species depending on these include Appalachian eyed-brown, silvery checkerspot, tr ees for food will, theref o r e, be dependent on rem n a n t s hobomok skipper, silvery blue, and pipeline swallowtail. of high-quality forest. Examples include the zebra swallowtail butterfly, the sycamore sallow moth, and the pawpaw sphinx moth. 5.2.5 Global significance and conservation importance Floodplain forests also provide benefits to river systems by trapping sediment and improving water quality, as Ac c o r ding to The Nature Conservancy’s global ranking well as slowing floodwaters. system, both types of flatwood communities are glob-

47 Biodiversity Recovery Plan ally imperiled (G2). The Chicago Wilderness region con- fo r ests, are rare, and a goal should be to sustain the rare tains a number of good-quality examples of flatwoods. species they support through appropriate management The region might include the majority of remaining high- and additional land protection where still possible. quality northern flatwoods. The upland forests of Chicago Wilderness are unusual in their pattern of occur- Additional indicators for evaluating the long-term health rence on the landscape. These forested communities were of the forested communities are the reptile and amphib- once naturally fragmented by prairies and other commu- ian assemblage and some wide-ranging mammal species, nity types, creating a unique mix of species. Chicago such as the gray fox. The region’s woodlands should sup- Wilderness has the best and possibly the only extensive port sustainable populations of woodland amphibians examples of this landform—oak forests in the middle of and reptiles with opportunities for gene flow among sep- the prairie. Floodplain forests are found along most of the arate sub-populations. Because amphibians have com- major river valleys, but in general they are rarer than plex life cycles, conservation of this assemblage req u i re s other forested community types. Although woodlands a variety of breeding wetlands within woodland sites. ar e widespread, this region is very important for two rea - Amphibian species of concern associated with fores t e d sons: 1) much conservation attention has been and is communities include spotted salamanders, spring peep- being paid to woodlands here, and 2) the dynamic inter- ers, and wood frogs, which are currently threatened by action of prairie and forest that creates woodlands could fragmentation of upland forests and the lack of bree d i n g be res t o r ed here. wetlands within forested blocks. It should be a goal to pr operly protect and manage flatwoods to sustain large populations of blue spotted salamanders. 5.2.6 Long-term vision and recovery goals Maintaining viable populations of woodland bird species, particularly sensitive species such as the re d - This plan’s vision for the region’s forested communities is headed woodpecker, is another goal. Due to habitat types to improve conditions and re s t o re natural processes to and shapes of habitat occurrences, the Chicago Wil d e r - allow canopy tree species to regenerate (in viable num- ness region has never provided major breeding grou n d s bers) and to maintain an appropriate continuum of for most forest-interior bird species. However, a goal canopy cover across the region to sustain viable popula- should be to maintain a number of locations that pro- tions of rare species and community assemblages. A vide the structural habitat re q u i red for these species. focus for achieving this goal will be on natural are a s Chicago Wilderness’s forested communities play a sig- wh e r e disturbance is essential for ecological health and nificant role for migrating birds, and these communities for allowing natural regeneration to occur. Natural dis- should be maintained to provide these fundamentally turbances include fire, disease, storms, and sustainable important stop-over sites. levels of animal browsing. Viable management options, including prescribed burns and selective or patch cutting, Another goal is to expand populations of rare plant should mimic natural disturbance. Forested sites should species to ensure their continued existence on our land- be managed to maximize structural and biological diver- scape. Flatwoods, in particular, harbor a large number of sity and to maintain a continuum of canopy from open to ra r e plant species, and more open-canopy examples are closed, reflecting historical proportions of canopy cover. needed for their continued existence. Recovery plans for An important goal, and an indicator of system health, key species are needed to identify priority actions. will be to re s t o re understory layers of shrubs and saplings and ground layers of native herbaceous species In total, it is thought that approximately 50,000–100,000 th r oughout all forested communities. a c res of healthy forest and woodland complexes are needed in the region to meet these goals. To maintain the La r ge-scale planning and restoration should attempt to diversity and richness of amphibian species, it is rec o m - c reate opportunities for landscape-scale processes that mended that we maintain enough sites to provide for a c reate healthy forested communities. These eff o r t s wide range of quality breeding habitat. Ideally, as many should also seek to maintain a variety of juxtapositions as 20 good-quality sites larger than 500 acres would pro- between woodland and forest, and between woodland vide a rich diversity of amphibians and other species. and grassland, to sustain the species dependent on these Several 800- to 1000-acre sites, with appropriate land- dynamic interactions. Flatwoods, for example, are forms (slope, soils, and hydrology), are needed to main- always contained within other forested community tain a variety of plants and woodland types. types. A goal is to move forested communities into more self-sustaining conditions, which will reduce the man- While size is more important than quality for some agement effort needed over time. Some forested com- species, most species that depend on forests and wood- munity types, such as flatwoods and true floodplain

48 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals lands need good-quality sites for their survival. To level (G1). Mesic sand savanna is also a first-tier conser- achieve a healthy state of the forested communities in the vation target for Chicago Wilderness, due to the small region, it is recommended that at least 90% of the highly number of remaining examples. Dry and dry-mesic sand f i re-dependent communities be managed with pre- savannas and are in the second and third tiers of conser- scribed burns on a rotating schedule. In addition, the vation priority, as remaining examples are in somewhat density of deer should be reduced to a level that, in com- better condition overall. Many acres of savanna are so bination with prescribed burns, will allow the herba- degraded that they are barely recognizable as savannas. ceous and understory layers to return to a healthy At the same time, savannas are very important due to condition. Active restoration, including cutting, burn- their biological richness. Savannas are often a transitional ing, weeding, and planting, should take place on many community between woodlands and prairies or wet- mo r e sites to increase the overall health of forested com- lands, which leads to their high diversity of species. munities in the reg i o n .

SA VANNA COMMUNITIES 5.35. 3 Co n s e r vation targets in top tiers

Savanna communities—status First (highest) tier Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil savanna (all subtypes) and recovery goals Mesic sand savanna

Second tier 5.3.1 Description of communities Dr y sand savanna

Savannas are wooded communities with a graminoid Th i r d tier gr oundcover and with an average tree canopy cover of Dr y-mesic sand savanna less than 50% but greater than 10%. A savanna may have sh r ubby areas, and the tree canopy may locally be grea t e r or less than the above limits. Savannas often have soils that are transitional between forest and prairie, and they have distinctive plants and animals. These communities 5.3.3 Status w e re maintained by fire before European settlement. For all types of savanna, the region has lost most of what They were among the most widespread and characteris- was once here, but across the region more fine-textured - tic communities in Illinois and Indiana, but few high- soil savanna has been lost than sand savanna. In Indiana, quality stands remain. Most remnants have changed very little fine-textured-soil savanna remains. In Illinois, ex t e n s i v e l y . The least-disturbed remnants are on sandy mesic and dry-mesic fine-textured-soil savannas are still land that still is frequently burned and on the very driest the most common types of savanna. Much of the slopes, where woody encroachment has been slowest. savanna in the region was lost in the conversion of land The two diffe r ent types of savanna are fine-textured - s o i l to row crops and pasture. The wetter savannas of both savanna and sand savanna. Savanna subtypes are dis- types are the rarest today. Many of the wetter fine-tex- tinguished by soil moisture. The subtypes of fine-tex- tu r ed-soil savannas were drained through tiling and con- tu r ed-soil savanna are dry-mesic, mesic, and wet-mesic. verted to agriculture. The subtypes of sand savanna are dry, dry-mesic, and mesic. A mo r e complete description of savanna commu- Of the remaining savanna, most of the known high-qual- nities is in Appendix 1. Associated animal assemblages ity sites are protected. Savannas were often included in ar e shown in Table 4.3. the original public land purchases along with woodlands. Due to the aesthetic appeal of savannas, many have been incorporated into golf courses and college 5.3.2 Findings and priorities campuses, which has helped to protect them to a certain Savannas were once common across the landscape in the extent, although such examples have lost most of their Chicago Wilderness region. Tod a y , much of the savanna original species diversity. Sand savannas, particularly in has been lost, although of greater concern is the poor con- the eastern and southern parts of the region, have been dition to which the region’s remaining savannas have pr eserved in moderately large blocks, whereas the fine- degraded. Due to their degraded condition, and their te x t u r ed-soil savannas have been severely fragmented. global conservation significance, savannas are one of the highest priorities for additional conservation attention Of the sand savannas, most of what remains in the reg i o n in the region. The Nature Conservancy considers fine- is dry-mesic sand savanna, particularly in southern Wil l te x t u r ed-soil savannas critically imperiled at the global Co u n t y , in Lake County, Illinois, and in Indiana. In these

49 Biodiversity Recovery Plan ar eas, management is being applied to good-quality sites. The assemblages of insects found in fine-texture d - s o i l Due to these efforts, dry-mesic sand savanna is in the best savannas differ from that of sand savannas, and there condition of all the savanna community types. Yet, pos- ar e diffe r ences depending on moisture gradients as well sibly as much as 50% of the remaining dry-mesic sand (T able 4.3). All of the savanna insect assemblages appear savanna is not being managed and is declining in quality. to be in decline and are of conservation concern (Ta b l e 4.8). A d d i t i o n a l l y, the sand-savanna insect assemblage Little of the dry sand savanna remains. With lack of man- of the region has been identified as globally important agement, these areas become overgr own, which alters the ( Table 4.9). The fine-textured-soil insect communities mo i s t u r e gradient and leads to a loss of community struc - may also be globally important, but not enough is known tu r e and diversity. Mesic sand savanna has always been about these species. ex t r emely rare in this region, because it occurs in a specific type of hydrology within a specific topography. The Characteristic insects associated with sand savannas remaining examples in the Chicago Wilderness re g i o n include the federally endangered Karner blue butterfly a re at Illinois Beach State Park and Indiana Dunes and American burying beetle. The phlox flower moth, National Lakeshore. originally described from the dune-and-swale complexes of northwest Indiana, was thought to have been extir- T h e re is a high level of concern about the amount of pated from Indiana until its recent red i s c o v e r y . Ad d i t i o n - remaining mesic and wet-mesic fine-textured-soil savan- al globally rare, but often overlooked, species include na and its fragmented condition. The hydrology of wet- the persius duskywing skipper, the cobweb skipper, the mesic fine-textured-soil savannas has very rarely been Indian skipper, the frosted elfin butterfly, Grote’s dart left intact, and hydrological change is a threat to all moth, and numerous other moths and leafhoppers. savannas. If the hydrology is lost, it is extremely diffi c u l t Grasshoppers, bees, wasps, beetles, and flies also have to res t o r e this community type to original condition. many species restricted to sand prairies and open sand sa v a n n a s . Savannas are fire-dependent communities, and the lack of burning leads to their rapid degradation. Many acres Insect species of concern rec o r ded from fine-textured - s o i l of fine-textured-soil savanna are not managed at all. A savannas include the rare silvery blue, which feeds as a natural, healthy savanna is as easy to manage as a prairie larva exclusively on the equally rare veiny pea. Var i o u s or woodland, and much easier to manage than a lawn or additional woodland and wetland butterflies and skip- ga r den. Invasive species are a significant threat to savan- pers are found primarily (or in greatest numbers) in high- nas, and degraded savannas often re q u i re larg e - s c a l e quality remnants of these savanna types. These include mechanical management at first, which can be expensive. the silver- b o rd e red fritillary, silvery checkerspot, and During restoration, some species of trees, shrubs, and Appalachian eyed-brow n . herbaceous plants may need to be reduced in number or eliminated. Additional threats to savannas include over- The savanna bird assemblage is in suboptimal condition abundant deer and rec r eational pres s u re s . and is considered globally important. The re d - h e a d e d woodpecker is found predominantly in savannas and responds well to management of the habitat. Some 5.3.4 Biological significance other savanna bird species, such as eastern kingbird, All types of savanna are biologically significant due to ar e declining. their species richness and numbers of rare species. Savannas were once very widespread and now generally Assemblages of reptiles and amphibians differ between occur only in small pockets, which raises concerns about f i n e - t e x t u red-soil and sand savannas. The amphibians the genetic viability of some remaining savanna species. and reptiles of fine-textured-soil savanna appear to be declining due to lack of management of their habitat. Sand savannas in the region have high species diversity, Plains leopard frog and smooth green snake are sensi- since the dunes systems where many occur contain a tive species. The Chicago Wilderness region is very mosaic of community types. The species richness in fine- important to the conservation of this assemblage. The t e x t u red-soil savannas is also very high, because they reptile and amphibian assemblage of sand savanna and contain a mixture of woodland, prairie, and wetland sand prairie also includes declining species. Sensitive species. Many species, particularly plants and insects, species belonging to this assemblage include Fowler’ s depend on savannas. State-listed endangered and threa t - toad, eastern racer, bull-snake, and western ribbon snake. ened plant species found in savannas include re d ro o t , F i n a l l y, it is difficult to determine the habitat re q u i re- savanna blazing star, pale vetchling, and veiny pea. ments of the endangered massasauga and Kirtland’s snake, as a number of factors are contributing to their decline. Savannas are, however, potentially important to these species.

50 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

5.3.5 Global significance and nas. The Karner blue depends on large, fire- m a i n t a i n e d conservation importance savannas or on complexes of smaller, high-quality savannas without much distance between them. The key to F i n e - t e x t u red-soil savannas are in as much tro u b l e long-term survival for insect species that depend on sand th r oughout their range as they are in the Chicago Wil d - savanna lies in the quality of the habitat and how it is erness region. Fine-textured-soil savannas are frag- managed over time. mented throughout their range and are considered critically imperiled (G1). Chicago Wilderness is very While fewer animal species depend only on savannas important for the global conservation of these savannas, than depend on other community types, savannas do because large amounts of restorable savanna remain. It have distinctive inhabitants, particularly birds, rep t i l e s , is possible that the Chicago Wilderness region has the and amphibians. These species serve as a target for con- best chance anywhere of conserving the fine-texture d - servation. Savanna birds req u i r e appropriate struc t u r a l soil savannas. conditions. Curren t l y , the region has many savannas in poor condition. Management should be undertaken in Th e r e are significant biological diffe r ences between the these savannas in order to improve their quality and sand savannas that occur in the Lake Plain Division and st ru c t u r e. Based on a general understanding of the habi- those that occur elsewhere. The Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s tat req u i r ements of reptiles and amphibians, it appears region is very important for the sand savannas in the that viable amphibian populations req u i r e sites of 200 to Lake Plain Division. Sand savannas along Lake Michigan 500 acres in size. As with all amphibian and reptile assem- ar e ranked as globally threatened in The Nature Conserv- blages, multiple sites with functional connections for dis- ancy’s system. Lake County, Illinois, and Porter and Lake persal to sustain metapopulations are rec o m m e n d e d . Counties, Indiana, have the best examples of this type of sand savanna. 5. 4 5.3.6 Long-term vision and Prairie communities—status recovery goals and recovery goals This plan’s vision for the region’s savannas is to dramat- ically improve the condition and integrity of rem a i n i n g savanna communities within the region. This globally 5.4.1 Description of communities imperiled ecosystem can again be a vibrant component Prairies are communities dominated by grasses on of the region’s natural landscape and can contribute sig- o rganic or mineral soils. Trees may be present, but less nificantly to the survival of all the species existing within than 10% of the area has tree cover. Four natural com- the mosaics of prairie, savanna, woodland, and wetland munities are recognized based on soil type: fine-textured - that constituted the original landscape of the region. As soil prairie, sand prairie, gravel prairie, and dolomite part of this goal, Chicago Wilderness members re c o g- prairie. Soil moisture gradients for each of these prairie nize North American savanna communities as among types range from dry to wet (except that gravel prairies the rarest community types on earth and will aim to ful- range only from dry to mesic). More complete descrip- fill a responsibility and opportunity to significantly con- tions of all types are in Appendix 1. Associated animal tribute to their global preservation. Goals for savannas assemblages are shown in Table 4.3. should focus on the health of the communities, their ability to regenerate, the restoration of natural ecological pr ocesses, and their role in a matrix of other natural com- 5.4.2 Findings and priorities munity types. Savannas should function as struc t u r a l l y and compositionally dynamic communities in time and Given how much has been lost and the generally poor space, especially in conjunction with shrublands and condition of what remains, we re g a rd all prairie types wo o d l a n d s . with a high level of concern. The region’s fine-textured - soil prairies, dolomite prairies, and the sand prairies in With restoration of fire and other natural disturbances the dune-and-swale topography are in the first tier of as a goal, sites need to be large enough that landscape- conservation targets. Gravel prairies, some subtypes scale processes can occur. Development of re l a t i v e l y of sand prairies, and dolomite prairies are considere d complete savanna communities will be most cost-effe c - globally imperiled (G2). Prairies once dominated the tive on larger sites, though smaller sites are also valu- landscape but now mainly exist in small, isolated re m- able and can be healthy if well managed. The Karner blue nants. Few high-quality prairies remain. More examples butterfly is a sensitive species and, where it occurs, it can of fair- to poor-quality prairie exist, but as of yet they are be helpful in defining management goals for sand savan- receiving little management attention and thus are

51 Biodiversity Recovery Plan degrading. Prairie communities have high biological lost proportionately more mesic fine-textured-soil prairie importance, and the prairie communities within the since European settlement than dry or wet. Wet fine-tex- Chicago Wilderness region are important to global t u red-soil prairie was often drained for agriculture, so prairie conservation, because the region contains some of today there is less available for restoration unless the the best remaining examples. The dune-and-swale topo- hy d r ology can be res t o re d . graphy is rare for sand prairies elsewhere, and theref o r e this region is important to the global conservation of this Sand prairies were probably never large and occurred in type of sand prairie. complexes with dunes and other sand communities. Relatively large remaining examples of these sand prairie complexes can be found at Illinois Beach State Park, Chiwaukee Prairie, and the Indiana Dunes National PRAIRIE COMMUNITIES Co n s e r vation targets in top tiers L a k e s h o re. Despite these remaining examples, most of the sand prairies have been lost since European settle- First (highest) tier ment. For instance, the Lake Calumet region has lost Sand prairie (all subtypes in dune and almost all (95%) of its sand prairies. Lake County, Illinois, swale topography) today has approximately 20% of the sand communities Dolomite prairie (all subtypes) that once occurred along its portion of Lake Michigan. Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie (all subtypes)

Second tier The patches of sand prairie were always smaller than the Gravel prairie (all subtypes) f i n e - t e x t u red-soil prairies. However, there is concern Sand prairie (other than those in dune and about the increased isolation of sand prairies due to swale topography) human activities. Sand prairies were interwoven with other sand communities. This loss of community mosaics has affected the diversity of remaining sand prairies. In Indiana, the drier sand prairies have been damaged more 5.4.3 Status than wetter ones, because these areas were developed first. Changes from development have pushed drier con- Along with fine-textured-soil savannas, fine-textured - s o i l ditions into the originally wetter areas. Drier sand prairies were once the most widespread community type prairies do recover with appropriate management. in the Chicago Wilderness region. They were certainly the most extensive of all the prairie types, although all Gravel prairies are naturally small and rare; this com- prairie types occurred in a mosaic at the landscape level. munity type has never occurred in the Indiana portion U n f o r t u n a t e l y, a tremendous amount of these prairies of the Chicago Wilderness region. However, the reg i o n has been lost, more than any other community type. has lost almost all of the gravel prairies that were once Hi s t o r i c a l l y , the threat was conversion of prairie to agri- h e re. Those that remain today are very small, and very cu l t u r e; this threat has shifted to development. Develop- few have been protected. Because gravel prairies are so ment, particularly suburban sprawl, severely aff e c t s small, some may still exist that have not yet been identi- hy d r ology and limits the amount and types of manage- fied and protected. They are also favored sites for hous- ment that can be done. Both of these factors thre a t e n ing or sand and gravel mining. In the past, when prairies and other natural communities. conversion to agriculture was a large threat to prairies, gravel prairies were somewhat protected because they Only one one-hundredth of one percent (0.01%) of occur on slopes that are difficult to plow. But today these Illinois’ original high quality prairie survives (Critical same slopes are targets for housing developments. Once Trends Assessment Project 1994). Although most of the the gravel hills are lost, there is little chance of res t o r i n g fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie has been lost, there are still some a gravel prairie. good-quality remnants of up to 100 acres. Very few large examples of fine-textured-soil prairie, such as Goose Dolomite prairie has always been the rarest prairie type, Lake Prairie, remain. However, there is opportunity, par- and the region has suffe r ed a tremendous loss. Ac r oss the ticularly at Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, to crea t e United States, dolomite prairie is a very rare community m o re large prairies. Most of the remaining prairie is in type. Most of the Chicago Wilderness dolomite prairies public ownership. In addition to the remnants, there are occur by the lower Des Plaines River. Dolomite prairies now a number of re- c r eation projects, which one hopes occur as patches within other prairies and thus tend to be will someday become higher-quality prairie. very small. It is possible to re s t o re the remaining poor- quality dolomite prairies around the Des Plaines River, Of the fine-textured-soil prairies, the dry subtype is prob - because the area has not been plowed. However, most of ably the rarest today, as it was originally. The region has the other dolomite prairies have been lost to mining and other development.

52 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

The overall condition of prairies remaining in Chicago Once prairies have reached the point of maintenance Wilderness is a complex subject for two reasons. First, after restoration efforts, they are relatively easy to main- most measures of quality primarily consider floristic tain. Regular burning is the only major management q u a l i t y, and there f o re they may not adequately re f l e c t need, provided there has not been significant build-up overall quality, including faunal components. Second, the of brus h . prairies today have lost a number of their ecological pr ocesses, and this compounds the threats facing them. We will now discuss each of these points in turn. 5.4.4 Biological significance Some have re f e r red to prairies as a tropical rainfore s t The INAI survey’s quality ratings may give a biased pic- turned upside-down, as the underg round portion of a tu r e of the condition of prairies, because it did not rank prairie has a tremendous amount of biodiversity. Not the status of the faunal communities. For example, there only are prairies very rich in species, but they are also a re some places where grassland birds are doing well, among the most endangered ecosystems in North but there is poor floristic quality. There may be sites of America. The Nature Conservancy ranks almost all of the grade D quality according to INAI that have thriving prairie types that occur here as globally imperiled (G2), insect communities, as insect richness does not necessar- because most examples have been eliminated thro u g h ily correlate to floristic quality. This is probably not a conversion to other land uses or have become woodier p roblem unique to prairies, and a diff e rent system is ar eas due to lack of fire. needed to measure faunal or overall quality. A s y s t e m that evaluates the condition of a number of diffe r ent tax- Prairies contribute significant ecological benefits to onomic groups would inform management goals for humans. Prairies are able to retain considerable mois- di ff e r ent sites. For instance, in Indiana the largest fine- t u re on site, thus dampening extremes in hydro l o g i c a l te x t u r ed-soil prairie is only about 30 acres, which is not cycles and minimizing flood damage. Grasslands also la r ge enough to manage for birds, but this site could be st o r e more carbon per acre than most other ecosystems. managed for important plant communities. Certain fac- Ninety percent of the biomass is undergr ound, and there- tors cannot be improved with management alone, par- fo r e the carbon is locked undergro u n d . ticularly size and functionality at the landscape level. These factors should be taken into account when assess- All types of prairies rate very high in biological impor- ing conservation value. Even just looking at floristic qual- tance, due to their high levels of diversity, particularly of it y , the number of acres remaining of high-quality prairie plants and insects. Of the prairie types, mesic prairies is extremely small for all prairie types. have higher diversity than wet or dry prairies. However, species richness is affected by scale; larger sites harbor To d a y, several ecological processes are missing. Some, mo r e diversity. such as fire, can be returned through management, others can not. Historically, grazers recycled large amounts of Prairies have high plant-species richness and high plant- biomass in prairies. Parts of the biomass-re c y c l i n g species conservatism. Species conservatism is particu- pr ocess are missing today, and it is unclear how this may larly prominent in the dolomite prairies. Many local af fect various organisms. An important res e a r ch prob l e m prairie plant species are important either because they is identifying the role grazers once played in maintaining ar e globally rare or because their critical range lies within s t ru c t u re, because some species, notably birds and or includes the Chicago Wilderness region. These species insects, rely on short-struc t u r ed prairies. include the prairie bush-clover, eastern prairie fringed or chid, leafy prairie clover, globe mallow, pale false fox- Fragmentation and the small size of the remaining rem - glove, shore St. John’s wort, Kalm’s St. John’s wort, Hill’s nants are specific problems for fine-textured-soil prairie. thistle, and Hall’s bulrush. Of these species, the first three Other significant threats include invasive species and ar e threatened at the federal level. lack of fire. In places where prairie remnants are rec e i v - ing intense management, they are showing signs of The prairies within the Chicago Wilderness region have i m p rovement. More management and restoration are long been known to harbor rare insect species as well as needed than land managers currently have the financial insect species dependent on good-quality prairie re m- and human res o u r ces to do. For all prairie types, much nants. Every prairie type has a distinctive insect fauna, a mo r e land is not being managed than is. In general, land- subset of which it does not share with other types. All of managing agencies are focusing their re s o u rces on the the prairie insect assemblages are of concern. Sensitive h i g h e r-quality sites. More than half of the high-quality prairie insects include the regal fritillary, Belfrag’s prairie remaining in the region is being managed. How- stinkbug, the red-veined prairie leafhopper, and the rat- e v e r, of the low-quality prairie of all types, perhaps as tlesnake master borer moth. Important rem n a n t - d e p e n - little as 10% is being managed. dent species associated with prairie habitat include the

53 Biodiversity Recovery Plan dusted skipper, silver-b o rd e r ed fritillary, silvery check- The Chicago Wilderness region is also very important for erspot, two-spotted skipper, ottoe skipper, eyed brow n , sand prairies. The sand prairies of the Lake Plain Div- g reat grey copper, byssus skipper, Acadian hairstre a k , ision, with its dune-and-swale topography, are globally ap h r odite fritillary, and a variety of moths, leafhoppers, ra r e. There are a few similar sand prairies around Tol e d o and grasshoppers. Many of these insects are tracked as and Detroit, some of which are of high quality and large , species of concern throughout the Midwest. Some are at but otherwise very few are situated in this topography. the eastern and southern extremes of their ranges, while It is the flora of the dune-and-swale communities that are others appear to be regional endemics. The insect assem- distinctive. This type of sand prairie occurs as part of a blages of dry and mesic blacksoil prairie, dry and mesic mosaic, typically with a narrow band of wet-mesic sand sand prairie, and wet prairie are of global importance. prairie, then a band of mesic sand prairie, then dry-mesic sand prairie. Various reptiles and amphibians depend on prairies as habitat. Three reptile and amphibian assemblages are Even though fine-textured-soil prairies stretch across the associated with prairies, specifically with the fine- Midwest, plant communities gradually change between te x t u r ed-soil, sand, and dolomite types. All three assem- Illinois and Nebraska, with no obvious line splitting this blages are in decline. The sedge meadow, fen and dolo- prairie into distinct types. Nonetheless the prairies of the mite prairie assemblage is globally important. The G reat Plains are very diff e rent from the prairies of the species in these assemblages rely on other habitat types Chicago region. For the conservation of fine-textured - s o i l in addition to the prairie communities. Sensitive prairie prairies occurring east of the Mississippi, the Chicago species include the smooth green snake, plains leopard Wilderness region is important. The Chicago Wil d e r n e s s f rog, queen snake, spotted turtle, bull-snake, eastern region has a high concentration of fine-texture d - s o i l ra c e r , eastern hognose snake, and Fowler’s toad. prairie remnants, particularly of high-quality rem n a n t s . A d d i t i o n a l l y, because much restoration work on these In their number of bird species, the prairie communities prairies is taking place in the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n , have fewer than other community types, but prairies do this region has added significance for their conservation. harbor many bird species of concern. Of all the bird assemblages, grassland birds have the highest perce n t a g e Gravel prairies were created on glacial deposits, which of threatened species and species of concern. Birds do not we r e never abundant in the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n distinguish specifically between types of prairie, or elsewhere. Gravel prairies range into southern although habitat use does vary according to moisture Wisconsin and other areas where gravel glacial deposits gradient, and diffe r ent bird species use diffe r ent prairie oc c u r r ed, but they have always been rare. Through quar- s t ru c t u res. Moist-grassland bird populations in the rying, most of gravel prairies have been destroyed in the Chicago Wilderness are critical to the global conservation Chicago Wilderness region. However, it is unclear how of this assemblage. Sensitive species in this assemblage well they are surviving in other locations. Possibly this ar e willow flycatcher, yellow-breasted chat, Bell’s vireo , region has some important remaining examples. American bittern, northern harrier, sandhill crane, king rail, short-eared owl, Henslow’s sparrow , and bobolink. Important species in the drier areas are loggerh e a d 5.4.6 Long-term vision and shrike, lark sparro w, upland sandpiper, and western recovery goals me a d o w l a r k . This plan’s vision for the region’s prairies is to manage and res t o r e prairies on the landscape so that they sustain 5.4.5 Global significance and viable populations of all area-limited species and all for- conservation importance merly common species, and to protect multiple viable examples of all the region’s prairie types. In addition, it is The Chicago Wilderness region is very important for a goal to have landscape-scale natural processes, such as the conservation of all its prairie types. The one possible fi r e, hydrol o g y , and gene flow between populations, play exception is gravel prairie, for which less information a significant role in maintaining the ecological integrity of is available. prairies. Achieving these goals re q u i res: (1) active protection of all high-quality prairie remnants that are large This region is very important for dolomite prairie con- enough to sustain native species far into the future; (2) servation, as it contains some of the best remaining exam- g reatly increased and improved levels of management ples. Similar plant communities called alvars grow on of all prairie remnants and other natural communities in dolomite substrate around the Great Lakes, but these dif- a matrix of re s t o red prairie and unre s t o red grasslands; fer from the dolomite prairies of Chicago Wil d e r n e s s . and (3) far more acreage of res t o r ed prairie.

54 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

Prairies in the Chicago Wilderness region vary by sub- ority should be to expand as many existing 80- to 200- strate type and moisture level, and efforts should be a c re prairie remnants as possible into 500- to 1000-acre made to protect and manage all prairie types. All are sites. When given the opportunity, mobile species will important components of the region’s biodiversity, and recolonize functioning habitats. These sites should be all are considered rare or imperiled at the global level. A managed with a diversity of processes to create the vari- goal for prairie conservation in the region should be to ety of habitats needed by diffe r ent species. p rotect viable populations of all currently endangere d and threatened plant species that were historically wide- As there are so few examples of gravel and dolomite s p read throughout the region. While some plants and prairies, all remaining examples should be protected, no insects rely on high-quality remnants, the region’s grass- matter how small. Beyond the rare prairie types, all land birds depend on large expanses of grassland. One of remaining good-quality prairie sites (such as INAI grade this plan’s goals is to maintain stable or increasing pop- C or above) should be protected and improved where ulations of all grassland bird species that occur or histor- possible. These sites will serve as important seed source s , ically occurred in the region. In addition to the birds that and they will also play significant roles in conserving depend on pure grassland, a distinct set of birds re l i e s specific endangered and threatened plants and rem n a n t - on grassland with shrubs. Several species of reptiles, such dependent insects. as smooth green snake, are restricted to grassland habitats, and a goal is to conserve all of these species. Because the condition of prairie communities is curren t l y declining due to lack of sufficient management, all prairie Of all the elements of the prairie community, the grass- remnants under protection should be vigorously man- land birds are the most area-sensitive and are declining aged and, where possible, expanded to make manage- regionally and nationally. Focusing on the needs of these ment more effi c i e n t . species will be necessary to fulfill this plan’s goals for prairies. The region is fortunate to have a very large protected site for grasslands at Midewin. Efforts to manage 5.55. 5 and re s t o re the most area-dependent species should focus on this site. However, no single site is sufficient to Wetland communities—status en s u r e stable populations of grassland birds. It is thought that ten to twelve large sites throughout the region, each and recovery goals ap p r oximately 3000–4000 acres in size, are needed to sustain viable populations of grassland birds and other 5.5.1 Description of communities prairie species. The Chicago Wilderness region has one of the most These large sites should consist of native vegetation in diverse collections of wetlands in North America. The mosaics of grasslands, savannas, and wetlands, in orde r Chicago Wilderness community-classification system to contribute to the conservation of all prairie-community recognizes six major categories of wetlands: marsh; bog; elements. Both within and among sites, there should be fen; sedge meadow; panne; and seeps and springs. In variation in stru c t u re and moisture to provide a full addition, wet prairie is often considered a wetland type range of habitats. Fire with diff e rent effects across the (although it is classified under prairie in this document). landscape would help to res t o r e this diversity of habitats. All wetlands are inundated or saturated by surface or Co r e areas of high-quality remnants need to be included gr oundwater for a sufficient part of the year to support in larger sites to provide a basis for recolonization by vegetation that is adapted to life in saturated soil. Their prairie plants and insects. Ad d i t i o n a l l y , translocation and vegetation, the amount of water they hold, and the chem- rei n t r oduction may be essential to establish prairie inver- istry of their soil and water define the diffe r ent wetland tebrates successfully. Watersheds containing key sites types. For a more complete description of the diffe re n t should be managed to allow hydrological res t o r a t i o n . wetland types, see Appendix 1. Associated animal assemblages are shown in Table 4.3. Viable populations of prairie reptiles and amphibians need a metapopulation stru c t u re. Reptile and amphib- M a r s h e s a re cyclical wetlands dominated by emerg e n t ian assemblages appear to re q u i re a minimum of 200 reeds and grasses and other aquatic plants. Ve g e t a t i o n ac r es to maintain most of the species. Theref o r e, to con- and wildlife composition varies spatially with water serve all of the region’s reptiles and amphibians, it is rec - depth. The stages of the marsh cycle form a continuum ommended that we create as many medium-sized (500- fr om a ponded state in which open water covers all but to 1000-acre) grassland sites as possible. These sites the marsh’s shallow edges to a closed, 100% cover by should consist of core natural areas within a landscape e m e rgent vegetation. Maximum structural diversity of that allows them to function as breeding habitat. A pr i - importance for wetland birds is reached where the sur-

55 Biodiversity Recovery Plan face is approximately 50% open water and 50% emerge n t a re separated on the basis of water chemistry. A s p r i n g vegetation. This is called the hemi-marsh stage, and in it has a concentrated flow of groundwater from an opening these two structural features are completely interspersed in the grou n d . to maximize the internal interface between water and vegetation. There are two subtypes of marshes. Basin marshes occur in glacial kettles, potholes, and swales. 5.5.2 Findings and priorities They are most often found with savannas or prairies. All types of wetlands in the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n S t reamside marshes are restricted to the floodplains of have declined in quantity and quality. Conservation of cr eeks and rivers. They border the streams themselves or the remaining examples, restoration of degraded sites, occupy connected backwaters and abandoned oxbows. and creation of new wetland areas are priority activities within Chicago Wilderness due to the high value of these B o g s a re glacial-relict wetlands restricted to hydro l o g i- communities both for species diversity and for ecological cally isolated kettles. Precipitation, naturally nutrient- pr ocesses of functional value to people. po o r , is the sole source of water. This factor, the cool basin m i c roclimate, and the nutrient- and water- a b s o r p t i o n Graminoid fens are in the first tier of priority for addi- p roperties of its dominant ground cover, sphagnum tional conservation action, due to their rarity, degraded moss, combine to create a highly anaerobic, cold, nutri- condition, and the global significance of the re m a i n i n g ent-deficient acidic substrate of sphagnum peat with lit- examples in the Chicago Wilderness region. tle biochemical decay. Three developmental stages in bog succession are recognized as distinct subtypes (gramin- Pannes are also a first-tier conservation priority due to oid, low shrub, and forested), but all are characterized their rarity and the loss of natural nourishment proc e s s e s . by relict boreal wetland vegetation, which is now rare in Pannes have high biological importance, and the reg i o n the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n . has some of the best remaining examples.

Fe n s ar e created and maintained by the continuous inter- Basin marshes are a relatively high priority for additional nal flow of mineral-rich groundwater from bord e r i n g conservation attention. Basin marshes have high biolog- upland rock formations and other re c h a rge areas. A n ical importance, particularly as habitat for wildlife. They impervious layer of till or other water barrier forces cold, merit particular consideration for additional conserva- oxygen-deficient, mineralized groundwater to seep out tion effort, because restoration efforts have proven suc- at the bases of upland slopes. Fens support many plants cessful in rec r eating their functional values, particularly adapted to high concentrations of dissolved alkaline min- when compared to the other wetland types. erals. There are three subtypes of fen: calcareous floating mat, graminoid fen, and forested fen. T h e re is a high level of concern about stre a m s i d e marshes, because so few remain and they are in poor con- S e d g e m e a d o w s a re sedge-dominated grasslands that dition. Unfortunately, it will be difficult to design effe c - include wet-prairie grasses. Groundwater seepage and/ tive conservation actions for these areas without or shallow flooding are the principal hydrological fac- ad d r essing substantial problems arising from changes in tors, and frequent fire is needed to retain their open struc - the hydrology of the region’s streams and rivers. Bio- tu r e. Sedge meadows often grade into fens, marshes, or engineering techniques are showing limited success, but wet prairies. mo r e effective watershed practices and ways to res t o r e st r eamside marshes must be found. P a n n e s a re unique interdunal wetlands on calcare o u s , moist sands of the lake plain, generally within one mile of Ca l c a r eous floating mats are more numerous and in bet- Lake Michigan. Sedges and sedge relatives dominate this ter condition than graminoid fens. Calcareous floating- op e n - s t ru c t u r ed wetland, which has considerable floris- mat fens rate as a relatively high priority for additional tic overlap with fens and calcareous seeps. conservation attention due to their biological importance and the significance of the Chicago Wilderness region to Seeps and springs occur where groundwater flows to the their global conservation. surface. A s e e p is an area with saturated soil caused by water flowing to the surface in a diffuse flow. Seeps may Sedge meadows are of slightly lower priority for addi- have local areas of concentrated flow, and the water usu- tional conservation attention. Their status is somewhere ally collects in spring runs. Seeps are usually smaller than in the middle of the continuum of concern, as a fair 0.1 acre and are most common along the lower slopes of amount of this community type remains. Managed sedge glacial moraines, ravines, and terraces. The three sub- meadows are improving in condition, and there is oppor- types of this community (calcareous, neutral, and sand) tunity to improve further by bringing more sedge meadows under management.

56 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

Bogs are of lower priority than other wetland types for salinization, siltation, nutrient loading, and hydrol o g i c a l additional conservation attention, because, for the most change. While all of the largest remaining complexes are part, the remaining bogs are well protected and rec e i v e in public ownership, many basin marshes are neither high levels of management. A d d i t i o n a l l y, the Chicago pr otected nor managed. Many of the marshes that exist Wilderness region is at the edge of their range, and they on public land are not receiving proper management. ar e of less overall biological importance due to their small The stressors are very large and widespread and are dif- size, although they do harbor a high number of locally ficult to control . ra r e plant species. A l a rger percentage of streamside marshes than basin C a l c a reous seeps are of higher priority than neutral marshes has been lost since European settlement, and and sand seeps, because they have higher biological very few good-quality examples remain today. Cook importance. There is concern about the rarity and the County has no known streamside marshes larger than poor condition of all seep types. Due to their small size, one acre. Over the years, streamside marshes have been h o w e v e r, they are difficult to target for additional con- lost to channelization, siltation, or hydrology modifica- servation attention without focusing on the surro u n d- tion, or they have been cut off from their rivers by lev- ing communities. ees. Because the flow of a stream can be altered by changes anywhere in its watershed, streamside marshes ar e threatened even when they are in public ownership. WETLAND COMMUNITIES Co n s e r vation targets in top tiers Sedimentation is a significant problem for stre a m s i d e marshes, and they are vulnerable to invasive species First (highest) tier whose propagules are carried by floodwaters. Non- Graminoid fen po i n t - s o u r ce pollutants that degrade marsh systems are Panne in c re a s i n g .

Second tier Basin marsh Bo g s Ca l c a r eous floating mat Bogs are a very rare community type in the Chicago Ca l c a r eous seep Wilderness region, with fewer than 20 documented St r eamside marsh oc c u r r ences. Most of the remaining bogs are prot e c t e d . Because bogs have small watersheds, they are the least Th i r d tier th r eatened of the wetland community types by outside Fo r ested fen Sedge meadow impacts, although development of surrounding land leading to changes in hydrology is a threat. Even though the bogs appear to be in better condition than other wetland community types, there is still cause for concern about their long-term maintenance. The remaining bogs 5.5.3 Status ar e surrounded by development and are theref o r e diffi - Ma r s h e s cult to manage. Since the time of European settlement, the Illinois has lost nearly 90% of its wetlands, and Indiana has lost more Fe n s than 85% of its wetlands (Critical Trends A s s e s s m e n t Of the fen community types, forested fens and graminoid P roject 1994, Bennett et al. 1995). To d a y, the Chicago fens are at a higher level of concern (both for quantity Wilderness region continues to lose acres of marsh due to remaining and for condition) than the calcareous floating development. Protection measures are in place larg e l y mat. Forested fens are the rarest of all the fen types, with th r ough the Federal Clean Water Act, and, thanks in grea t only nine known occurrences in the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s part to these measures, fairly large amounts of basin region. There may have been more forested fens before marsh remain. The wettest marshes in particular have Eu r opean settlement. While forested fens are very rare, survived, because they are the most difficult to drain for some exist that are not officially protected. Remaining conversion to other uses. Although most of the larg e s t f o rested fens are in urban areas and are suffering fro m examples of basin marsh have been lost in the region, it is road run - o f f and other pres s u r es of development. Their still the most common of the wetland community types quality is believed to be declining, as they are losing found within Chicago Wil d e r n e s s . species, but not enough is known about how to best mea- su r e the long-term health of forested fens. The remaining marshes have undergone general degradation across the entire region, and most are considered Although there are more graminoid fens than other type to be of low quality. The main threats are invasive species, of fen, they are being lost at an alarming rate. Unpro-

57 Biodiversity Recovery Plan tected graminoid fens have been identified rec e n t l y , and Seeps and springs experts think more are still to be discovered in the reg i o n , In general, seeps and springs are very small, and many although their condition is likely declining. Hydrol o g i c a l ar e not being managed. They are invaded by a number of changes, invasive species, and cattle grazing thre a t e n plants including buckthorn, reed canary grass, cattail and graminoid fens. Although the full effects of these threa t s Impatiens. Often there is limited burning of the wood- have not been seen yet, there is a high potential for fur- land community surrounding seeps and springs, and this ther degradation of the graminoid fens. In general, lack of burning contributes to their poor condition. Many graminoid fens are in poorer condition than calcareo u s of the seeps and springs are not on protected lands, and floating mats and, of the fens, are the most sensitive to these are in poor condition. There is only one known gr oundwater changes. sand seep in the region, making this community type ex t r emely rare. C u r rent investigations, such as the McHenry County Wetland Advanced Identification study, are still finding a few previously unknown calcareous floating mats. It is 5.5.4 Biological significance pr obable that the region has suffe r ed historical loss of this community type, but there are no data on pre- s e t t l e m e n t Ma r s h e s amounts. Because calcareous floating mats are difficult to Marshes are of high importance to this region because reach, they tend to be better protected than the other fen they are so widespread and provide habitat to a number types. Like other fens, calcareous floating mats are asso- of species. Some plants are restricted to this community ciated with their grou n d w a t e r , and theref o r e are subject type, and marshes play an important role for a number of to issues of water quantity and quality. In addition, cal- animal species. For example, many birds rely on the ca r eous floating mats are subject to inundation by surface marshes in this region during migration. State-listed w a t e r. Invasive species, particularly purple loosestrife, en d a n g e r ed or threatened plant species of concern that ar e also a threa t . occur in marshes include American bur-r eed and gree n - fr uit bur-re e d .

Sedge meadows The region’s marsh reptile and amphibian assemblage, A fairly large number of sedge meadows remain in the which includes the western chorus frog, green fro g , Chicago Wilderness region, and many are officially pro- northern leopard frog, painted turtle, Blanding’s turtle, tected. Nevertheless, very large amounts have been lost Graham’s crayfish snake, and western ribbon snake, is since the start of European settlement, when this com- c o n s i d e red globally important. The assemblage seems munity occurred throughout the region. Sedge mead- relatively stable, although it includes some species that ows are susceptible to draining and to flooding as well a re declining. For marsh reptiles, Blanding’s turtle, as to the suppression of fire. Sedge meadows have been Graham’s crayfish snake, and the western ribbon snake se v e r ely degraded by past grazing. Curren t l y , most sedge ar e the species of special concern either because they are meadows are of fair quality. A p p roximately half are in decline or because they are restricted to a declining being managed, and management appears to be improv - habitat. In general, marsh reptiles and amphibians suffe r ing their quality. The rest are degrading and in danger of f rom management regimens that prevent the natural being lost as they are overgr own by brush and invasive cycling of water. Development of surrounding lands, exotic species. purple loosestrife invasion, and loss of plant diversity also threaten marsh reptiles and amphibians. Pa n n e s Very few pannes remain in the region, with only twelve The region’s marsh insect assemblage is considered to known occurrences covering less than 40 acres. Due to be in decline. In particular, purplish copper, great cop- physical impediments on beaches, the natural proc e s s e s pe r , broad-winged skipper, and Dion skipper have been by which pannes were created are almost totally blocked. identified as sensitive marsh insects. Wa t e r-table alter- Thus, while they appear stable and in good quality in ation, siltation, and the invasion of cattails threaten the the short term, pannes are threatened in the long term. marsh insects. The lack of littoral drift of sand due to hardening of sh o r elines in Wisconsin, Chicago, and other areas of the The community of birds found in hemi-marshes with- region has led to the lack of sand replenishment in the out shrubs, which includes black tern, marsh wren, and pannes. Without management in the form of adding sand yellow-headed blackbird, is considered to be in sub-opti- to the beach system, the pannes will be eventually lost. mal condition. The Lake Calumet complex was a very Even though the remaining pannes are mainly prot e c t e d , important site for hemi-marsh birds, but it is now grea t l y th e r e is a high possibility of complete loss. Even in a pro- degraded through pollution, habitat loss, invasion by tected state, pannes are threatened by succession, lake a g g ressive plants, and disruption of hydro l o g y. Else- er osion, and elevation changes of Lake Michigan.

58 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals wh e r e, small- to medium-sized marshes that maintained Pa n n e s significant populations have also been badly degraded. Pannes are of high biological importance because they harbor some narrowly endemic species. While the panne Bo g s reptile and amphibian assemblage is presently stable, its Bogs have a large number of distinctive plant species, as species are of conservation concern due to their rarity. well as a distinctive insect fauna. State-listed endangered Sensitive species include Fowler’s toad, northern cricket or threatened plant species that occur in bogs include fr og, and Blanding’s turtle. These species are affected by water arum, few-seed sedge, and round-leaved sundew. human disturbance, including collection, air pollution, Th e r e is a possibility that bogs have a distinctive rep t i l e and invasion by alien plants, mainly purple loosestrife. and amphibian assemblage, but this has not been confirmed. Because they were never a significant component Seeps and springs of the landscape, bogs are of relatively less biological Ca l c a r eous seeps are biologically important because they importance than the other wetland types in this reg i o n . maintain many restricted plants, including the federal candidate species forked aster. In general, because seeps Fe n s and springs are so small, they do not harbor many Fens in general have high overall diversity as well as dis- species, and they have no distinctive associated faunal tinctive plant communities, and they are of high biological co m m u n i t i e s . importance to the region. Priority plant species dependent on fens include marsh valerian, a candidate for federal listing, American burnet, and queen of the prairie. 5.5.5 Global significance and conservation importance Fo r ested fens tend to be rich in amphibians. It is possible Both basin marshes and streamside marshes are wide- that, in this region, the four-toed salamander is only sp r ead throughout the country. Good examples of both found in forested fens. The reptile and amphibian assem- these community types occur within the Chicago blage of sedge meadow, fen, and dolomite prairie Wilderness region, as well as elsewhere. The region does includes western chorus frog, green frog, northern leop- have a significant opportunity to create complexes of a rd frog, pickerel frog, Blanding’s turtle, smooth gre e n marsh, prairie, and other community types that does not snake, northern water snake, and queen snake. This occur anywhere else. Marshes are very important locally. assemblage in the region is considered to be globally important. Ac r oss the region, this assemblage is declin- Pannes are globally imperiled and many of the best ing, although there is a north/south division. In the examples exist in the Chicago Wilderness region. The northern part of the region (Lake and McHenry Counties Chicago Wilderness region is important to the global con- in Illinois), the assemblage is doing better, perhaps even servation of this community type. i n c reasing, due to management and protection. In the southern part of the region, the species that are specialists Both calcareous floating mats and graminoid fens range ar e declining, with only a few species hanging on. This up into southern Wisconsin and further north but is primarily due to fragmentation and isolation. Purple do not occur south of the Chicago Wilderness region. The loosestrife poses a threat to these species over time. Chicago Wilderness region contains many good examples of both graminoid fens and calcareous floating mats The fen insects are of conservation concern with many and is in a good position to contribute to their global ra r e species. Sensitive species, which are rare and habitat- co n s e r v a t i o n . restricted, include Baltimore checkerspot, swamp metalmark, and bluebell dragonfly. Hydrological alteration The forested fens of the Chicago Wilderness region are and invasion by common reed and cattail threaten fen not significant to the global conservation of this commu- in s e c t s . nity type. Similarly, most bogs are located to the north of the Chicago Wilderness region, and thus we are on the Sedge meadows edge of the range. Sedge meadows are extensive and important at the landscape level. While they do not harbor many rare plants, The Chicago Wilderness region occupies a central part they harbor great diversity. Ad d i t i o n a l l y , they are impor- of the midwestern range of sedge meadows and contains tant for several animal species and as water- c l e a n s i n g a number of good examples of this community type, agents. Sedge meadows partially support the globally although other good examples can be found elsewhere. important reptile and amphibian assemblage of sedge m e a d o w, fen, and dolomite prairie; this assemblage is Neutral seeps are widely distributed and are common in discussed above under “Fens.” eastern forests. Chicago Wilderness is on the edge of the

59 Biodiversity Recovery Plan range of sand seeps, which occur where there are sand- edge of habitat req u i r ements of wetland birds, rep t i l e s , stone outcroppings, beach ridges, or dunes. Good exam- and amphibians, a natural-area complex of appro x i- ples of calcareous seeps occur in the region, but they are mately 1000 acres, with several marshes of 100 acres or distributed elsewhere as well. m o re and with smaller wetlands and ephemeral pools, appears to be appropriate. There is the potential to create and res t o r e around fifteen of these large wetland com- 5.5.6 Long-term vision and plexes in the region, and this number should allow recovery goals su f ficient acreage and diversity of condition to meet the habitat needs of breeding and migratory waterfowl. This plan’s goal for the region’s wetland communities is Management of large wetland complexes across the to preserve all wetland types in viable examples and to region should be coordinated to ensure a diversity of con- expand the amount of some wetland types for wildlife ditions at all times. habitat and for the sake of other ecologically important functions. The floristic diversity of wetlands should be In addition, many more relatively small wetland com- maintained by managing most wetlands to good quality plexes are needed throughout the region, but particularly for natural species, eliminating or aggressively control - in the southern and western parts, to connect existing ling invasive species. Hydrological regimes for most wet- wetlands. These connections help species disperse. These lands should be improved by managing surro u n d i n g complexes would protect the full range of wetland types, lands in a manner that protects wetland integrity, and particularly as smaller wetland types do better when by planning management at the watershed level. A go a l managed as part of a larger complex. In particular, fens, should be to look at planning for wetlands at a landscape sedge meadows, bogs, pannes, and seeps req u i r e contin- level, recognizing that having complexes of wetlands in ued protection of currently designated natural areas and close proximity and embedding wetlands in a matrix of p rotection of newly identified sites. Wetlands, particu- other natural areas is essential to their functioning. larly those fed by gro u n d w a t e r, re q u i re protection of their rec h a r ge areas as well as protection of their plants. Chicago Wilderness’s wetlands re p resent an array of Natural hydrology needs to be res t o r ed in many areas as diverse community types (marshes, bogs, fens, sedge well as protected in others. Invasive species and other meadows, pannes, and seeps), all of which should be th r eats, such as salt and nitrates, need to be controlled in pr otected as unique contributors to the region’s biodiver- or der to maintain healthy communities. si t y . Due to their complex life cycles, amphibians rely on several diffe r ent habitats. Theref o r e, conserving habitat mosaics, particularly including wetlands with varying h y d rologic regimes, is important if we are to have 5. 6 demonstrably secure populations of amphibians. Serving as a good indicator species for marsh reptiles and Minor community types amphibians, Blanding’s turtle is a sensitive reptile for which habitat conditions should be improved. Many 5.6.1 Shrubland communities b i rds species, both breeding and migratory, depend on the region’s wetlands. We need to increase the bree d i n g At the time of settlement, the woody vegetation matrix populations of wetland birds and improve wetland man- of the Chicago Wilderness region is thought to have agement to be able to sustain populations thro u g h included three vegetation types: oak savanna, woodland, d roughts. Within wetland complexes and across the and forest. This vegetation occurred across a landscape region, diff e rent wetlands should be at diff e rent stages fi r e gradient, with forest having the greatest level of fire at the same time. Wetland plants depend on hydrol o g i c a l p rotection and savanna the least (Moran 1976, Hanson cycling of wetlands, yet the birds need open water dur- 1981, Anderson 1991, Bowles and McBride 1998, Bowles ing droughts. Some particularly sensitive species include et al. 1994). However, a fourth community type, shrub - American bittern, sandhill crane, king rail, and black lands or barrens, was also a component of this landscape, tern. Requiring a diversity of habitats, including mud- but it has been overlooked or misunderstood. Most his- flats, high water, and low and high vegetation, amphib- toric accounts describe shrublands as maintained by fire ians also depend on a number of wetlands in a variety (Bowles and McBride 1994, White 1994). Illinois shrub - of hydrologic phases. lands rep r esented a late stage of fire-caused forest degen- eration characterized by four- to five-foot sprouts of scrub The above elements along with the overall goal help to oak, hazel, and wild plum (Gleason 1922). They were define some specific re q u i rements for protection and most common in uneven or rolling topography and in management. To maintain viable populations of marsh st r eam valleys, which reduced fire effects, or they devel- br eeding birds, reptiles and amphibians, the region needs oped on the west sides of forests attacked by eastward- mo r e large marsh complexes. Based on scientific knowl- moving prairie fires driven by prevailing winds (Gleason

60 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

1913). Shrublands appear to have been strongly allied ment of hazel clones within a res t o r ed graminoid matrix floristically with savanna (Packard 1991, Anderson and (Bowles et al. 1993). To accelerate development of large Bowles 1999). However, savannas were formerly wide- hazel clones, fire protection may be needed for several sp r ead, while shrublands may have been much less fre- years. How fire or fire protection affects establishment of quent, occurring in a linear pattern bordering the western ba r r ens species is not clear, and may vary with species. flanks of prairie groves. For example, less than 1% of the DuPage County landscape comprised barrens or shrub - lands at the time of European settlement, while savanna 5.6.2 Cliff communities may have covered about 18% (Bowles et al. 1999). Dolomite cliffs E x p o s u res of dolomite containing plant and animal Sh r ubs and fire-stunted oak grubs appear to have been assemblages in pre-settlement condition are very rare , s t ructurally dominant components of shru b l a n d s . due primarily to the lack of exposed dolomite and to Historic descriptions (reviewed in Bowles and McBride the historic commercial extraction of the substrate. Most 1994) identify more than 30 shrub species that may have natural occurrences of dolomite have been quarried, characterized barrens, including hazel, New Jersey tea, resulting in serious loss of ecological value. Most of the dogwood, wild crab, wild plum, sumac, rose, prairie wil- remaining high-quality examples of this community lo w , and prickly ash. Shrublands that formed along the type have been protected. Protected areas, however, are western flanks of forests were dominated by hazel, form- pr one to a variety of conditions that may result in their ing a margin for the interior forest (Gleason 1913). Hazel degradation. Additional areas with degraded examples is an important source of wildlife habitat and bro w s e , of dolomite cliffs are unprotected and under private and its nuts are among the richest wildlife food source s ow n e r s h i p . (Stearns 1974). Thus, hazel may have been a keystone species in the historic continuum of vegetation from for- Dolomite cliff communities provide areas for primary est to prairie. In addition, historic descriptions list more colonization on highly alkaline, sterile substrates, which than 30 forb species occurring in barrens (Bowles and ar e unlike the vast majority of more common communi- McBride 1994). ties in the region. Undisturbed exposures of dolomite p rovide ecological conditions suitable for a variety of Due to their instability without fire, few, if any, high-qual- plants and animals with very narrow ranges of ecological ity shrublands exist (Packard 1991, Anderson and Bowles tolerance, and these species are limited to dolomite cliffs 1999). No high-quality shrublands remain in the Chicago and the large blocks of dolomite talus that result fro m region (Bowles and McBride 1996). With advancing set- natural erosion of these cliffs. Four groups of orga n i s m s tlement and fire protection, many authors described the in this category are ferns, lichens, other herbaceous instability and disappearance of shrublands (White plants, and land snails. Springs and seeps at the base of 1994). Thus, large areas of shrublands were converted dolomite cliffs add a great deal of diversity to these com- into forest “as by magic” when the fires that had main- munities, as do the perennial or intermittent streams that tained them were stopped and the oak sprouts became flow through dolomite canyons. tr ees (Gleason 1922). The primary ferns found on dolomite cliffs are purple Because of the apparently total loss of intact shrub l a n d s cl i f f brake, walking fern, bulblet bladder fern, and slen- or barrens, restoration of degraded land will be req u i re d der rock brake. All four species are found only on to rec r eate this community. Perhaps the best potential site dolomite cliffs or boulders in our region and are limited for shrubland restoration is the Hickory Creek Barre n s to communities with high ecological quality. N a t u re Preserve, which is part of the Hickory Cre e k Fo r est Preserve in Will County. Because of fire- m a n a g e - The lichen population of dolomite cliffs is not completely ment and introduction of prairie grasses at Hickory known, but it contains crustose, foliose and fru t i c o s e Cr eek and other sites, the process of restoring shrub l a n d s lichens. Many species in this habitat are restricted to bare will differ from natural shrublands development. Hazel rock that remains free of external disturbance for long is a fire-sensitive, yet fire-dependent species. Burning periods of time. Several species previously unknown in kills back hazel canes, which req u i r e three to five years this region were found in the Sagawau Canyon Nature to reach rep r oductive size from root sprouts, and severe P reserve in 1990. Numerous other species most likely or growing-season fires can reduce stem density or cause remain to be discovered at this and other sites, and little m o r t a l i t y. However, without fire, trees replace hazel. is known of their ecological req u i re m e n t s . Thus, the establishment and maintenance of hazel barrens must incorporate burning frequencies and intensi- Several herbaceous species also req u i r e the highly alka- ties that are concordant with the life history of hazel. line substrate. The hairy rock cress only grows on small Competition from grass appears to hamper the establish-

61 Biodiversity Recovery Plan ledges of cliff faces where a small amount of soil has tion of their natural biota. However, some moderate- to formed. Other primitive plants such as mosses and liv- l a rge-sized stretches of beach in Indiana and Lake erworts are well re p resented on undisturbed dolomite Co u n t y , Illinois, are in relatively good condition. cl i f fs and on the talus at the bottom of the cliffs but have restricted distribution elsewhere. For their nourishment, beaches rely on a continuing supply of sand transported by currents along the shore to N a r row ledges covered with soil, small herbaceous replace sand lost to areas further along the shore . plants, and plant detritus harbor a few species of land U n f o r t u n a t e l y, the supply is being cut off or deflected snails that are restricted to these habitats. Additional fau- into deep areas by construction or dredging. In some nal species restricted to this habitat may also exist. cases, this has made it necessary to import sand to maintain beaches. The beach community is one of the few nat- Other organisms with wider tolerances, but with an affi n - ural communities where natural, periodic, catastrop h i c ity for dolomite or limestone, may be quite abundant on disturbance is a healthy part of the community. These dolomite cliffs but be fairly rare elsewhere in this reg i o n . disturbances occur as the result of storms and natural changes in lake levels. Eroding bluffs / r a v i n e s The ravine bluff ecosystem occurs along the Highland Beaches and immediately adjacent foredune communi- Park moraine from approximately Wilmette to North ties serve as virtually the only habitat for several special- Chicago, Illinois. Although much of this system is in pri- ized plant species, some of which are regionally rare , vate ownership, the finest examples and highest-quality including beach pea (endangered in Illinois), marram remnants occur on publicly owned property in Lake grass (endangered in Illinois), sea rocket (threatened in Fo r est, Highland Park, and other North Shore commu- Illinois), and dune thistle (threatened federally and in nities. These remnants include McCormick Ravine in Illinois). It appears that beaches can serve as colonization Lake Forest, and Rosewood Park and Ravine Drive Park zones for plants that specialize in beaches and fored u n e s in Highland Park. These sites contain examples of the and that can migrate over fairly large distances arou n d rich diversity of the eastern deciduous hardwood fores t the edge of the lake during storms or ice movement. intermixed with northern boreal forest relics that botanists theorize are left behind from the post-glacial Beaches are important stops for migrating shore b i rd s . ecosystem. Two such plants, buffalo berry and dwarf Migrating species include ruddy turnstones, buff - scouring rush, are only in these ravine bluff ecosystems. br easted sandpipers, and semipalmated plovers. Beaches Thirty-eight percent of the ravine bluff flora grows in no ar e the only possible local nesting habitat for the piping other Lake County plant community (Wilhelm 1991). plover (endangered federally and in Illinois), which now Many typically northern species occur in relative abun- pr obably no longer nests in the area . dance in the ravines. A staggering 367 species of plants have been found in these ravine bluff ecosystems. Fo r e d u n e s Un f o r t u n a t e l y , many of the more rare species have been The foredunes in the Chicago Wilderness region are the extirpated from the ravine landscapes. first vegetated dunes formed adjacent to the Lake Mich- igan shoreline. They still exist in portions of northwest In addition to the rare plant community harbored within Indiana and north of Chicago, but they have largely been the ravine bluff complex, the geologic features are quite de s t r oyed around the city as fill has extended develop- dynamic and unique. The relative geologic youth of this ment into the lake. Few high-quality, dynamic fored u n e system results in dramatic change due to erosion and systems remain because the construction of harbors and mass wasting events. The glacial till includes ancient jetties and the hardening of the coastline to prevent ero- rock and rocks otherwise not found in Illinois that were sion have cut off littoral drift of sand. The nearshore fore- carried down with the glacier from Canada, Wis c o n s i n , dunes are dominated by marram grass with scattere d and Michigan. cottonwoods. Secondary dunes and blowouts are dominated by little bluestem, bunchgrass, sand reed grass, sand cherry and numerous scattered forbs: hairy puc- 5.6.3 Lakeshore communities coon, sand cress, bugseed, and horizontal juniper. Beach communities F o redunes are important as buffers between the shore Many beaches still exist, at least in terms of substrate and the lake. Linear foredunes form with the interaction pr esence, although a large majority is unable to function between lake level, sand supply, and vegetation estab- na t u r a l l y . Most remaining beaches are very damaged or lishment by marram grass in many years and cotton- a l t e red by continual disturbance caused either dire c t l y wood in cool, moist years. They formerly harbored the or indirectly by people, and they only harbor a tiny frac- federally threatened Pitcher's thistle and other rare

62 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals plants. Foredunes at Illinois Beach State Park harbor a parks are a critical element in maintaining habitat for la r ger element of western prairie than do those in north- bi r ds that migrate though the region between bree d i n g west Indiana. and wintering grou n d s .

High dunes The Chicago Wilderness region is an important area for High dunes occur in the southeast shoreline of Lake migrating birds because Lake Michigan constitutes a key Michigan where post-Nipissing winds piled up larg e part of one of the major flyways in North America. Most sand dunes. High dunes in Miller, Ogden Dunes, Dune bi r ds do not fly over the Lake itself, but instead fly along Park, Dune A c res, and Beverly Shores in Indiana have its edges as they travel north or south. Westerly prev a i l - been altered or destroyed by residential and industrial ing winds push more birds up against the Lake so grea t development, leaving about half of what existed in pre- concentrations end up traveling in a narrow corridor settlement times. The best unfragmented examples occur adjacent to the shoreline. As a result, shoreline parks are in the Indiana Dunes State Park, but Indiana Dunes excellent res o u r ces for migrating birds, and are an invalu- National Lakeshore has high-quality examples as well. able res o u r ce to the bird watchers of the reg i o n . High dunes harbor a mesophytic community on the north/northeast slopes and in the deep valleys, called Migrants will benefit significantly from greater vegeta- mesophytic pockets. Here, climatic extremes are moder- tion cover, and greater variety of food sources along the ated by Lake Michigan, in contrast to the barrens and e n t i re lakeshore, such as seeds and insects associated savannas that occur on the south and west slopes. High with native vegetation. Urban greening in general, par- dunes are often interrupted by large blowouts whose ori- ticularly in the City of Chicago, would provide cover and gins are controversial. Some believe the blowouts are the food for migrating birds. Use of native plants in land- result of post-settlement disturbance, and others believe scaping parks and other spaces will increase the value they rep r esent past movement of sand when lake levels of these areas as habitat for migrating birds. Limiting we r e high or decreasing from a high level. Dominants in mowing and spraying of pesticides in lakeshore park- the high dunes can include jack and white pine, bass- lands during migration will also help protect birds dur- wood, white and red oak, ash, tulip tree, and dogwood. ing this vulnerable period. Another urban issue related to Further from the lake, high dunes have black oak fores t s migratory birds is collision with buildings during night or white oak flatwoods. migration in the spring and fall. Tall buildings that are substantially glass should, where possible, turn off lights These are important transitional communities between during these periods. Finally, as discussed in Section 9.2.6 the unforested foredunes and the savanna and fores t e d of this plan, public education to encourage people to portions of the dunes. They harbor mesophytic and keep house cats indoors is an important action to prot e c t b o real elements including winged polygala, hepatica, both migrant and resident songbird populations. trailing arbutus, ivory sedge, rice grass, bellwort, and black oat grass. Red-headed woodpeckers and white- footed mice are common. 5. 7 5.6.4 Urban and rural open spaces Threats and stressors to A significant portion of the open space in the re g i o n terrestrial communities —parks, golf courses, industrial sites, and agriculture— does not contain natural communities as discussed in this c h a p t e r. These areas can still contribute to biodiversity 5.7.1 Hydrological change conservation and should be considered in future plan- Al t e r ed hydrology is a severe threat to a number of com- ning. Chapter 11 contains suggestions on how corporate munities, including wetlands, prairies, flatwoods, and campuses, agricultural lands, and other private open dolomite cliffs. There are a number of sources of hydro- spaces can help conserve biodiversity. logical change. Urban and suburban development with associated draining, paving, and topography changes A particular focus for such planning, as noted by partici- often alters the hydrology of nearby natural communi- pants in this recovery plan, should be the lakefront parks ties, either increasing or decreasing the quantity of water along the shore of Lake Michigan. Although most of flowing into the community. Low-lying communities, these urban parks are built space, in many cases the land- particularly marshes, flatwoods, and seeps, are thre a t- scape architects have used the natural setting as their ened by the development of associated uplands. model. These and other urban open spaces can prov i d e habitat for wildlife and plants. In particular, the lakefron t

63 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

The other significant cause of altered hydrology is tiling. The effects of fragmentation include not only the parti- Tiles were often used to drain lands for agriculture. In tioning of sites but also what happens in the rem a i n i n g many cases the land has returned to natural vegetative small, isolated patches. Development surrounding a nat- co v e r , but tiles remain and stress the natural community. ural area limits the amount and types of management This is particularly a problem in prairies, sedge mead- that can be done. For instance, in some cases new devel- ows, and fens. opment has limited the opportunities to burn prairies due to prevailing wind direction. Fragmentation is a par- St r eamside marshes are dependent on the streams with ticular problem for animal species, most notably grass- which they are associated, and thus a number of the land and forest birds, that can only breed successfully in th r eats to streamside marshes are linked to stream issues. la r ge, contiguous habitat blocks. Ex t r eme water-level fluctuation is a significant prob l e m , due to the increasing amount of paved surfaces in the region. Another major stressor is the downcutting and 5.7.3 Altered fire regimes channelization of streams resulting in substantially low- F i re was once a natural disturbance across the entire er ed water table in riparian wetlands. The hydraulic con- Chicago Wilderness region. While pockets of the reg i o n nection between stream and riparian wetland is virtually we r e protected from fire by landscape features, all of the eliminated, except during flood flows. Alterations to the community types evolved in the presence of fire . quantity and quality of stream flow also disturbs the Th e re f o r e, the lack of fire and altered fire regimes lead to talus and gravel areas of dolomite cliffs, resulting in the degradation of most community types. Al t e r ed land- wi d e s p r ead changes to plant communities. scape patterns and the suppression of natural fires in the region have eliminated natural disturbances, and pre- Other threats associated with altered hydrology include scribed burns are theref o r e necessary to maintain the con- i n c reased sedimentation in floodplain forests due to dition of the region’s natural communities. Lack of fire is flashier floods. Ad d i t i o n a l l y , gravel mining and paving of most threatening to the forested, prairie, and savanna re c h a rge areas threaten communities dependent on communities. Fire is being used as a management tool at gr oundwater flow, including fens, sedge meadows, and a rate far below that which is necessary to sustain healthy seeps. Changes to the subsurface water flow affect the natural communities. This is due to a number of factors, distribution of liverworts and some mosses in dolomite- including lack of human and financial res o u r ces and lack cl i f f communities. Some marshes suffer from a diffe re n t of public understanding of the importance of fire . type of hydrological change, in that they are often man- Management with fire is often constrained by necessary aged for one hydrological state and not permitted to go pr ecautions to protect nearby houses. This is particularly th r ough the normal hydrological cycling. tr ue with prairies, which for the most part remain only in small patches. In forested communities, invasive In addition to altered hydro l o g y, deteriorating water species, particularly once they are well established, can quality might be damaging a number of communities. also alter fire regimes and make it more difficult to man- The effects of toxins on wetland and other plants are not age with fire alone. fully known. The lack of fire in forested communities, particularly 5.7.2 Fragmentation those with shorter fire- r eturn periods such as woodlands, can lead to canopy closure. This causes overshading, Fragmentation particularly threatens the communities which limits growth in the understory and the herba- that were once more widespread: prairies, savannas, ceous layer. The health of the herbaceous layer depends woodlands, and upland forests. Fragmentation is a lesser on light penetrating the canopy and periodic control of th r eat in the naturally small communities, although pop- sh r ubs and saplings by fire. Some species, such as oaks, ulations of some species may suffer loss of genetic vari- a re more fire-tolerant and have seedlings and saplings ability if migration patterns are disrupted. Fragmentation whose survival is aided by periodic fire. For some com- is caused by many forms of human development. Roads munities, the lack of fire has meant a shift in major type of and areas of human occupation divide up the commu- disturbance from external forces to internal disturbance, ni t y , affecting it in a number of ways, including altering such as canopy-gap processes from disease and wind- gene flow (possibly leading to loss of genetic diversity th ro w . However, these internal disturbances are not suf- and increased inbreeding), increasing predation, and ficient to maintain the long-term health or viability of i n c reasing opportunities for invasive species. In some the communities. The exception is upland forests, which cases, fragmentation occurs in less obvious ways. For have always operated under canopy-gap proc e s s e s . instance, a power line through an upland forest or a trail t h rough a prairie may fragment that habitat for insects and other small orga n i s m s .

64 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

A particular problem with the absence of fire is the inva- urban and suburban development and from agriculture. sion of exotic species and fire sensitive native species into Quantities from development can be very large, but typ- savannas, which were once dominated by oaks. ically occur for only one or two years from any one parcel of land. Agricultural cultivation tends to pro d u c e substantial quantities annually unless conservation mea- 5.7.4 Loss of structural diversity su r es are adopted. In natural areas, invasive species can For many animals, the struc t u r e of the community is very cause the loss of herbaceous plants, leaving exposed soil important. “Struc t u r e” refers to the spatial arrangement that may lead to increased erosion, particularly where of the community elements. Loss of structural diversity other human disturbances help create gullies. The extent results from the loss of natural disturbances and then lack to which loss of the herbaceous ground layer in the of management to mimic these processes. Fire was the region’s forested communities contributes to large - s c a l e main disturbance process creating structural diversity in s h e e t - e rosion is a topic for continued study. Excessive the prairies, but grazers also contributed. In some cases, sedimentation is of greatest threat to streams, lakes, and monotypic management fails to achieve the desire d low-lying areas including wetlands, floodplain fore s t s , s t ructural diversity. For example, limitations on pre- and vernal ponds in flatwoods and other forested com- scribed burns often mean that the management does not mu n i t i e s . cr eate the structural diversity that natural fire once did, because the location and intensity of burns are control l e d . Along the lakeshore, erosion and sedimentation are nat- Natural prairie fires varied in intensity and skipped area s ural processes, which provide sand to nourish beach and as they moved across the landscape, leaving struc t u r a l l y dune communities. However, when these natural varied grassland behind. pr ocesses are disrupted, erosion becomes a threat, as in the case of pannes. Erosion in pannes is caused by rec r e- In the forested communities, a loss of structural diver- ational pre s s u res and storms, and because the natural sity occurs with the loss or degradation of the herbaceous pr ocesses have been disrupted, there is a lack of natural l a y e r. Lack of fire, invasive species, and overabundant sand rep l e n i s h m e n t . deer all threaten the herbaceous layer in today’s fores t e d co m m u n i t i e s . 5.7.8 Invasive species Altering the species composition of the community, inva- 5.7.5 Nutrient loading sive species are a threat to almost every community type Excess nutrients in a system are often a stress to the in the Chicago Wilderness region. Invasive species are plants adapted to that system. Many native plants do not usually non-native species that have been brought to the compete well against invasive plants at higher nutrient region intentionally or unintentionally by human actions. levels. Excess nutrients enter communities through agri- They become established in natural habitats, threa t e n i n g cultural run - o f f, urban and suburban run - o f f, and air pol- native biodiversity. Most non-native species are not inva- lution. In this region, excess nutrient loading particularly sive, but the few that are, are often aided by having few t h reatens the prairies, marshes, bogs, and floodplain if any predators or diseases that held them in balance in fo r ests. Airborne pollutants, such as nitrogen and even their native habitat. Species native to the region can also carbon dioxide, can also contribute to excess nutrient be invasive when they move into habitats that did not loading, and are potential problems in the future. originally contain them, as a result of human disrup t i o n of natural processes and lack of management. Species are often able to invade a community of which they are not 5.7.6 Increased salinity naturally a part when the community is suffering under other stresses. In many communities, this stress is a lack In c r eased salinity is a possible threat in all communities, of fire, but other stresses enabling invasion include nutri- but is recognized primarily in the wetter ones, including ent loading, hydrological change, and soil compaction. certain prairies, marshes, and floodplain forests. The spe- Sometimes non-native species can out-compete native cific effects of increased salinity on the plant communities species even when the system is not under stres s . still req u i r e further study. The primary source of increa s - ed salinity is road salt, both airborne and dissolved. F o rested communities in the region are particularly t h reatened by invasion by buckthorn, Asiatic honey- 5.7.7 Erosion and increased suckle, and garlic mustard. Regular fires often pre v e n t se d i m e n t a t i o n the establishment of invasive species, but some invasive species are adapted to fire and cannot be controlled after Excessive erosion and sedimentation are caused by a vari- they are established, even with the rei n t r oduction of fire. ety of problems. The greatest source of sediment is from In these cases, mechanical or chemical control is needed

65 Biodiversity Recovery Plan to balance the system so that less severe management 5.7.9 Overabundance of deer practices will become sufficient. Floodplain forests are and other animal species also threatened by the invasion of reed canary grass. As demonstrated by the recent urban occurrence, there is Amajor concern for forested and savanna communities is potential for invasion by a substantial forest pest, the deer overabundance. Deer overabundance results from Asian longhorned beetle, as well. the absence of natural predators, the shrinking of available habitat due to development, and lack of manage- Because savannas are more open and have more light, ment. The primary effects of overabundant deer are they are more susceptible to invasive species than fores t s reduction or elimination of some herbaceous plants and or woodlands. Buckthorn is extensively invading fine- selection against certain woody species, including oaks, te x t u r ed-soil savanna. Other significant invasive species with consequent increases in less-palatable species such include garlic mustard, bush honeysuckle, and re e d as maple, white ash, and ironwood. Deer often harm canary grass in the wetter savannas. Mesic sand savan- species of conservation concern, typically monocots nas have problems with purple loosestrife and common (lilies, orchids), which are usually the most difficult to reed invasion. Species such as Norway maple, A m u r res t o r e because of their rarity, and legumes, which may maple, and Japanese hedge parsley are also invading. In be important for soil fertility (Etter 1998). Deer also crea t e the absence of fire in savannas, many native tree species a corridor for invasive species to move into quality area s behave as invasive species, especially those with wind- by disturbing the soil along their trails. These trails can disseminated seed such as ash, maple, and elm. also serve as an avenue for animal predators. The inter- active relationship between deer overabundance and fire, Prairie invaders, which may or may not be controlled by or lack of fire, is an important topic for further study to fi r e, include crown vetch, sweet clover, reed canary grass, im p r ove management techniques. Although deer favor teasel, and leafy spurge. These non-native grassland f o rests and woodlands over savannas, the effects fro m species can alter species composition and eventually deer are the same in savannas as they are in forests. Deer st ru c t u r e and soil chemistry. A whole host of additional numbers generally decrease with successful savanna plant species is beginning to invade prairies. As discussed restoration. Overabundant deer are also a severe threat to ea r l i e r , lack of fire in prairies leads to invasion and major high-dune communities and a concern in prairie res t o r a - degradation by brush, both native and non-native. tion and management. Knapweed is invading dolomite prairies, and wet prairies of all types suffer from invasion by purple loosestrife. The density at which deer cause permanent damage to ecosystems varies by community type and specific site Wetlands are also threatened by invasive species. Basin conditions. Studies in eastern forests (deCalesta 1994, marshes suffer from the invasion of giant reed, purple Alverson et al. 1988, Tilghman 1989) indicate that dam- loosestrife, glossy buckthorn, narrow-leaved cattail, ree d age to ecosystems occurs at densities exceeding 10–15 per canary grass, and carp, among others. Carp is the pri- s q u a re mile. However, excessive damage from lower mary invasive species threatening streamside marshes. densities has been observed, and lower densities may be Buckthorn and purple loosestrife are the invasive species re q u i red for communities to recover from their curre n t of particular concern for bogs. Lack of fire in graminoid degraded state. Current res e a r ch in Chicago Wil d e r n e s s fens and calcareous floating mats leads to invasion by is assessing the local situation, and the results will be b rush and non-native species. A very significant thre a t important for future management efforts. to sedge meadows is the invasion of reed canary grass, which might be correlated with increased siltation. Not enough is known about the natural population sizes Purple loosestrife is another threat to sedge meadows. of various other animal species, or about the effects of changes in relative population sizes, to fully understand Dolomite cliffs are being invaded by garlic mustard , the negative impacts they may be causing. For instance, which is resulting in a serious decline of native species. ne s t - p r edation rates are currently high for grassland and Red and Austrian pine and Lombardy poplar are freq u e n t fo r est birds due to small predators such as raccoons and invasive species in foredune communities. Garlic mus- house cats. Raccoons are abundant due to development ta r d, Asiatic bush honeysuckle, winged euonymus, and and the absence of large predators. Forest fragmentation oriental bittersweet are occasionally a problem in high also leads to high nest parasitism by brown-headed cow- dunes. Although it is a secondary threat, beach communi- bi r ds. In grasslands, the specific causes of nest pred a t i o n ties are also subject to problems from invasive species. ar e less clear, and more res e a r ch is needed.

66 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

5.7.10 Other threats managed, they degrade and lose biodiversity. All of the community types need more management atten- Many communities are threatened by other, less perva- tion. For the forested community types, marshes, and sive human activities. Forested, savanna, and lakeshore fens, the most important action is to increase the communities are threatened by human over-use and amount being managed. Because of the appare n t l y abuse. Activities of concern include bike and horseback total loss of intact shrublands, restoration of degraded riding off trails, foot trampling, off - road vehicles, and land will be req u i r ed to res t o r e this community. Lack the dumping of grass clippings. Beaches are freq u e n t l y of human and financial re s o u rces, and public re s i s- raked and bulldozed by municipalities in order to sculpt tance to certain management practices, often hinder them for rec r eational purposes. This abruptly terminates cu r r ent management. beach substrate succession and plant succession so that nothing beyond the earliest successional stage can be Ac r oss the region, probably less than 10% of fores t e d reached. Recreational activities including hiking, ro c k land is being actively managed. The DuPage County climbing, and rappelling, along with fossil and plant col- Fo r est Preserve District is actively managing approx i - lecting, seriously degrade dolomite cliff communities. mately 30% of its forested communities, but this is likely the highest of all counties. The Cook County Beach health includes successional periods of stabiliza- F o rest Preserve District is actively managing about tion when there is a rough balance between sand depo- 15% of its forested communities. sition and erosion. But major public works projects such While some high-quality sites still re q u i re further as harbors and piers interfere with the original patterns of management and they are a priority where they are lake-water movement, often leaving sand deposition too not managed, a much greater general effort needs to low at some beaches and too high at others. Some struc - be placed on managing fair- and low-quality sites. tu r es divert sand into deep water, where it is lost as beach Priority should be placed on sites with important nourishment. Shoreline erosion is a threat to high dunes species and on sites with the highest species diversity. and fored u n e s . In managing more fair-quality sites, one goal is to reconnect remnant high-quality pockets. Priority Basin marshes are often used as a dumping ground for should also be placed on managing and re s t o r i n g grass cuttings and other wastes, and humans and dogs ar eas that have multiple community types. often disturb marsh wildlife. Mosquito abatement is also a potential threat to wildlife. Cats are a threat to many The top priority for wetlands is to manage those bi r ds and mammals. In some places, commercial collec- w h e re the associated uplands are protected in ord e r tion of snakes and turtles is an increasing problem. Wit h to maintain the proper hydrology of wetlands and to the growing popularity of mushrooms, mushroom col- mitigate the threat of invasive species. In general, it is lecting in savannas, woodlands, and forests is a poten- best to res t o r e a community within a complex of exist- tial problem. If collection harms a mushroom population, ing natural communities, because source populations this may affect the habitat negatively for other species as will be there, increasing the likelihood of rec o n s t ru c t - well. For example, some mushrooms are the fruiting bod- ing a high-quality community. ies of symbiotic fungi, whose presence is necessary for An important area for continued and expanded man- the survival of oak tree s . agement efforts is that of deer. The overabundance of deer is causing significant harm to forested communities and is also a threat to savanna and other natural 5. 8 community types. Chapter 9 includes further discus- Recommended actions sion of deer and other wildlife-management issues. Some specific actions include: ✔ Increase number of acres under manage- • Allocate more funds to management activities ment on public lands • Apply generally accepted management techniques, Many of the natural communities, even when they are as discussed in Chapter 9, including pre s c r i b e d pr otected, are degrading, because natural ecological burning, hydrological restoration, rei n t r oduction of pr ocesses have been disrupted and the communities native species, control of invasive species, and man- ar e not being adequately managed to compensate for agement of deer and other problem wildlife. the loss. Depending on the community type, req u i re d management includes controlling invasive species, • Train more people in management techniques co n t r olling water levels, conducting prescribed burns, • Make more effective use of volunteers in manage- and carrying out other activities to improve the habi- ment activities tat for plants and animals. When communities are not

67 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

• Educate the public to build support for needed save biodiversity. Public resistance may inhibit cer- management practices tain management activities that are essential to the pr otection of biodiversity. Greater emphasis needs to ✔ Increase management and biodiversity be placed on informing and educating the general planning outside preserves public. In particular, the importance of disturbance in natural communities needs to be better explained to While the recommendations described above gener- cr eate support for a wider range of management activ- ally apply to sites owned by public land-managing ities. The best example of a social barrier to manage- agencies, local parks, private land, and land held by ment is objection to burning. agencies not charged with protecting natural res o u rc e s A first step is to identify all of the barriers to the effe c - also re q u i re ecological management in order to con- tive use of fire and other management practices in the serve biodiversity. For some community types, such as region. Then, appropriate education and training of the forested, substantial amounts are on private lands. both the public and land managers should be incor- And for all community types, although particularly porated into overall regional planning. wetlands, biodiversity concerns need to be incorporated into other, broader planning efforts. Since the Some specific actions include: degradation of marshes and other wetlands is so wide- • Identify all barriers to the effective use of fire s p read and the stressors so large, the best way to im p r ove the quality of wetlands is for watershed plan- • Inform/educate the public about disturbance and ning to integrate biodiversity concerns. ap p r opriate management Strategies need to be developed to work with various • Train/educate land managers about social barriers landowners to protect and manage communities on and appropriate approaches to sharing information their prop e r t y . One goal is to work more cooperatively with the public with state and local transportation agencies, utility companies, and railroads in managing prairies and ✔ Communicate information about the other communities that exist in their rights of way. ef fects of management Corporate and college campuses provide another opportunity for cooperative management. These sites Considerable knowledge about the effects of manage- can be managed for hydrology and some biodiversity ment on communities and specific animal populations values, and, possibly more importantly, they can serve exists, but not all of it is easily accessible. Chicago as demonstration sites. Corporate land could be used Wilderness members should facilitate compilation for broad-scale linkages or corridors to public land. and communication of such information to the land managers, scientists, and the public throughout the Some specific actions include: region. This information will not only help land man- • Develop and implement strategies to work with agers in their work, but should also be used to inform la n d o w n e r s the public about the benefits of res t o r a t i o n . • Work with state and local transportation agencies, Some specific actions include: utility companies, and railroads to manage com- • Compile information on techniques and effe c t i v e - munities in rights of way ness of management • Implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for • Disseminate to land managers and res e a rc h e r s water quality and water management in ongoing de v e l o p m e n t • Summarize and communicate to the public • Integrate a biodiversity component into existing BM P s ✔ Increase the number of people qualified to manage land • Integrate a biodiversity component into watershed planning Limited human res o u r ces are one barrier to managing mo r e. One goal is to develop a region-wide standard- ✔ Increase public understanding of land- ized training program for burning that would give the management needs public confidence in the oversight of burns and in- cr ease the number of people trained to conduct burns. Management of natural communities is often limited In particular, a burn-training course specific to our by poor public understanding of their significance and urban context should be developed and implemented of what actions are needed to keep them healthy and in the Chicago Wilderness region. Illinois is establish-

68 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

ing statewide burn-leader standards, which should be rent management constraints. Also, some natural supported in the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n . pr ocesses, such as elk grazing, have been lost but are not yet being mimicked adequately. Some specific actions include: Some specific actions include: • Develop a region-wide standardized burn-training pro g r a m • In c r ease the variety of burns through space, time, and intensity • Implement the training prog r a m • Manage for short-struc t u r ed grasslands • Support Illinois statewide standards for burn le a d e r s • E x p l o re how haying and other mechanical techniques can mimic loss of biomass consumption by • Publicize the training proc e s s gr a z e r s

✔ Implement adaptive management, linking ✔ goal setting, implementation, monitoring, Create and manage large preserves and research To conserve biodiversity at all scales, the ideal condition is to have large sites that contain a variety of com- To recover biodiversity and achieve greater diversity, munity types. Large preserves are important for a management techniques should be improved and number of reasons. Small remnants have been shown diversified through knowledge currently available to lose species. To maintain viable populations, large r and through additional res e a r ch. This can be achieved a reas are needed. The exact size needed depends on by implementing adaptive management across the the species. Large preserves also allow landscape-scale region. Adaptive management is the practice of con- pr ocesses to occur. These processes are important for ducting management within an experimental frame- maintaining healthy and diverse communities. Buffe r work and using the results in future management zones around natural areas are also re c o m m e n d e d decisions. Adaptive management allows testing and because they help to mitigate threats and to make diversification of management strategies. Diversified management easier and more effective. Creating large management is needed for everything from learning sites also makes economic sense, as it is much more how to better manage communities to learning more expensive to maintain small preserves than larg e , about various elements and processes in the system. functioning ecosystems. Experimental approaches to improving existing techniques should be developed for prescription burns, Knowledge of habitat needs of various taxonomic c o n t rol of invasive species, and other management g roups provides some clues to the preserve sizes pr a c t i c e s . needed to support viable populations. The various workshops convened to compile information for the A specific action is to: recovery plan produced some rough estimates of min- • Develop and implement a region-wide monitoring imum size req u i r ements for various target species and p rogram based on conservation design, as dis- g roups. Based on scientific knowledge of habitat cussed in Chapter 9. req u i r ements of wetland birds, reptiles, and amphibians, a natural-area complex of approximately 1000 ✔ Increase the variety of management ac r es, with several marshes of 100 acres or more and approaches to better simulate the effects with smaller wetlands and ephemeral pools, appears of natural processes to be approp r i a t e . At least 500 acres are needed to support a full com- In order to res t o r e biodiversity, the types and effe c t s munity of birds in a wet-mesic grassland. A few very of management need to be diversified. Management is l a rge grassland sites (1000 to 3000 acres) are needed used in large part to mimic natural disturbances that in the area to support species such as harriers that once maintained the region’s communities. However, req u i r e relatively large expanses to breed. These large r today’s management tends to be somewhat narro w grasslands are also needed to act as anchors for the in its effects and thus does not fully mimic the variety g r a s s l a n d - b i rd community in the region. A l t h o u g h of natural processes. For example, the limited diver- smaller areas (100 to 500 acres) will lack a few of the sity in fire regimes reduces the diversity of habitat species normally found in a full community, as long as conditions and struc t u r es necessary to maintain a full t h e re are enough of these blocks spread thro u g h o u t complement of biodiversity. Many animal species rel y the region, most species should be pres e n t . on structural diversity within a given community type, and this diversity is often achievable under cur-

69 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Fo r est and woodland amphibians need good-quality • Manage whole watersheds to conserve ecosystem sites of at least 500 acres to maintain a complete suite pro c e s s e s of sensitive species. Forested sites as large as 10,000 • Re s t o r e communities as part of mosaics ac r es may be needed to maintain viable populations of sensitive larger mammals such as gray fox. These fig- u res are all rough planning guides, and additional ✔ Protect priority areas res e a r ch in this area will be needed to understand the A region-wide viability assessment is rec o m m e n d e d conditions that ensure long-term population viability. to determine which sites would give the biggest The vision statements for community classes found return for the investment, thus helping to prioritize earlier in this chapter provide additional information regional protection efforts. The three protection prior- on the goals for creating large preserves, based on our ities are: 1) remaining high-quality sites, 2) land that cu r r ent best knowledge. will connect or expand existing natural areas, and 3) Some specific actions include: any large sites with some remnant communities (see next action). High-quality sites are important because • Ac q u i r e buffer zones around existing pres e r v e s they are genetic reserves. It is very difficult to translo- • Pr otect and res t o r e natural communities adjacent to cate plants and insects, and thus protecting re m a i n- existing preserves to connect and enlarge pres e r v e s ing high-quality areas is the best conservation action. Remnant communities in larger areas are important • Continue re s e a rch to determine how large a site because they serve as the basis for re c o n s t ru c t i n g must be to maintain target species la r ger natural communities. • Di r ect Section 404 mitigation funds and land-acqui- Some community types found in the Chicago sition funds to sites near existing pres e r v e s Wilderness region have always been rare, but never- • P rotect re c h a rge areas for gro u n d w a t e r-fed wet- theless are an important part of the region’s biodiver- lands and other wet communities si t y . Some of these communities are rare because they a re on the edge of their range here. However, these ✔ Create and manage community mosaics examples are important to the global conservation of the community type, because areas at the edge of the Hi s t o r i c a l l y , natural communities occurred in mosaics range often harbor high genetic diversity. Many of with a heterogeneous mix of diff e rent habitats dep- Chicago Wilderness’s rare community types, such as ending on soil type, moisture, aspect, fire patterns, and bogs and pannes, are currently well protected, but their other factors. As a result, many species and proc e s s e s need for protection is worth highlighting because we depend on the close interconnections between com- cannot affo r d to lose any examples of these community munity types. In particular, many animals rely on types. The rare lakeshore communities (beaches, fore- multiple habitats for their various life stages, and these dunes, and high dunes) and dolomite cliffs need pro- habitats need to be managed together. For example, tection from rec r eational pres s u re s . wetland insects, reptiles, and amphibians req u i r e inte- Some specific actions include: grated management of uplands and wetlands, as well as integrated management of multiple wetland types. • Use existing inventories, such as INAI, the Regional Wetlands themselves do much better when managed G reenways Plan, and ADID, and conduct addi- together with their associated uplands. The large pre- tional inventories, to identify priority areas for pro- serves discussed above do not need to be of a single te c t i o n . community type. In fact, large mosaics of diff e re n t • Assess acquisition opportunities community types are preferable in most cases, because the interconnection of communities allows more eco- • Prioritize opportunities logical processes. The one caution, however, is that • Develop protection strategies for priority area s mosaics should not be created on sites too small to support them. In addition, some species, notably • Look to protect remaining remnants of particularly grassland birds, need large areas of one stru c t u r a l r a re community types, including dolomite and community type. gravel prairies, forested bogs, dolomite cliffs, and pa n n e s . Some specific actions include:

• Manage associated uplands with wetlands ✔ Identify potential large complexes • Mange communities as part of a large system Opportunities still exist in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s region to create large protected areas with a variety of

70 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals community types, through either expanding existing • Chicago Wilderness members should facilitate pr eserves or connecting several together. This curren t acquisition and management of sites that cro s s opportunity to acquire large blocks of undeveloped political borde r s . land to rec o n s t r uct into natural communities or to provide buffers, however, will not last long. In the near ✔ Understand and mitigate urban threats f u t u re, this opportunity will be lost as open space is to metapopulations and gene flow developed. Land-owning agencies should take advantage of this opportunity now (as recommended ear- Genetic diversity may not be maintained in frag- lier), even if they do not have the capacity to re s t o re mented landscapes, because many things act as barri- the land immediately. It is particularly important to ers to dispersal. Theref o r e, in the urbanized context of a c q u i re more buffer zones around existing wood- Chicago Wilderness, it is important to learn more lands, as there is little opportunity to protect any addi- about genetic neighborhoods, gene flow, and barriers tional woodland areas, and the buffer zones will to dispersal. Given the number of small sites, strate- im p r ove the condition of existing woodlands. gies to maintain genetic diversity need to be res e a r ched, developed, and implemented. Gene flow T h e re is also the likelihood of increased funding for studies on plants are particularly needed. land acquisition in the near future from state and federal sources. As a priority action, the Chicago Wil d e r - One possibility for plants is to introduce seed fro m ness Science and Land Management teams should small, high-quality sites to large r , degraded sites. Good help to identify possible areas for large mosaics. A li s t techniques to do this type of translocation with re p- of criteria, including size, current condition, diversity, tiles and amphibians have not been developed, and pr esence of conservative species, and estimated cost, past attempts have often degraded the source popula- would need to be developed to prioritize sites for tion. More is known about genetic management in restoration and acquisition. This assessment would mammals, although the specific effects of fragmenta- maximize the contribution of each land-owning tion in this region have not been studied, and strategies a g e n c y. The Chicago Wilderness teams should help for genetic management for mammal species of con- to identify areas where preserves could be expanded cern should be developed. if connected together to form larger pres e r v e s . To aid gene flow, it might be better to think in terms The region-wide assessment would help to identify of connections rather than artificial colonization. The opportunities to create more large complexes. Some ef fectiveness of narrow corridors is still not clear, and counties, such as DuPage and Lake Counties, are they may have some negative aspects by facilitating al r eady working to map out potential complexes, but movement of invasive species and predators. A be t t e r this would be more beneficial if done on a re g i o n a l strategy might be understanding and removing barri- scale. Specifying exactly which blocks of land and how ers to dispersal. For instance, the intervening space big the blocks need to be re q u i res further investiga- between blocks of forest or woodland can be a signifi- tion. These questions re q u i re immediate attention cant barrier to woodland wildlife dispersal. Planting because acquisition should start as soon as possible. oak trees in this space can diminish the barrier, even if The Illinois Department of Natural Resources has the full community type is not res t o r ed. Other barriers started this work with its “large grasslands ecosystem need to be removed as well. For instance, a road can pr oject,” which aims to identify large grassland sites be a significant problem because it increases the mor- remaining in Illinois. A study of hydric soils could tality of wildlife and acts as a complete barrier to some help to identify areas where large wetland complexes species. Also, gradients rather than abrupt shifts could be created. The Lake Calumet area and should be maintained between habitat types. These Midewin may provide opportunities to re s t o re and gradients are of particular importance for birds . cr eate some large complexes. The regional vegetation Some specific actions include: map pre p a red through the recent NASA C h i c a g o Wilderness project can serve as a very important tool • R e s e a rch , develop, and implement strategies to for planning and identifying opportunities. maintain genetic diversity Some specific actions include: • Study gene flow in plants including the role of dis- persers and pollinators • Use tools—hydric soil maps, GIS, large grassland ar eas project—to identify potential sites • Translocate plants or seeds from high-quality area s to larger fair-quality sites • Develop criteria to prioritize sites for re s t o r a t i o n and acquisition • Im p r ove translocation techniques for amphibians and rep t i l e s

71 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

• Develop strategies for genetic management in ✔ Increase seed supply of local genotypes ma m m a l s One current limitation to management is the limited • Study barriers to dispersal availability of seeds of local genotypes. The grow i n g • Plant oaks in space intervening between forest or demand for native species depletes the supply of woodland blocks seeds for restoration projects, and nurseries and garden centers often stock non-local genotypes. Native • Remove or mitigate barriers such as roads in key species of non-local genotypes can cause genetic dete- are a s rioration of the local genotypes if they spread into • Maintain gradients between community types local natural areas. Native plantings in gardens and on corporate campuses should be encouraged, but an adequate supply of seeds from local genotypes is ✔ Manage a portfolio of sites needed. Potentially, corporations could increase the In our urban landscape, a portfolio approach to man- pre s s u r e on garden centers to carry local genotypes by agement and protection is necessary. Protecting a wide in c r easing the demand. variety within each community type ensures prop e r • Land-managing agencies should create nurseries to habitat for the broadest array of species. Likewise, in c r ease supply for seed diversity in management spread across sites allows a gr eater diversity of habitats. • In c r ease demand on nurseries and garden centers to supply local genotypes As prairies are quite varied and only small rem n a n t s remain today, a variety of sites is needed to pro v i d e ✔ a p p ropriate habitat for the region’s fauna. Very few Mitigate the threat of salinization sites, if any, pr ovide all things for all birds, and there- Salinization of wetlands and other wet community f o re a collection of sites is needed to capture a wide types due to road salt is a growing pro b l e m . range of habitats. Alternatives to road salt in sensitive areas need to be The natural fluctuations in the hydrology of wetlands investigated, as well as ways to keep excessive salt a re important in maintaining species diversity, and and water out of wetlands. The full impact of salt on wetland management should theref o r e be considered plant communities is not understood and should be at a regional scale. Marshes and other wetlands will res e a rc h e d . not provide good habitat for birds in all of their stages. Some specific actions include: Ho w e v e r , birds will move from site to site. So long as th e r e is a diversity of hydrological states within wet- • Se a r ch for alternatives to road salt lands of the region, the birds can find suitable habitat. • Investigate the full impact of salt on plant commu- Land managers should communicate with each other ni t i e s about planned fluctuations in their wetlands to promote hydrologic variability at the regional level. • Look for ways (especially in the design of ro a d drainage) to keep excessive salt and water out of Cu r re n t l y , management is being conducted mainly on we t l a n d s a site-by-site basis. However, it would be better for management planning to occur on a broader scale, at ✔ least at the county level, as is already occurring in some Mitigate the threat from hardening of counties. A range of effects from management strate- shorelines and prevent further hardening gies should be distributed across sites, rather than With the hardening of shorelines in some portions of using a narrow range of management prescriptions on the Chicago Wilderness region, a continuous supply of every managed site. It is difficult to implement a broa d - additional sand is needed to resupply natural beach scale management strategy because many high-quality ecosystems including pannes, beaches, foredunes, and remnants contain rare species, for which these sites are sand prairies. Sand needs to be deposited at strategic and need to be managed specifically. locations at Illinois Beach and the Indiana Dunes Some specific actions include: National Lakeshore and littoral drift allowed to carry the sand along the lakeshore. Coastal protection funds • Communicate across the region about planned fluc- (f r om the Conservation and Reinvestment Act) should tuations in wetlands be allocated to ensure a continued, adequate sourc e • Vary management from site to site of sand to maintain coastal ecosystems. These funds should be used to obtain and transport clean dred g e sand from harbors and local quarries, and they could

72 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

be used to clean minor amounts of contaminants from • Examining how fire functions in natural systems, and closer sources of sand. In addition, agencies should how it can best be used in restoration and manage- discourage additional hardening of the shore l i n e , me n t which ultimately starves the down-drift beaches and • Studying below-ground processes to improve long- other communities of sand. term success of restoration • Understanding the return of soil struc t u r e to more natural conditions when previously cultivated land is 5. 9 res t o r ed to natural communities Research needs for Hy d r o l o g y H i s t o r i c a l l y, most of the plant communities of the maintenance and recovery Chicago region were dependent on ground water. Tod a y , of biodiversity in the surface water is the predominant source. This water is often irregularly abundant and of poor quality. Under- Chicago Wilderness region standing the hydrology of healthy systems and how to res t o r e this critically important function is of trem e n d o u s importance to maintaining the biodiversity of the reg i o n . 5.9.1 Introduction Examples of res e a r ch issues in hydrology include: Continuing to increase our knowledge about biodiversity • Studying the relationship of vegetation cover to and how to maintain it is an important rec o m m e n d a t i o n amount and quality of run o f f water of this plan. Suggestions for increasing the amount and ef fectiveness of res e a r ch are included in Chapter 9. Ten • Looking at the long-term impact of water quality on ar eas of res e a r ch concern have been identified throu g h reptile and amphibian populations several workshops that brought together scientists and • Monitoring effects of re s t o red hydrology in natural land managers in the region. These concerns can be co m m u n i t i e s gr ouped into two broad categories of Natural History/ Ecological Process and Management/Stresses. Prov i d i n g • Identifying methods of managing grou n d - w a t e r- f e d answers to some or all of these questions will gre a t l y systems under changing hydrological conditions i m p rove the effectiveness of preserving biodiversity in the Chicago Wilderness region. Below are listed examples So i l s of some of res e a r ch issues for terrestrial communities. Soil is a valuable re s o u rce for ecological restoration in several ways. It is an archive of ecological information 5.9.2 Research needs on natural history and may help managers better understand the vegetation and ecological processes in terrestrial and ecological history of their sites. This knowledge may assist the manager in choosing historically approp r i a t e co m m u n i t i e s management objectives, where such considerations are Ecological process important. Soil provides the rooting medium of plants, In considering biodiversity conservation, the number of and soil characteristics may provide an important crite- species of plants and animals is usually foremost in rion when selecting species for rei n t r oduction. While the people’s minds. Equally important, however, is the m i c ro-biota of soil is poorly understood, soil micro b e s p reservation of the diversity of ecological pro c e s s e s rep r esent the greatest concentration of biological diver- (decomposition, pollination, herbivory, predation, etc.). sity within terrestrial ecosystems. Soil provides dire c t Pr eserving the pieces without considering the proc e s s e s benefits to the public and is a re s o u rce to be pro t e c t e d that formed them and tie them together would fall short and developed. Public benefits include carbon storage; of long-term, sustainable conservation. To guide manage- rainwater absorption and storage; and adsorption of tox- ment, it is important to understand both former and cur- ins on soil particles, preventing their movement into sur- rent processes at work in a community and how the face and ground water. community responds to these processes. To obtain a better understanding of these processes, the following exam- The soils of natural areas in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s ples are rep r esentative of the res e a r ch needed in this area : region are poorly known. Our understanding of soil in the Chicago area and elsewhere has focused primarily on • Examining the role of grazers in prairie systems and the manipulation of soil for agriculture, horticulture, and how best to mimic their effects today development. Scientific understanding of soil and its rol e in Chicago Wilderness ecosystems needs to advance in at least five major area s :

73 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

• Describing soils for the entire region, including local • Ascertaining habitat re q u i rements relevant to the variations in properties, and extensively gro u n d - en t i r e life history of priority reptiles and amphibians checking existing soil maps • Determining the habitat needs of bats for foraging and • Examining relationships between soil and ecosystem, roosting starting with less disturbed ecosystems. Knowledge • Documenting the effects of coyotes on other native gained here then can be applied to situations in which sp e c i e s the biota has been greatly or completely disrup t e d . • Investigating relationships between species of concern • Investigating soil function, particularly as it relates to and the effects of overabundant species hy d r ology and nutrient reg i m e s . • Determining the habitat and other ecological needs of • Studying soil biodiversity, particularly comparing the en d a n g e r ed and threatened species diversity and composition of organisms in re m n a n t natural soils to those in the highly disturbed and manipulated soils of agricultural and developed land- Genetic studies sc a p e s Many once-common species have been isolated in small, fragmented pockets. This isolation may have led to loss • Monitoring the short-term and long-term effects of of genetic variability in species that were once genetically ecological restoration on the soils of natural area s diverse and widespread. Genetic considerations also are important in determining sources for propagules to Distribution, abundance, and status reestablish lost populations or to bolster severely frag- Knowing where species and communities are, how many mented ones. Knowing the best method to increase and individuals are in populations, and whether these popu- to res t o r e these populations depends on a good under- lations are increasing or decreasing are essential pieces standing of their genetic make-up, especially for species of information to effectively preserve biodiversity. A s that have always been rare or that survive in drastically m o re work is done, once-rare species are found to be reduced populations. Examples of res e a r ch topics rel a t - mo r e common, new species for the region are discovered , ing to genetics are: and species previously thought to be extirpated are red i s - c o v e red. All of this information helps in planning and • Determining the genetic relationships between popu- di r ecting res o u r ces and effort. Inventories are also impor- lations of priority reptiles and amphibians to identify tant as a baseline against which to compare the impacts management needs of management techniques. Examples of res e a r ch needed • Evaluating the significance of genetic drift in plants on this topic include: in fragmented habitats • Mapping the distribution of specialized and rare com- • Determining habitat and population dynamics munities such as gravel prairies needed for viable populations and communities • Determining the distribution of understudied faunal species, such as bats 5.9.3 Research needs on • Identifying taxonomic groups that have key rem n a n t - management and stresses dependent species Restoration and effects of management • Developing baseline inventories for understudied te c h n i q u e s gr oups such as soil fauna Restoration is being carried out currently on many sites using a variety of management methods. Although spe- Life history and habitat needs cific goals and objectives direct this work, many unan- Basic information on life history is lacking for many s w e red questions present themselves about how these species. This is particularly true of diff i c u l t - t o - s t u d y methods affect various pieces or processes within the or ganisms such as nocturnal species and invertebrates. communities being re s t o red. Many of these questions The habitat needs of many species are also poorly under- may re q u i re long-term investigation. There f o re, due to stood. Diffe r ent community types may be necessary for imminent threats to the communities, restoration often di ff e r ent parts of an organism’s life cycle. For threa t e n e d pr oceeds without having all the information in hand and and endangered species, it is necessary before develop- without setting up controls to measure the impacts of ing recovery plans to know basic information on their life management. No one realizes the importance of obtain- histories, phenology, and rep r oductive biology, as well as ing pertinent management information more than the their ecological and habitat req u i r ements. Research needs restorationists themselves do. Land managers are contin- he r e include: ually looking for ways to improve their management,

74 Chapter 5. Ter r estrial Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals and so they req u i r e an experimental framework to exam- Preserve design ine options. Research issues in this category include the Knowing how species interact with their habitat is critical fo l l o w i n g : to designing effective preserves for conservation. The pr eserve’s size and shape, the diversity of communities • Determining how res t o r ed habitats accommodate all within it, and its connectivity to other similar habitats major life forms of those communities ar e all important factors in preserve design. Examples of • Looking at the impacts of restoration on soil prop e r t i e s res e a r ch concerns in this area include: • Investigating the effects of timing, fre q u e n c y, and • Examining the dispersal of reptiles and amphibians intensity of fire on biodiversity and habitat quality • Studying how species use corridors, and under what • Determining which species will move from rem n a n t s conditions corridors promote biodiversity conservation into res t o r ed areas and under what conditions • Understanding barriers to dispersal for diff e re n t • Evaluating whether management to a pres e t t l e m e n t sp e c i e s condition maximizes biodiversity • Determining the conditions under which nearby iso- Human effects and effects of lates function as a complex for species viability urban environments G rowing human populations and changing land-use Further res e a r ch is not necessary to understand that most practices have shifted the relationship between human of the natural communities in the Chicago region are in and non-human communities into one of instability and a degraded condition, are losing ground, and are in need un s u s t a i n a b i l i t y . Understanding our relationship to the of human action. The need for re s e a rch should not be land will be critical to maintaining biodiversity in the seen as a reason to fail to take positive action based on region. Examples of res e a r ch in this area include: best current knowledge. However, res e a r ch is necessary to refine and improve land-management methods to • Examining the effects of adjacent land-use practices on achieve the desired goals of these practices. As res t o r a - natural communities and determining how adverse tion of natural communities prog r esses, more questions impacts can be best mitigated will be generated. Research into those questions, in addition to the examples provided above, will serve to inform • Studying the impact of materials such as road salt on the restoration process. More details on the interaction plant populations between conservation planning, monitoring, and re- • Determining the effects of mosquito-abatement pro- se a r ch are presented in Chapter 9. grams and pesticides on native species • Determining the effects of fragmentation on metapopulations, and determining effective mitigation strategies • Developing a better understanding of the cumulative ef fects of stressors in the urban environ m e n t

75 Chapter 6 Aquatic Communities: Status, Needs, and Goals

6. 1 6. 2 In t r o d u c t i o n Stream communities—status,

This chapter describes and assesses aquatic communi- recovery goals, and ties—those of rivers and streams, of inland lakes and ponds, and of Lake Michigan. It reports on the status of recommended actions the communities and their habitats in terms of their condition and problems, defines goals, and identifies 6.2.1 Stream classification actions needed. S t ream ecosystems within watersheds of the Chicago The information presented in this chapter is based on the Wilderness region fall into three general categories: head- knowledge of participants in the expert workshops and wa t e r , low-orde r , and mid-orde r . Within these groups are reviewers of the resulting working papers. Much of the subcategories defined by flow, gradient, and substrate. content is based on professional experience, rather than The following is a brief description of each class and the published literature, and is provided to give an indi- examples of streams within those classes. cation of priority and direction for future conservation work. Workshop reports on which this chapter is based Headwater streams can be found on the Chicago Wilderness web site C o n t i n u o u s - f l o w headwater streams are first-ord e r (w w w. c h i w i l d . o r g). Each of the aquatic communities was st re a m s 1 with small drainage areas and little or no pool examined by a diffe r ent assessment process, as described development. They are characterized by relatively sta- in each section. ble, cool temperatures and consistent levels of dissolved oxygen. They have low habitat heterogeneity and low The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency lists 76 tr ophic complexity. Indicator fish species include sculpins st r eams within the Illinois portion of the Chicago Wil d e r - and dace. Invertebrate indicator species include caddis ness region (IEPA 1996). In addition, there are approx i - flies and stone flies. Plants include waterc ress, chara, mately 20 streams in the Indiana and Wisconsin portions. water parsnip, and berula. There are two general types Each stream’s watershed boundary can be mapped to of continuous-flow headwater streams: those with coarse help delineate important water res o u r ce areas for biodi- substrates (e.g., Black Partridge Creek and Silver Cree k ) versity protection and recovery planning. These water- and those with fine substrates (e.g., Rob Roy Cree k ) . sheds are the basic management units for determining recovery goals and actions for aquatic biodiversity. In t e r m i t t e n t - f l o w headwater streams are first-order strea m s with highly variable flows and temperatures. They are The following sections describe the streams of Chicago inhabited by colonizer species with high re p ro d u c t i v e Wilderness in terms of their general descriptive classifi- rates or are largely abiotic. Indicator fish species include cation, protection and recovery goals, quality assessment, bluntnose minnow and striped shiner. Intermittent-flow prioritization, threats, and recommended actions. headwater streams can also be divided into those with coarse substrates and those with fine substrates.

1 A fi r s t - o r der stream is a headwater stream without any tributaries. When two streams of the same order unite, the resulting stream is raised one level. Thus, when two first-order streams unite, the resulting stream is a second-order stream. When two-second orde r st r eams unite, the resulting stream is a third orde r . The order of a stream is not increased when a lover-o r der stream enters it. 76 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

Low-order streams vation, and boating. Healthy streams provide habitat for H i g h - g r a d i e n t l o w - o rder streams are second- to fourth- diverse communities of fish, amphibians, insects, and ord e r , small- to medium-sized creeks, often with distinct aquatic plants. Stream and river corridors also are r i ffle and pool development. They have more complex viewed as aesthetic amenities for residential develop- habitats and trophic characteristics than headwater ment and public open space, and they provide travel cor- st r eams. High-gradient low-order streams fall more than ridors for wildlife. t h ree feet per mile and have coarse substrates, mostly cobble, gravel, and sand with some silt. Indicator fish Hi s t o r i c a l l y , however, conflicts have arisen between the species include darters, stonerollers, hornyhead chub, various uses and functions of streams. In particular, and juvenile suckers. Examples include Tyler Cre e k , in c r eased reliance on streams as conduits for storm water Buck Creek, and Long Run Cree k . and wastewater has greatly diminished their ability to pr ovide benefits of rec r eation, habitat, water quality, and L o w - g r a d i e n t l o w - o rder streams are second- to fourth- ae s t h e t i c s . o rder creeks that fall less than three feet per mile and have predominantly fine-textured substrates. Indicator T h e re are two principal causes for these conflicts. The fish species include creek chub and bluntnose minnow; first is the alteration or destruction of the stream channel plants include sago pondweed, water star weed, and and its adjacent corridor, or ri p a r i a n zone. Activities such American pondweed. Examples include Lily Cache as stream channelization or straightening destroy criti- Cr eek, Skokie River, Plum Creek, and Mill Cree k . cal habitat and upset the natural balance between a st r eam and its floodplain that has developed over thou- Mid-order streams sands of years. The second cause is the alteration of the Hi g h - g r a d i e n t mi d - o r der streams are fifth- to eighth-orde r , st r eam’s watershed. For example, the conversion of farm- la r ge creeks to medium-sized rivers with relatively stable land to subdivisions and shopping centers increases the flows, temperatures, and high habitat diversity. They impervious land surface. This can result in adverse have the most complex habitats, are highest in species changes to both the quantity and quality of strea m - f l o w . d i v e r s i t y, and harbor abundant predators. High-gradi- These changes can upset the natural equilibrium of a ent mid-order streams fall more than three feet per mile s t ream, often resulting in channel erosion, lost habitat, and have coarse substrates. Indicator fish species include degraded water quality, and frequent flooding. smallmouth bass, northern hogsucker, and re d h o r s e . Examples include Kankakee River, Kishwaukee River, 6.2.3 Stream assessment and the Lower Fox River. and prioritization Low-gradient mi d - o r der streams differ from high-gradient One of the goals of the biodiversity recovery plan is to m i d - o rder streams in that they fall less than three feet build consensus on the protection and enhancement of per mile and have finer substrates. Indicator fish species s t reams that provide a high degree of biological func- include largemouth bass, pike, and channel catfish. tion. Watersheds of streams that have exceptional aquatic Examples include the Upper Fox and the Upper Des biological integrity, or have the potential to be res t o re d , Plaines River. should be identified in order to establish priorities for fu t u r e efforts in protection and rec o v e r y .

6.2.2 Functions of streams The information in this section results from a Chicago S t reams and rivers are familiar features in the Chicago Wilderness project called “Stream Biodiversity Recovery Wilderness region. They perform many important func- Priorities.” As a first step, the project identified pere n- tions, some obvious and some not so apparen t . nial streams that support or have the potential to support native fish and aquatic life populations in the six-county Drainage is their most obvious function. Streams convey northeastern Illinois region (Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, ru n o ff from the land, most noticeably during floods, Mc H e n r y , and Will Counties) were identified. The proj e c t when even the least conspicuous drainageway can developed a stream prioritization method that classified become a raging torrent. Streams also convey the trea t e d s t reams into four categories according to the following and untreated wastes of our urban and agricultural recovery goals: protection, restoration, rehabilitation, and lands. In fact, during the drier times of the year, trea t e d enhancement. Streams for which the goals are prot e c t i o n wastewater constitutes virtually the entire flow in some and restoration are considered of very high priority and of our more urban strea m s . high priority res p e c t i v e l y . (See Figure 6.1.) The strea m s we r e classified by the following criteria: S t reams also are valued for re c reation because of their potential to support fishing, swimming, wildlife obser-

77 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

78 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

• Index of biotic integrity (IBI) Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index (MBI) • Species or features of concern MBI values, based on pollution-tolerance ratings for m a c roinvertebrates, were compiled for streams where • Ma c r oinvertebrate Biotic Index (MBI) data were available. Streams with IBI scores of less than • Abiotic indicators 40 and with MBI scores of less than five may indicate go o d - q u a l i t y , healthy stream ecosystems that have some potential for restoration, rehabilitation, or enhancement. The following describes each of these criteria and dis- Ho w e v e r , until a relationship between MBI and IBI val- cusses their use and limitations in determining priorities ues can be verified, other criteria must be used to assign for protection and recovery in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s goals for recovery and prot e c t i o n . reg i o n .

Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) Abiotic indicators For streams where biological data are extremely limited The IBI uses fish-sampling data to indicate the overall (for example, almost all headwater streams), abiotic health and integrity of a stream. The IBI assesses the watershed variables need to be considered in order to health of fish communities using twelve diff e rent met- pr edict biotic potential and assign a recovery or prot e c - rics. These twelve metrics fall into three categories: tion goal. Abiotic watershed variables are fre q u e n t l y species composition, trophic composition, and fish abun- components of both aquatic a n d t e r restrial ecosystems. dance and condition. Data are obtained for each metric at Land-use patterns, percentage of impervious land sur- a given site, and a number rating is assigned to each met- face, stream-flow obstructions, in-stream habitat, degree ric. The sum of the twelve ratings yields an overall site of erosion and sedimentation, degree of alteration and sc o r e, with scores in Illinois ranging from 12 for excep- channelization, stream width, and substrate are all exam- tionally poor quality to 60 for exceptionally high quality. ples of abiotic factors affecting streams. Until these con- The IBI integrates information about individuals, popu- ditions can be adequately described and a prioritization lations, communities, and the ecosystem into a single method established, the assignment of recovery priority ecologically based index of water-re s o u r ce quality (Karr goals will rely primarily on professional judgement. 1981, Karr et al. 1986, IEPA 19 9 6 ) .

IBI data from Illinois were used to characterize strea m s . 6.2.4 The relationship between stream St r eams with an IBI score of greater than 50 were designated as very high priority, with a primary goal of pro- quality and urban development tection. Streams with an IBI score of 50 or less, but with The biotic quality of streams and rivers in the Chicago species or habitat features of concern (described in the Wilderness region is highly variable. As in other parts of next section), were also designated as very high priority. the country, there is clear evidence that watershed urban- S t reams with IBI 41–50 that lacked species and habitat ization has adverse impacts on the ecological integrity fe a t u r es of concern were designated as high priority, with and beneficial uses of downstream bodies of water. In a goal of restoration. Streams with IBI 31–40 that lacked northeastern Illinois, this impact is reflected in a rel a t i o n - species and habitat features of concern were assigned a ship between urbanization, as measured by watershed goal of rehabilitation. Streams with IBI less than 31 that population density, and stream quality, as measured by lacked species and habitat features of concern were the fish-based Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI). The assess- assigned a goal of enhancement. Figure 6.1 shows the ment of over 40 northeastern Illinois streams and rivers method for developing stream and watershed priorities shows that nearly all streams in urban and suburban and gives examples of watersheds for each category. watersheds (that is, with population densities exceeding roughly 300 people per square mile) exhibit signs of con- Species or features of concern siderable impairment of their fish communities, with These include state threatened and endangered species conditions being described as fair to very poor. In con- as well as other unique aquatic habitat and biological trast, most rural streams support fish communities that characteristics. Professional experience and judgement ar e rated good or excellent. we r e used in cases where fish and invertebrate data were unavailable, where unique cold-water habitats exist, or w h e re unique fish and invertebrate communities were 6.2.5 Status of streams in believed degraded because of point and non-point northwest Indiana s o u rces of pollution. Streams that contained species or Arecent study provides details on the struc t u r e and func- fe a t u r es of concern were designated as very high priority, tion of fish communities in the Lake Michigan watershed with the goal of protection. Table 6.1 gives a prov i s i o n a l of northwest Indiana (Simon and Stewart 1999). There list of stream-based species and features of concern. ar e three functioning riverine watersheds in northwest

79 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Table 6.1 St r eam based species features of concern

Mu s s e l s Fi s h Amphibians and rep t i l e s Sl i p p e r s h e l l Iowa darte r Spotted turtl e Sp i k e Wes t e r n sand darte r Smooth softshell turtl e El l i p s e Rainbow darte r Bl a n d i n g ’ s turtl e Cr eek heelsplitter Pallid shiner El e p h a n t - e a r Mottled sculpin Ra i n b o w Blacknose shiner Ma m m a l s Wavy-rayed lampmussel Pugnose shiner Sn u ff b o x Gr eater red h o r s e River otter Higgins eye Banded killifish Salamander mussel Ir oncolor shiner Sh e e p n o s e Blackchin shiner Pl a n t s Po n d h o r n Weed shiner He a r t-leaved plantain, Plantago cordata Sp e c t a c l e c a s e Longnose dace Water marigold, Bidens beckii Br ook lamprey Pugnose minnow In s e c t s St a r head topminnow Banded darte r Other featur es Hi n e ’ s emerald dragonfly Bo w f i n St r eams with > 8 species of mussels Spottail shiner Other conditions that are known Brassy minnow to harbor unique biological La r gescale stonerol l e r ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s Cr eek chubsucker Pirate perch

Indiana, the Little Calumet River, the Grand Calumet 6.2.6 Long-term vision and Ri v e r , and Trail Creek. In addition, there are creeks drain- recovery goals ing the area of the Great Marsh in the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. The natural hydrology of this part of The goals in this chapter focus on achieving a desire d the Chicago Wilderness region has been greatly changed biotic integrity and biological diversity for streams of the fr om natural conditions by human actions over the past Chicago Wilderness region. The goals provide the basis 200 years, beginning with changes in drainage patterns for actions, such as best management practices, informa- by Native Americans (Indiana DNR 1999). tion and education activities, land acquisition, and other initiatives that would promote stream biodiversity, T h e re are no high quality re f e rence sites for stre a m s ca p a c i t y , and res i l i e n c y . remaining in this region, and few areas qualify even as “least-impacted.” The Trail Creek watershed is the only We use the terms pr otection, restoration, rehabilitation, an d one with a significant percentage of species that are intol- en h a n c e m e n t to describe the recommendations for man- erant of degradation in water and habitat quality. The fish aging streams and watersheds. The following goal state- community in each watershed is composed of at least ments help define the terms as they are applied to te n - p e r cent exotic species, with the Grand Calumet River watersheds throughout the region (see Figure 6.1 and fish community having nearly 60 percent exotic species. Fi g u r e 6.2). Im p r ovements in native species richness and the biological integrity of these streams will req u i r e extensive habi- P r o t e c t i o n is used for high-quality streams that fully tat restoration, as even the protected lands in the area are support their potential biological integrity and diversity. not functioning as high quality fish habitat (Simon and Co n t r olling point- and non-point-source pollution, chan- Stewart 1999). nelization, impoundment, and other threats to biological integrity and diversity is necessary to assure that

80 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

Fi g u r e 6.2 Priority watersheds in north e a s t e r n Illinois

81 Biodiversity Recovery Plan st r eam quality is maintained and not degraded. For exam- ularly municipal wastewater-t r eatment plants and comple, if a stream is supporting a high-quality fish commu- bined sewer overflows, generally contribute the grea t e s t nity or an endangered species, the goal is to protect those pollutant loads to most urban rivers and streams, dra- co n d i t i o n s . matic reductions in the concentration of pollutants in di s c h a r ges have occurred in the last two decades. Impair- R e s t o r a t i o n is used for streams that are moderately ments from non-point-source pollution are substantial degraded and only partially meet their potential biologi- and are actually increasing in many watersheds due to cal integrity and diversity. Restoration seeks to re p l a c e expanding suburban development in the region. Thus, a lost or damaged biological conditions, restoring ecologi- major challenge is to better control the impacts of devel- cal processes and linkages (such as energy flow, dispersal op m e n t - r elated non-point-source pollution to protect the mechanisms, and succession). For example, if a stream is region’s remaining high-quality strea m s . supporting a moderate-quality fish community and is d i rectly linked to a viable source of species re c o l o n i z a- R u n o ff from residences, businesses, construction sites, tion, as is the Kankakee River, the goal is to re s t o re the and industries carries sediment, nutrients, pesticides, s t ream to a more diverse fish community by re s t o r i n g metals, grease, oil, bacteria, salts, and debris to nearby lost habitat and improving degraded water quality. s t reams. Runoff from agricultural areas carries similar pollutants but at diff e rent rates and concentrations. Re h a b i l i t a t i o n is used for streams that are more severel y Losses in dissolved oxygen and thermal pollution are degraded and do not meet their potential biological other water-quality problems associated with human integrity and diversity. The goal here is to replace some of impacts on streams and watersheds. the lost or damaged biological functions and linkages of the stream. For example, if a low-quality fish commu- As development occurs, streams are often impounded, nity retains some functional linkage to a viable source of straightened and channelized, the banks sometimes recolonization, the goal is to re-establish some biological ar m o r ed with concrete or stripped of native vegetation— integrity by partially restoring some habitat or water- all to accommodate buildings, roads, flood control and quality components. stormwater conveyance systems. The resulting stre a m habitat degradation severely limits aquatic life, encour- E n h a n c e m e n t is used for streams that are the most ages exotic species, and reduces healthy biodiversity. se v e r ely degraded. The goal is to reclaim severely damaged ecosystems. For example, if a very poor fish community has no functional linkage to a source of 6.2.8 Recommended actions recolonization, the goal is to mitigate the sources of degradation in the stream, but to recognize that this will • Reduce hydrological alteration only have a limited effect on biological functions. ✔ Continue to identify watersheds with streams that have exceptional aquatic biological integrity 6.2.7 Threats to inform planning efforts and set priorities. This chapter describes a technique, using well- As watersheds undergo development, land is covere d established indicators, for classifying stre a m s with impervious materials (such as pavements and ac c o r ding to their biological integrity and suggests rooftops) or surfaces that limit infiltration (such as culti- priority goals for protecting or restoring their bio- vated fields and areas with shallow-rooted plants). As a d i v e r s i t y. This process has been applied to the result, stormwater collects on or near the surface. s t reams in the Illinois portion of the Chicago G roundwater re c h a rge areas are restricted and surface Wilderness region but should be extended to cover run o f f becomes the principal source of stream flows. The the entire region, so that priorities can be set at the result is “flashier” streams that are prone to flooding and regional level. se v e r e erosion. Watersheds with greater than 10%–15% impervious surface area tend to produce degraded ✔ Limit development in some high-priority s t ream habitat and biodiversity (Center for Wa t e r s h e d su b w a t e r s h e d s . Pr otection 1998a). In addition, drainage of wetlands and Recent re s e a rch has shown that the amount of other low-lying storage areas and channelization of impervious cover in a watershed can be used to s t reams alter a watershed’s hydrology and re d u c e pr oject the current and future health of many head- aquatic biodiversity. water streams. There also is strong evidence sug- gesting that impervious cover is linked to the Based on watershed assessments of impaired stre a m s , quality of other water re s o u rces such as lakes, both point and non point sources of pollution are major reservoirs, and aquifers (Center for Wa t e r s h e d contributors to impairment. While point sources, partic- Pr otection 1998b).

82 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

✔ Direct development into areas that limit ally supports acquisition of new parks and fore s t hydrological alteration. p reserves for multiple benefits, including re c re- Many model land-development principles have ation, aesthetics, wildlife habitat, clean air, and been documented to limit adverse stormwater clean water. Additional open space, with its pro- impacts and to benefit both the stream environ m e n t tection of trees and other deep-rooted vegetation, and the community. These principles involve the enhances stormwater infiltration and grou n d w a t e r c a reful location and design of residential stre e t s , re c h a rge, and it can help to mitigate damages parking lots, building footprints, and conservation caused by flashy stream flows. ar eas (Dreher and Price 1994). ✔ Develop stormwater management plans. ✔ Promote cluster development. Stormwater management plans establish a frame- Cluster development uses smaller lot sizes and less work of standards for minimizing storm damages pavement to minimize impervious area, re d u c e to struc t u r es, public health, and safety. They should co n s t r uction costs, conserve natural areas, prov i d e i d e n t i f y, protect, and improve waterways and community rec r eational space, and promote water- g roundwater re c h a rge areas by requiring all new shed protection. Relaxing side-yard setbacks, allow- development to minimize or reduce stormwater ing narrower frontages and shared driveways, and damages. The plans should protect and impro v e p roviding shared parking arrangements are all water quality, promote public awareness of techniques for cluster development. stormwater issues, and identify revenue sources for the adopted prog r a m . ✔ Require stormwater detention that effectively controls the full range of flood events. ✔ Enforce erosion-control measures Local standards for stormwater ordinances are on new construction. usually intended to prevent increases in flood dam- Many effective practices for controlling erosion and age. Drainage and detention facilities should be sediment have been developed specifically for use designed to minimize ru n o ff volumes and rates, on construction sites. Developers and local offi c i a l s so that the natural hydrologic and water- q u a l i t y should work together to choose the best techniques functions of streams, wetlands, and floodplains are to minimize off-site sedimentation. For this to hap- pro t e c t e d . pen, building inspectors, contractors, and engineers must all understand the principles, benefits, and ✔ Promote natural drainage as an alternative limitations of best management practices for ero- to storm sewers. sion and sediment control . W h e re density, topography, soils, and slopes permit, open vegetated swales and constructed wet- ✔ Create or restore streamside wetlands. lands should be used to temporarily detain, convey, St r eamside wetlands are complex ecosystems that and treat run o f f from a range of storm events. New p rovide many ecological functions beneficial to stormwater outfalls should not discharge unman- their adjoining streams. They are biologically pro- aged stormwater into jurisdictional wetlands, ductive systems that provide fish and invertebrate aquifers or sensitive area s . habitat, water pollution control, sediment control , water supply, floodwater storage, and barriers to ✔ Create buffer strips and greenways er osion. In addition, streamside wetlands prov i d e along streams. habitat for threatened and endangered species such Riparian stream buffers are variable-width strips as the spotted turtle and river otter. of land continuously vegetated with native plants. They encompass environmental features such as ✔ Educate decision-makers about development wetlands, steep slopes, the 100-year floodplain, patterns and the effects of land uses on streams. multiple-use greenways and trails, wildlife corri- Elected officials and local governments should be dors and additional safety widths adjacent to high- aw a r e of model watershed-development principles impact, high-density development. Buffers should and how they apply to their watersheds. Offi c i a l s be maintained throughout the stages of plan should evaluate their zoning codes and subdivision rev i e w , construction, and post-development. o rdinances based on those principles. The Center for Watershed Protection (1998a), NIPC (1992) and ✔ Acquire additional land for conservation. D reher and Price (1997) give details on model Results of open space ref e r enda in several Chicago development principles. Wilderness counties showed that the public gener-

83 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

• Reduce deterioration of habitat quality ✔ Study the effects of riparian management. ✔ Un f o r t u n a t e l y , relatively little monitoring has been Remove unnecessary dams. conducted on managed riparian lands. Experi- Many dams in the region impede the movement of mental model projects, such as the one at Mellody fish and other aquatic life up and down the water- Farm Nature Preserve on the Middle Fork of the w a y. Dams can cause degradation of habitat in North Branch of the Chicago River, should be care- u p s t ream areas and can have dramatic negative fully studied to evaluate the biodiversity benefits to ef fects on water quality. Consequently, high-quality the strea m . s t reams sometimes abruptly deteriorate above or below a dam. Where dams are not needed for water ✔ Survey how people use aquatic resources and su p p l y , flood control, or rec r eation, they should be study the economic impacts of uses such as removed or fitted with stru c t u res that eff e c t i v e l y fishing and recreational boating. permit the passage of aquatic species. By re m o v- Surveys, like the one conducted by the Chicago ing a dam, the owner can often eliminate the cost River Demonstration Project, should be taken to of repairing the dam while improving the strea m ’ s help describe and understand how user and inter- b i o d i v e r s i t y. State and federal agencies should est groups currently perceive and use streams of develop guidelines and policy for dam re m o v a l Chicago Wilderness, and how they would like to activities, which at a minimum should re q u i re see the corridors improved for re c reation and study of a removal alternative for any dam repair or related values. rebuild proposal, including economic and environ - mental analysis. ✔ Use bioengineering solutions to control streambank erosion. ✔ Retain or restore emergent and Bioengineering methods combine live plant materi- ne a r -shore vegetation. als with built struc t u r es to stabilize eroding strea m A thriving, diverse vegetative community is an banks, resulting in a living and sustainable eros i o n - important component of a functioning stream or c o n t rol system. By using native plant species and st r eamside wetland. If a degraded stream’s hydrol - with considerable care and maintenance in the first ogy and water quality can be stabilized, vegetation few years, bank stabilization can become self-sus- can be re-established by planting seedlings, ro o t taining and, to an extent, self-repairing since the stocks, bulbs, or transplants. Native plant species plants are adapted to growing and rep r oducing in should be used in riparian buffer areas to pro t e c t the stream environ m e n t . and res t o r e important functions such as bank stabi l i t y , wildlife habitat and forage areas, run o f f fil- tering, and shading. The choice of native plants • Reduce deterioration of water quality depends on local needs and conditions. The USDA (1997) has published information on local species ✔ Rigorously enforce non-degradation standards. that are best adapted for stream conditions. P o l l u t i o n - c o n t rol agencies such as the Illinois E n v i ronmental Protection Agency (IEPA) have ✔ Re-meander channelized streams. been criticized for failing to adequately enforc e Meanders are naturally occurring bends in a strea m rules that prohibit adverse impacts of discharges on that help dissipate energy of flowing waters. They s t reams as called for in the Clean Water A c t . c reate a variety of flow velocities and pro v i d e E ffective anti-degradation policies and enforc e- important habitat features for some aquatic species. ment proc e d u r es will ensure that pollutant levels in Th e r e are many opportunities to rec r eate meanders wastewater and stormwater discharges do not in artificially straightened streams in the Chicago exceed levels that are damaging to stream biodi- Wilderness reg i o n . ve r s i t y , especially in high-quality strea m s .

✔ Restore riffles, pools, sandbars, and other ✔ Develop and implement best management elements of in-stream habitat. practices to control soil erosion, sedimentation, Ari f fle is a shallow rocky area that separates deeper and storm water runoff. pools in a stream. Riffles enhance water aeration Ef fective efforts to protect streams and their water- while providing habitat for many aquatic species sheds usually include the use of best management such as darters and stoneflies. In channelized practices. These are actions or stru c t u res that are st r eams, riffle sequences are typically diminished or needed to control ru n o ff pollution and flooding. eliminated altogether. Sandbars and mud flats pro- Examples of some commonly used practices are vide valuable habitat for a variety of birds and use of vegetative buffers, streambank stabilization, in v e r t e b r a t e s .

84 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

wetland creation or restoration, use of grassed recognition to unique areas of biodiversity. The state swales or waterways, sediment basins, diversions, of Ohio, on the other hand, has developed a set of keeping streams above ground, re m e a n d e r i n g metrics that have given a higher measure of prot e c - st r eams, and wildlife plantings. tion to many of the high-quality streams there.

✔ Find alternatives to new and expanded effluent ✔ Gain community support for watershed discharges to high-quality streams. For example, ma n a g e m e n t . route sewage flows to regional facilities and use Watershed planning and management are perha p s land treatment. the most important strea m - p r otection tools. Man- Or ganic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus, and micro- agement plans should be developed with commu- nutrients in storm water and wastewater are gener- nity consensus on the goals for water res o u r ces and ally harmful when discharged to high-quality the techniques and practices needed to meet those s t reams and lakes. Land treatment systems and goals. Techniques may include overlay zoning, detention facilities should be designed to ensure co s t - s h a r e incentives, growth boundaries, and con- that pollutants do not reach streams, especially servation easements. See Section 0 (especially 8.3.3) high-quality strea m s . for further discussion.

✔ Re-examine standards and practices for ✔ Evaluate aquatic insects as indicators sewage treatment. of water quality. Th e r e is a need to establish sewage-treatment poli- The presence or absence of indicator organisms is cies that ensure protection for high-quality strea m s an indirect measure of water pollution. Benthic and that allow restoration of low-quality strea m s . ma c r oinvertebrates, including aquatic insects (such While improvements to sewage-treatment plants as mayflies, stoneflies, caddisflies, midges, and bee- have improved quality in degraded urban strea m s , tles), snails, worms, freshwater clams, mussels, and the same standards and discharge limits are prov - crayfish are sensitive to changes in a stream’s eco- ing insufficient to protect high-quality streams in logical integrity. However, the relationship between non-urban areas. Aging sewage- treatment facilities benthic macroinvertebrates and other water-q u a l i t y eventually develop structural problems or worn- indicators, such as fish and water chemistry, has not out mechanical systems that are difficult or uneco- been clearly established. nomical to replace. Plant managers should, to the extent of their authority, assess downstream aquatic ✔ Evaluate the need for improved water biodiversity when determining how to meet permit quality standards. limits and water-quality standards for pollutant The state of Illinois does not have numerical stan- removal and when establishing policies for new da r ds for two major causes of stream degradation: plants and updated equipment. ph o s p h o r us and sediment. The State should evaluate and develop appropriate standards that are pro- ✔ Promote effluent polishing through constructed tective of designated stream uses. wetlands for all discharges to moderate- and high-quality streams. ✔ Encourage volunteer monitoring. Wastewater effluent should not be directly dis- In the State of Illinois, the goal of the Critical Tren d s ch a r ged to streams, especially high-quality strea m s . Assessment Program to track changes in stre a m Instead, treatment trains should include tertiary habitats over time can only be met with a combi- co n s t r ucted wetlands or provide reuse options such nation of volunteers and scientists working in col- as irrigation, industrial processing, gro u n d w a t e r laboration. Volunteer monitors enable the state to re c h a rge, fire protection, and/or limited-contact collect large amounts of information economically, rec re a t i o n . and this information is providing an important bank of knowledge about local conditions in ✔ Encourage pollution-control regulators to use st r eams and other ecosystems. Curren t l y , there are biocriteria for water quality standards. unlimited opportunities for volunteer monitors to Biocriteria are measures of the quality of stre a m s become trained citizen scientists through the based on living organisms. Standards for pollution Illinois EcoWatch Network. The Conservation di s c h a r ges are based on the impact of the discharge Foundation also participates in these monitoring on these living elements. Wa t e r-quality metrics p rograms. In Indiana, a similar program entitled used by the Illinois Environmental Pro t e c t i o n Hoosier Riverwatch involves citizens in efforts to Ag e n c y , for example, do not recognize the graded c a re for and monitor the health of streams and continuum of stream systems and do not give ri v e r s .

85 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission’s “Restoring and Managing Stream Gre e n w a y s ” Table 6.2 (1998) further explains some of the actions described above. This handbook addresses landscape Pre l i m i n a r y assessment showing b u ffers, channel maintenance, stream bank stabi- exceptional lakes lization, and techniques for restoring in-stre a m ha b i t a t . No. of No. Co u n t y Lake name native of E/T fi s h e s sp e c i e s

6. 3 Co o k Wolf Lake 28 5 Lake communities—status, La k e Bangs Lake 22 5 La k e Cedar Lake 27 9 recovery goals, and La k e Cr oss Lake >1 4 * 5 La k e Deep Lake 18 5 recommended actions La k e Deer Lake-Redwing >1 4 * 1 Sl o u g h 6.3.1 Lake classification La k e East Loon Lake 23 5 La k e Fo u r th Lake >1 4 * 2 In addition to Lake Michigan, three types of natural lakes La k e Gray's Lake 15 2 occur in the Chicago Wilderness region: bottomland La k e Timber Lake >1 4 * 1 lakes, vernal ponds, and glacial lakes. Bottomland lakes La k e Lake Catherine 21 1 ar e shallow lakes adjacent to large streams and are sea- La k e West Loon Lake 23 8 sonally flooded. There is seasonal rec r uitment of species La k e Mud Lake >1 4 * 1 in bottomland lakes. Vernal ponds a re small, seasonally La k e Petite Lake 17 1 inundated depressions that have no fish species. Gl a c i a l La k e Sullivan Lake >1 4 * 2 lakes ar e divided into two types: kettle and flow-throu g h . La k e Sun Lake >1 4 * 1 Kettle lakes ar e isolated basins, while fl o w - t h r ough lakes ar e connected to a stream system. Glacial lakes are the most La k e Tur ner Lake 22 1 biologically diverse of the lake types. In addition to the La k e Wooster Lake >1 4 * 3 natural lakes, the region has a number of manmade lakes. Mc H e n r y Cr ystal Lake 23 2 Mc H e n r y Elizabeth Lake 19 6 In planning for biodiversity re c o v e r y, the classification Mc H e n r y Lake Defiance 18 1 system for lakes is less useful than the terrestrial classifi- Mc H e n r y Lake Killarne y 19 2 cation system. The glacial lakes are the most ecologically Mc H e n r y Lily Lake 16 2 important of the lakes, and are thus the primary focus for conservation attention, although other lakes do contribute to the region’s biodiversity. To help establish pri- * For these lakes, data on number of native fishes was orities for conservation efforts and recovery goals, a not available, but experts at the workshop expect high native fish diversity based on overall lake condition. working group for lake recovery plans developed a system to assess the status of the lakes’ biodiversity.

6.3.2 Lake assessment and prioritization i t y, but we believe that biodiversity provides the most di r ect measure. The method to assess the current condition of biodiversity in the region’s lakes is in part based on Ve r m o n t ’ s The criteria for the lake status assessment are as follows: system (Garrison 1994–1995). This system defines four categories for lakes. The categories are intended to be Exceptional lakes operational and to promote various conservation actions • Must have threatened or endangered species of flora for the region’s lakes, rather than to be rigid or res t r i c t i v e . or fauna The four categories are exceptional, important, re s t o r a b l e , and o t h e r. The criteria used to place various lakes in a • May have other watch species category are driven solely by the biodiversity in the lake. • Have more than eight native plant species and more We recognize that other features of lakes such as water than 14 native fish species. quality are important indicators of environmental qual-

86 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

• May be currently dominated by exotics that could be co n t r olled with appropriate management Table 6.3 Pre l i m i n a r y assessment showing important lakes Other lakes • Ar e unlikely to support sensitive species and may be better managed for purposes other than biodiversity No. of co n s e r v a t i o n . Co u n t y Lake name native fishes We conducted a preliminary assessment of the reg i o n ’ s Co o k Axehead Lake 14 lakes. Tables 6.2 and 6.3 show preliminary results for Co o k Beck Lake 16 exceptional and important lakes. Information used for Co o k Busse Woods Lake 22 this assessment includes data from the Illinois Natural Co o k Maple Lake 15 Heritage Database, the Illinois Department of Natural Co o k Ma r quette Park Lagoon 16 Re s o u r ces, The Nature Conservancy, and the McHenry Co o k Midlothian Reservo i r 15 ADID study, as well as expert opinion. It should be noted Co o k Tampier Lake 18 that the data used did not include information on native Du P a g e Ma l l a r d Lake 18 plant species present, and in some cases numbers of Du P a g e Pi c k e r el Lake 18 native fish species are not rec o r ded. In cases where com- Du P a g e Silver Lake 18 plete information was not available, scientist and land La k e Channel Lake 22 managers made a determination based on what they did La k e Diamond Lake 20 know about the lake. As new information becomes avail- La k e Fo x / N i p p e r s i n k 23 able, the status of the lakes may change. La k e Gages Lake 22 La k e Lake Marie 22 6.3.3 Long-term vision and La k e Lake Zurich 22 La k e Long Lake 21 recovery goals La k e Old School Pond 2 20 Exceptional lakes: The vision for these lakes is to manage La k e Pistakee Lake 18 all of them for maximum aquatic biodiversity. This will La k e Sand Lake 14 include allowing native vegetation to dominate shore- La k e Sterling Lake 25 lines and keeping littoral-zone disturbance to a mini- Mc H e n r y Griswold Lake 18 mum. A goal is for no exceptional lake to lose any native Mc H e n r y Lac Louette 16 species, particularly endangered or threatened species. Wil l Braidwood Lake 38 Over time, the number of exceptional lakes should Wil l Lake Milliken 19 in c r ease due to improvement in the condition of important lakes, yet none of the exceptional lakes should decline in condition. A goal is to manage exceptional lakes as part of their watershed. To achieve this, watershed plans should be developed, implemented, and changed as needed to maintain the exceptional status of a Important lakes lake. To help achieve these goals, all historical biodiver- • Have more than eight native plant species and more sity data should be retained. Ad d i t i o n a l l y , the state laws than14 native fish species on endangered and threatened species should be • May have exotic species present, but not dominant s t rengthened to provide adequate protection for these aquatic species. More res e a r ch is needed on the life his- • May have watch species tories of endangered and threatened aquatic species. For • Ac c o r ding to historic rec o r ds, have had threatened or priority species, specific recovery plans should be devel- en d a n g e r ed species of flora or fauna oped and implemented. Important lakes: The goals for these lakes are similar to Restorable lakes the goals for exceptional lakes. The vision for important • Ac c o r ding to historic rec o r ds, have had threatened or lakes is to improve their condition so that most of the en d a n g e r ed species of flora or fauna important lakes move up to the category of exceptional • A re glacial lakes with physical characteristics that lakes. Management plans need to be implemented not would support re i n t roduction of endangered and only to improve the conditions of these lakes but also to th r eatened species pr event them from falling into a lower category. A go a l

87 Biodiversity Recovery Plan is to have landowners value the natural state of a shore- Causes of erosion resulting in turbidity and sedimenta- line and play an active role in conserving and pre s e r v- tion include carp, shoreline development, upland devel- ing lakes. opment, agricultural ru n o ff, and other man-made di s t u r b a n c e s . Restorable lakes: For these lakes, the goal is to contro l invasive species and sources of impairment effe c t i v e l y . S u b m e rged and emergent vegetation can be lost either Many of these lakes can and should be re s t o red to the th r ough turbidity and siltation, deliberate removal, shad- point where endangered and threatened species can be ing by excess algae caused by nutrients, or from the re i n t roduced. With proper restoration efforts, native ef fects of invasive species. The loss of submerged vege- species should be surviving the challenge of exotics. A tation is particularly important, because of its value as goal is for most restorable lakes to move up to the cate- habitat for fish and other organisms and its role in set- gory of important lakes through restoration eff o r t s . tling sediments. Demonstration projects that clearly show how it is possible to res t o r e a lake to exceptional condition should be Di ff e r ent from terrestrial communities, which are signif- conducted as part meeting this goal. The goal of res t o r a - icantly threatened by the lack of management, lakes often tion efforts is to return lakes to a condition in which they s u ffer from narrowly focused management activities, can retain their historical native species. which are generally not aimed at protecting biodiversity. Lakes are often “managed” for rec r eational purposes or Other lakes: Lakes that are not viewed as re s t o r a b l e for particular species of game fish. This type of manage- (f r om a biodiversity perspective) should provide rec r e- ment tends to disreg a r d biodiversity and hence becomes ational and cultural services that do not jeopardize the a threat to the region’s lake communities. For rec re a t i o n a l biodiversity goals of other lakes. These lakes may serve reasons, native aquatic plants are often removed either important educational purposes, and natural habitats th r ough harvesting or herbiciding, which can be extrem - should be encouraged in these lakes. A goal for these ely detrimental to biodiversity. These activities are par- lakes is to have all of them contribute positively to their ticularly damaging to the littoral zone. Wa t e r- l e v e l watershed’s overall quality, either through water-q u a l - manipulation and dredging, if done solely for re c re- ity or stormwater management. Fisheries management ational purposes, are also very damaging to the lake bio- needs to be better understood, and anglers and other di v e r s i t y . Recreational motor boats and jet skis are also rec r eational users should have a better understanding of p roblems because they create waves and turbulence in the importance of biodiversity. The goal is for the public excess of natural frequency and intensity. This aff e c t s to understand the limitations of a finite res o u r ce and to both shore erosion and the bottom in shallow are a s . adjust their expectations accordi n g l y . A d d i t i o n a l l y, motor boats and jet skis disrupt lakebed and shoreline soils, req u i r e large open-water areas that ar e often created by removing emergent vegetation, and 6.3.4 Threats harm the vegetation that does remain. The most severe threats to lakes are invasive species, nutrient loading, sedimentation, loss of native sub- When fisheries are managed for a few particular species m e rged and emergent vegetation, and management or when there are uncontrolled levels of stocking, the actions focused on only a narrow range of species (such overall lake biodiversity often suffers. Not all manage- as game fish). While invasive species, hydrologic change, ment for game species conflicts with biodiversity goals, and loss of native vegetation are common threats to both and lakes important for biodiversity can also support aquatic and terrestrial systems, aquatic communities are rec r eational fishing activities. The challenge is for man- much more sensitive to sedimentation, toxic substances, agers to explicitly consider and address biodiversity and excess nutrients. issues in sports fisheries management activities, particularly in high-quality lakes. Pr oblematic invasive species include Eurasian water milfoil, carp, and zebra mussels. Species most often invade Lakes also face several other threats. Lake hydrology is lake communities either through human intro d u c t i o n often interrupted through disconnection between lakes (knowingly or not) and through hydrological connec- and other hydrological breaks. The introduction into lakes tions. Theref o r e, lakes without significant public access of contaminants, such as heavy metals, pesticides, and and with few or no hydrological connections are more salt, has detrimental effects on the biodiversity. Finally, the resistant to invasion than other lakes. loss of vegetation and overhanging canopy around a lake can lead to loss of essential habitat and fish species. Nutrients enter lakes through a variety of sources. These so u r ces include effluent from sewage-treatment plants, agricultural run o f f, lawn fertilizers, and waterfowl.

88 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

6.3.5 Recommended actions ✔ Plan, protect, and manage lakes at the watershed level Lakes are very diff e rent from the terrestrial communi- For exceptional and important lakes, opportunities for ties in Chicago Wilderness, in that most lakebeds are public acquisition of shoreline and upland are a s l a rgely in private ownership. Consequently, conserva- should be identified and prioritized. Critical water- tion of lake biodiversity cannot be focused just on the shed areas also should be identified. In general, lakes ef forts of the Forest Preserve and Conservation Districts should be managed as part of their watershed, and and other land-owning public agencies. Some specific watershed-planning efforts should account for the actions can be taken to manage directly for biodiversity. biodiversity needs of lakes. Some management needs will re q u i re additional re- s e a rch and an adaptive management approach. How- ✔ e v e r, the fate of lakes lies more directly in the hands of Develop a region-wide process to track and the private citizen. There f o re, there are numerous re c- study threats to lakes ommendations to improve conservation of lake biodi- A region-wide rec o r ding system should be developed versity through both regulations and volunteer activities that collects information about the types of pesticides by the public. Both regulation and incentive tactics will being used in the region and specifically where they re q u i re better knowledge of the laws and issues by the ar e applied. The system should also track the status of general public. Creating a balance among the multiple lakes. These rec o r ds are needed to better understand uses of lakes is an overarching need and goal of many the threats to lakes and to adapt management and pol- recommended actions. Pro g ress can be made in re a c h- icy accordi n g l y . ing this balance through better guidelines and laws re g a rding human activities around and in lakes. Most ✔ Conduct research to better understand habitat important, extensive public education and communica- requirements of aquatic species tions are needed to create a heightened awareness of To better manage for fish diversity, more re s e a rch is issues affecting lake biodiversity. All of the pre c e e d i n g needed on environmental partitioning by fish species. recommendations in 6.2.7 for protecting the hydrol o g y Th e r e is more to learn about how fish use their habitat. and water quality of streams also are appropriate for Ad d i t i o n a l l y , very little is known about the status and la k e s . habitat req u i r ements of many invertebrate and algae species. To manage for biodiversity, more information Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s is needed on these poorly understood species. ✔ Develop specific recovery plans for species and lakes of concern ✔ Investigate and mitigate the threat of salinization It is recommended that recovery plans for specific While salinization is a known threat to lake commu- species be developed and implemented. Some priority nities, more res e a r ch is needed on the specific effe c t s species for specific recovery plans include pugnose and impact thresholds of salt on lake biodiversity. s h i n e r, fern pondweed, white-stemmed pondweed, Until more is known about the effects of salt, the gen- water star grass, grass-leaved arrowhead, and water eral practice should be to minimize loading of salt to c e l e r y. Of all the fish species, pugnose shiner serves lakes, especially those not having outlet flows that as a good indicator species; if recovery actions res t o r e relieve accumulation. viable populations of pugnose shiner, then other species will be helped as well. In addition to specific ✔ Investigate and prepare for the possibility of species, recovery plans for specific lakes are re c o m- reintroduction of native species mended. A first step is to develop criteria to identify As conditions of restorable lakes are improved to the priority lakes for lake-specific recovery plans. point where they can support a variety of species, it is recommended that species be re i n t roduced to these ✔ Develop better mechanisms to control the lakes. However, protocols and models should be invasion of exotic species developed to ensure that rei n t r oductions will be effe c - Better control mechanisms are needed for invasive tive and effi c i e n t . species, particularly Eurasian water milfoil and carp, and this will req u i r e res e a r ch. Biological controls such as beetles and weevils to control Eurasian milfoil hold ✔ Strengthen laws protecting species and pr omise as the best long-term solutions, but great care their habitats must be taken to prevent introduction of controls that Laws on endangered and threatened species need to be could themselves become prob l e m s . st r engthened and enforced to provide adequate protection for these species. Another recommended action

89 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

is to strongly encourage naturally vegetated shorel i n e and other potential supporters. Revisions to incen- zones, particularly in critical watersheds. The excep- tives, programs, laws, and regulations should then fol- tional lakes are of particular importance to the conser- low together with appropriate public hearings. vation of the region’s aquatic biodiversity. Theref o re , rules and regulations to limit uses of the exceptional ✔ Increase public involvement in lake lakes and mitigate negative impacts warrant additional management and protection di s c u s s i o n . T h e re are already a number of volunteer lake monitors and stewards, but their numbers should be ✔ Integrate biodiversity concerns into laws, expanded, not only to increase the amount of data col- policies, and guidelines lected and the number of lakes monitored, but also to State laws, particularly those dealing with the use c reate a broader network of people knowledgeable of pesticides and herbicides, need to be improved to about lakes. It is recommended that Chicago Wil d e r - integrate biodiversity issues. State policies on aquatic- ness promote cooperation and communication among plant management should ensure that plant manage- la k e f r ont owners and users. Active lake users need to ment both respects property rights and encourages learn the full impacts of their collective uses of the diverse plant communities. Guidelines for land-use lakes on biodiversity and realize the ecological limits planning that recognize biodiversity and impro v e to their uses. Lake-use plans that offer a range of rec r e- water quality should be developed. In general, biodi- ational uses consistent with a balanced, diverse versity concerns need to be much more broadly incor- ecosystem need to be developed. Development of porated into land-use and wastewater- t re a t m e n t these plans will re q u i re the input of knowledgeable plans. Model ordinances for alternative development citizens and consumers. Additional funding for biodi- ar ound lakeshores should be enhanced and prom o t e d , versity conservation and non-consumptive uses and conservation easements around shorelines should should be generated, at least in part, from consump- be promoted. In short, alternative methods that tive uses of the lakes. reflect biodiversity needs should be enhanced and pr esented to the public. Ad d i t i o n a l l y , Chicago Wil d e r - ness should work directly with municipal governments in lake area s . 6. 4 Ne a r -shore waters of ✔ Clarify ambiguous laws relating to lakes and their management Lake Michigan One particularly problematic legal issue is Illinois’s water law. How this law relates to water use, owner- Lake Michigan is a vast aquatic ecosystem in its own ship, and management is unclear and inadequate. right, and its near-s h o r e waters in the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s T h e re are numerous legal interpretations of the law, region function primarily as part of that system. However, and this confusion currently stands in the way of they are an important part of Chicago Wilderness, both restorative issues and actions. It is recommended that in their impact on adjacent ecological communities and Chicago Wilderness take a leading role in working to intrinsically as an important ecological community. Lake help resolve this issue. Michigan provides climatic diversity and supplies sand to nourish its changing beaches and dunes. The seasonal and year-to-year changes in water level support lakeshore ✔ Increase public understanding of lake wetland communities. Its near-s h o r e waters provide habi- biodiversity issues tat for many fish and other aquatic species and are used For the conservation of lake biodiversity, the most by migrating waterfowl and shoreb i rd s . important action is to balance human uses with ecosystem constraints. Public recognition of the value Much of the shoreline in the Chicago Wilderness area has of lake biodiversity and appreciation that lakes are a been filled for buildings, parks, and marinas, eliminat- limited re s o u rce will be important to achieving con- ing coastal wetlands. The areas that remain in near- servation goals. Recreational and other human uses original condition tend to be beaches with re l a t i v e l y must not exceed what lakes can support. As a first h i g h - e n e rgy wave systems and relatively little org a n i c step, the negative environmental impacts of develop- substrate to support ecological communities. Struc t u re s ment, rec r eation, and misuse should be documented, installed to protect harbors and lakefront development as well as the positive effect of management practices. have in many cases interrupted movement of sand or Public information and education should make these deflected it into deep water where it is lost from the well known, particularly to lake association members beach-nourishment proc e s s .

90 Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

The fish communities are in a state of flux due to many Th e r e are opportunities that should be addressed locally changes throughout Lake Michigan. Major factors to res t o r e aquatic habitat and biodiversity in some shel- in c l u d e : te r ed areas such as harbors, river mouths, and lagoons. Even intensely urban settings offer opportunities to cre- • historic invasion by lamprey and alewife and intro- ate incidental habitat while designing projects focused on duction of Pacific salmon other purposes such as shore stabilization or brow n - f i e l d • excessive fish harvest red e v e l o p m e n t . • recent invasion by zebra mussels, which are changing abundance and species mix of algae and zooplankton Recommended actions (including algae that create taste problems in drink- • Identify information gaps concerning the Lake ing water) Michigan shoreline in the region with respect to surviving habitat, and opportunities for habitat res t o r a - • ongoing invasion by gobies and other species tion, so that practical goals can be developed.

Historic problems with excessive nutrients, acute toxicity, • Identify key site-specific aquatic habitat re s t o r a t i o n and floating materials have been solved, but pro b l e m s opportunities to support local and lake-wide biodi- with persistent toxic substances that bioaccumulate in ve r s i t y . fish are still a problem for human health, although effe c t s • Identify site-specific opportunities to provide shore- in the ecosystem are not apparen t . line protection that also provides improved habitat.

Wanton filling of shallow areas and gross pollution has ended, but care must be taken not to allow additional filling and not to allow stru c t u res that interrupt curre n t s and supplies of sand. A major current fishery problem is the decline of lake perch, which is being addressed by the fish-management agencies in the respective States.

91 Chapter 7 Status of Endangered and Threatened Species: Assessment and Recommendations

fr om considerable distances simply for the opportunity 7. 1 to view it. (However, caution must be used in prov i d i n g Importance of endangered public access to these organisms so as not to create additional threats to their survival.) and threatened species Some species are of special interest because they are to the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s relicts, surviving in the region after climatic change. Many more plant species are regionally significant recovery plan because they are members of characteristic, and often imperiled, natural communities of the region. Ad d i t i o n a l This plan is concerned with the conservation of biodi- species are significant because they play key roles in local versity at all levels—natural communities, species, and ecosystems (such as canopy trees or obligate food plants genes. The process of assessing this nested diversity for insects) or simply add to the direct human value of seeks to answer basic questions about its status: how such systems. much is there or how much remains, what is its quality and viability, what are the trends—stable, increasing, or En d a n g e r ed and threatened species make up a substan- de c r easing? The ultimate goal of assessment is to develop tial component of the region’s biodiversity. For example, pr ograms that ensure recovery of all the elements of bio- the 237 plant species listed as endangered or threa t e n e d d i v e r s i t y. Except for the few species that have been the at the state level re p resent nearly 15% of the re g i o n ’ s subject of intensive res e a r ch or recovery programs, usu- native plant species. Twelve of these species occurring ally those on the federal list of endangered and thre a t- within Chicago Wilderness are ranked as globally signif- ened species, we are just beginning to answer these icant, because they occur only within the region and adja- questions for individual species. cent regions (called “near endemics”) or because they ar e highly rare and imperiled. Of these, five are curren t l y E n d a n g e red and threatened species are recognized by recognized by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as threa t - federal or state governments as being in danger of extinc- ened or endangered at the national level. tion or being sufficiently compromised that they are at risk of becoming endangered, either nationally or in a Among the mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and state. Some states, including Wisconsin and Indiana, also fish there are 114 state level endangered or thre a t e n e d categorize species as rare or of special concern. species. Five of these are federally listed and several more ar e federal candidate species. Because of their rarity, endangered and thre a t e n e d species possess an aesthetic appeal to the public that can- Quantitative data are available for some aspects of the not be overestimated. In general, rare organisms are val- status of endangered and threatened species, such as ued, the sight of them is genuinely thrilling, and their loss numbers of occurrences of populations or subpopula- is mourned. A beautiful and conspicuous endangere d tions (known as element occurrences), amounts and plant like the eastern prairie fringed orchid can serve as types of monitoring being done, and levels of prot e c t i o n . a symbol to enlist public support for all rare species. The Much of the assessment of their status and future viabil- recovery of a species can be a success for all to celebrate. ity is qualitative; nevertheless, it is based on the com- Aspotting of the rare upland sandpiper can bring birde r s

92 Chapter 7. Status of Endangered and Threatened Species: Assessment and Recommendations bined best judgement of res e a r chers and land managers human disturbances. Their plight mirrors that of reg i o n ’ s experienced both in studying and managing these taxa. biodiversity in general. Many more native species are As part of the recovery plan process, the Science and also dwindling—the more common species of today Land Management Teams Endangered Plants Task Force could well become the threatened species of tomorrow . developed a list of endangered and threatened species By documenting and re s e a rching the region’s endan- meriting additional conservation attention. This list is in ge r ed and threatened species, we can learn about the bio- Appendix 6. logical and ecological needs of a broad spectrum of flora and fauna. This information also contributes overall to the field of conservation biology. 7. 2 Many plant species are rare because of their dependence Endangered and on specialized biological or environmental factors such as specific pollinators, soil micro o rganisms, hydro l o g i c a l threatened species within a conditions, soil chemistry, or soil parent materials. Many of these factors have been adversely affected over the community context last century of intensive development. In the case of self- incompatible plants, small, isolated populations lack the In Illinois, the 1978 Natural Ar eas Inventory found that pollen from other populations needed for rep ro d u c t i v e less than 1% of the original Illinois landscape (fore s t s , success. In some cases, rare animals are dependent on a prairies, savannas, wetlands, lakes, and ponds) rem a i n e d common plant for food, or a rare plant may parasitize in relatively high-quality, undisturbed condition. Indiana another more common plant. Understanding the com- and Wisconsin lands have suffe r ed similarly. This level of plex interdependence among organisms is critical to a community disturbance has had a direct impact on ani- full understanding of regional biodiversity and its rec o v - mals and plants. Instead of being dispersed across the er y . Recognizing these specialized life histories and the landscape, these organisms have ret r eated to—or survive req u i r ements that vary from species to species can help in in—the few remnant areas. Once widespread, native cr eating effective plans for their recovery within a com- species have become scarce and naturally rare species munity context. have become increasingly rare if not extirpated. Many species are rare because they are restricted to and This plan focuses on the assessment and appro p r i a t e a re sometimes characteristic of rare and regionally or management of communities in order to preserve and globally significant habitats such as fens, bogs, seeps and enhance the biodiversity occurring within them. The springs, pannes, dunes, dolomite and sand prairies, oak majority of endangered plant and animal species fall savannas, and shrublands. Some of these habitats may be within this overall community perspective. The sound remnants from earlier climatic or geophysical re g i m e s management of communities outlined in the Recovery such as glaciation. The continued presence of healthy Plan will, theref o r e, work toward their preservation and populations of these rare species and their associates eventually their re c o v e r y. However, special considera- reflects the quality of these areas today. tions and concerns arise for endangered and threa t e n e d species. This chapter addresses those considerations. Some species are rare within a region because they are at the limits of their range here, but they may be abundant or stable in other areas. These species contribute to bio- 7. 3 diversity in important ways, but have less priority in a Chicago Wilderness Recovery Plan because they are less Why are organisms rare? at risk throughout their range. Some plant and animal species were always rare in our Some rare plant species req u i r e early successional habi- region because of geographic distribution, narrow habitats or natural disturbances, such as fire, grazing, tat re q u i rements, and low-density populations. It is dr ought, soil disturbance, or periodic flooding. These dis- important to ensure that the conditions that support turbances cause their appearance in sporadic and ran- these species persist despite radical changes in land and dom ways and give them a niche within high-quality res o u r ce usage. a reas. These disturbance re q u i rements must be understood and incorporated into management plans and Many species were once widespread, but have become practices to ensure the survival of these species. r a re because of habitat loss or fragmentation, fire sup- p ression, encroachment of invasive species, and other

93 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

move from site to site and are protected while they are on 7. 4 a protected site. On the other hand, as property of the Threats and stresses to state, animals receive more protection than do plants wh e r ever they are. endangered and threatened species Pl a n t s

By definition, endangered and threatened species are at Il l i n o i s risk of being lost from the region. Both state and federal • 28.7% of element occurrences (EOs) (209 of 728) have governments recognize the plight of these species and no protection or semi-protection. Most of the unpro- their need for special attention and protection by placing tected EOs occur on privately owned prop e r t y . them on endangered and threatened lists. As outlined • 26.8% of the listed species (40 the 149) have 50% or above, a variety of causes lead to rarity, some of them fewer of their EOs protected or semi-prot e c t e d . intrinsic to the biological nature of the species. However, many threats and stressors are strongly correlated with human impacts, which have greatly escalated over the In d i a n a past several decades. Most of these factors negatively (based on records documented since 1979; an additional 39 af fect the region’s natural biodiversity, both at the com- listed species have not been documented since 1979 or are con- munity and species levels. In general, threatened and si d e r ed extirpated) en d a n g e r ed species are the first to be at risk under these • 44.8% of EOs (189 of 422) have no prot e c t i o n . p re s s u res. Threats are imminent problems that have potential to radically change or eliminate a habitat or • 47.9% of listed species (47 of 102) have only 50% or population. Stressors are the chronic problems that fewer of their EOs on public lands. er ode diversity and quality of habitats and species over time. As described in Chapter 3, threats and stre s s o r s include loss of habitat, fragmentation, fire suppres s i o n , An i m a l s invasive species, imbalances of native species, collect- Illinois ing pres s u r es, hydrological change, and other environ - • 58.7% of EOs (285 of 485) of listed animal species are mental and abiotic factors, including pollution, eros i o n , un p r otected: 81.1% of fish, 85.7% of mammals, 23.1% and contaminants. Often, rare species have declined due of amphibians and reptiles, 57.5% of birds, and 4.3% of to an interaction of factors. For example, habitat loss in v e r t e b r a t e s . multiplies the problems of habitat fragmentation. Fire su p p r ession leads to habitat alteration, invasion of exotic • 60% of listed animal species (33 of 55) have only 50% species, and finally to habitat loss. In conjunction with or fewer of their occurrences prot e c t e d . these general threats to communities, individual rare o rganisms may have additional stressors particular to In d i a n a their life history and req u i r ements. These circu m s t a n c e s (f r om records documented since 1979) must be dealt with in greater depth in any recovery plan for a listed species. • 60% of EOs (138 of 238) of listed animal species are u n p rotected: 100% of fish, 80% of mammals, 43% of amphibians and reptiles, 64% of birds, and 42% of 7. 5 invertebrates (Lepidoptera rep o r t e d ) . • 58% of listed animal species (18 of 31) have only 50% Protection status of or fewer of their occurrences prot e c t e d . listed species Pr otection status is a rough but useful guide to determine 7. 6 priorities. Species that are protected (within Nature Pr eserves or in some portions of national parks) or semi- Management and recovery p rotected (on publicly owned conservation lands that may have multiple purposes) have a better chance of re c o m m e n d a t i o n s being adequately managed or monitored. If 50% or fewer of the sites on which a species occurs are protected, the Na t u r a l - a r ea scientists and restorationists have long since species is at much greater risk of being lost. A n i m a l s , learned that mere protection is not enough to pre s e r v e unlike plants, are mobile and in many instances can systems and their species adequately. For these rare

94 Chapter 7. Status of Endangered and Threatened Species: Assessment and Recommendations species to continue at present levels or to increase, sound ✔ Rotate and diversify management treatments in orde r management and restoration programs are essential, to maintain a variety of habitats needed by many involving knowledge of the make-up of communities sp e c i e s . that include rare species and of the means of maintain- ✔ C reate a common Chicago Wilderness database. To ing their struc t u r e and function. While sound community avoid duplication of re s e a rch and effort, managers management plans will go a long way towards the con- should have access to centralized information about servation and recovery of many endangered and threa t - the needs of rare species and management practices ened species, some species will always re q u i re special related to them for adaptation to their own sites. management attention, accompanied by a well-designed Linking with Natural Heritage Databases in Illinois, monitoring prog r a m . Indiana, and Wisconsin is critical to this proc e s s . ✔ Expand ex situ pr ograms for endangered and threa t - Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s ened plant species so that adequate seed or plant ✔ A c q u i re more public land to increase the size and material is available for appropriate rei n t r oduction as number of available habitats. Among the criteria to mo r e sites are res t o re d . consider in purchasing land should be the pre s e n c e ✔ Develop recovery plans for both federal-listed species of endangered and threatened species; greater empha- and state-listed species that have been identified as sis should be placed on land acquisition as a means of priorities. The Chicago Wilderness Endangered and pr otecting rare species. Priority should be given to cre- Th r eatened Species Task Force has identified approx i - ating complexes of communities, since many animal mately 150 species as priorities for recovery in the species depend on a variety of habitats. region, assigned to six categories (see Appendix 6). ✔ Legal protection of plants, in contrast to that of ani- The plans should be realistic, suited to the CW reg i o n , mals, is weak. Enact stronger legislation for the pro- and workable within county and other regional struc - tection of rare native plants. t u res and agencies. Reference should be made to recovery plans already developed or in process for ✔ E n l a rge and consolidate existing natural communi- federally listed species as models to be adapted and ties by creating buffers, or by restoration, to counteract simplified for state-listed species. Essential elements of the effects of fragmentation, particularly the isolation these recovery plans include: of populations of rare species. For some species, such as insects, it is more important to enlarge sites than to • Historical and present extent of populations (using cr eate new ones. GIS-based mapping) ✔ I n c rease the levels of protection for unprotected or • Oc c u r r ences on private and public lands s e m i - p rotected sites with known occurrences of • Life history characteristics en d a n g e r ed and threatened species. For example, incorporate such sites into the Nature Preserves system. • Identification of stressors, threats, and tren d s ✔ Work with private landowners, either individual or • Ecological req u i r ements and availability of appro- corporate, to protect the endangered and threa t e n e d priate habitats for rei n t ro d u c t i o n oc c u r r ences on their prop e r t y . Use conservation ease- • Identification of seed sources and germination and ments and other incentives to protect endangered and nursery facilities for rei n t r oduction of plant stock; ra r e res o u r ces on private land. identification of source populations and re a r i n g ✔ In management plans for all sites with endangere d facilities for rei n t r oduction of animal stock and threatened species, include specific provisions to • Outline of appropriate management practices eliminate stresses and threats and to enhance rec o v e r y of these species. • Monitoring the effects of management practices as part of a species-based monitoring prog r a m ✔ To measure effects of management activities on rare species, design monitoring programs (for rep re s e n t a - • Identification of res e a r ch needs tive populations) to provide feedback to adapt management activities and approa c h e s . ✔ Institute a region-wide monitoring program for rare species, implemented by trained volunteers as well as agency staff, to enhance and coordinate current effo r t s to measure population trends. Protocols should be sp e c i e s - b a s e d .

95 Chapter 8 Preserving Land and Wat e r Resources for Biodiversity

Ownership of natural areas in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s 8.18. 1 region is a mix of public and private. The core of Chicago In t r o d u c t i o n Wilderness consists of public land permanently dedicated to the conservation of nature. However, as human The previous chapters reviewed the types of natural use of the land intensifies, the choices made by private communities found in the Chicago Wilderness area and landowners become increasingly important. Land man- the goals and actions needed to sustain them. As noted in agement by private owners can strongly affect the course Chapter 3, the natural areas of the region can be seen as of events in nearby public natural areas. Fortunately, shrinking islands in an increasingly non-natural land- every year more citizens and public officials inquire scape. To overcome this, two categories of action stand about techniques for, and become more adept at, pre- out: 1) enlarging natural areas by protecting the land and serving open space and restoring habitat. 2) managing the land to sustain native ecological communities. This chapter discusses the first of these two actions; Chapter 9 discusses the second. 8. 2

B e f o re the remaining unprotected natural areas disap- Private landowners: pear from the Chicago Wilderness region, it is essential that we identify and protect the land that is important to initiatives for conservation sustaining our natural ecological communities. Ac q u i s - ition and other protection must be accomplished as soon 8.2.1 Introduction as possible and must be focused on high-priority sites. Also, natural areas within publicly owned land must be Private property owners can play a critical role in Chic- pr otected from conversion to intensive uses such as golf ago Wilderness. Especially important are those who own: courses and playing fields. • lands that harbor significant habitat The landscape is being shaped by market forces, and con- • critically situated lands with important re s t o r a t i o n servation needs to take account of and function within po t e n t i a l the economic and regulatory processes. Consumption of • lands that adjoin high-quality habitat land has accelerated faster than population growth, but consumers are showing increasing pref e r ence for envi- P roperty owners with lands meeting any of these ronmentally sensitive developments with well designed descriptions can make a long-term commitment of all or open space and natural areas. And as development cov- part of their property to the overall fabric of large - s c a l e ers the remaining open areas of Chicago Wilderness, the ecosystem restoration. The privately owned pro p e r t i e s public is supporting re f e renda for acquisition of addi- that can play an especially important role in Chicago tional natural areas. Acquisition by entities devoted to Wilderness are those that include remnant habitats of conservation is the most direct and certain form of pro- good to high quality, those with lesser-quality habitats tection and should be strongly supported. But many that could be improved by restoration of missing species, other methods can help provide protection. The follow- and those on which degraded habitats can be re p l a c e d ing sections describe these methods. or soil hydrology can be res t o re d .

96 Chapter 8. Preserving Land and Water Resources for Biodiversity

Ty p i c a l l y, the larger the property the better, but also ✔ Chicago Wilderness should establish a process where- important are clustered, separately owned, smaller sites by private property owners can become effective par- with cooperative neighbors and also all sites that adjoin or ticipants in broader efforts to res t o r e ecosystems. di r ectly affect properties with threatened or endangered species or rich natural communities. In addition, all prop - Conservation strategies available to private pro p e r t y erties in critical watersheds have a role to play. The critical owners are described in the remainder of section 8.2. watersheds are those of very high-priority and high-priority streams, and those of exceptional and important lakes, as defined in Chapter 6. Types of privately owned 8.2.2 Conservation easements pr operty most likely to play an important role in Chicago Illinois statutes allow private property owners to donate Wilderness are include residential lots three acres and conservation easements to governmental bodies or not- la rg e r , golf courses, corporate campuses, commonly fo r- p r ofit conservation organizations certified as 501c3 owned open space in planned unit developments, hunt by the IRS. The property owner retains title to the prop - clubs, undeveloped investment properties, and re c re- e r t y, but the easement is granted in perpetuity, to pro- ational lands owned by individuals and corporations. tect the natural re s o u rces from major changes in land use, such as the building of struc t u r es, removal of native Recommendations for private flora or fauna, grading or disruption of soils, or similar property owners restrictions specific to each prop e r t y . The management of the property to enhance natural res o u r ce values, or the ✔ P roperty owners who believe they own important role it would play in a larger ecosystem restoration, is habitats should have inventories of their land made by normally spelled out in a separate management agre e- the staff of local, state, or federal agencies or by expe- ment, which can be amended periodically to respond to rienced citizens associated with local conservation changing conditions. org a n i z a t i o n s . ✔ P roperty owners who wish to commit to long-range A p p roximately 2000 acres of land have had conserva- pr otection and enhancement of their habitats should tion easements applied by private property owners. The first assess the various methods of legal pro t e c t i o n key not-for-p r ofit organizations who hold conservation (listed in detail below). easements include: Corlands (1400 acres), the Conserv- ation Foundation of Du Page County (200 acres), the ✔ Pr operty owners who do not wish to encumber or sell Land Foundation of McHenry County (150 acres), Lake their land, but recognize its habitat value, should pur- Fo r est Open Lands 300 acres, plus 220 acres in easements sue habitat-enhancement techniques, participate in 170 acres managed for others under lease agree m e n t s . ) , la r ger landscape restoration efforts, inspire neighbor- and the Fox Valley Land Foundation (50 acres). Examples ing property owners, and share information on include the Weers easement in McHenry County, the uncommon species observed on their prop e r t y . Merit Club in Lake County, the Shaw easement in Kane ✔ Pr operty owners who have already established a strat- Co u n t y , and the Barbara and Allan Wilson easement in egy to protect and res t o r e their property should assess Lake in the Hills. potential impacts on their habitat from changes to land use on neighboring properties and, based on that 8.2.3 Illinois Nature Preserves assessment, pursue strategies with neighboring prop - erty owners to insure protection and expansion of the Illinois Nature Preserves can be established on pro p e r- habitat res o u rc e s . ties that hold threatened or endangered species or especially high-quality habitats. Sixteen privately owned ✔ Corporate property owners should re s t o re native Illinois Nature Preserves have been established in the plant and animal communities on their lands or Chicago Wilderness area. They constitute some of the expand existing restorations wherever possible to richest concentrations of biodiversity that have survived expand, link, or enhance nearby habitats. This can pro- since presettlement times. Examples include the Parker vide employee and community benefits and, in some Fen in McHenry County and the Bystricky Prairie in cases, can achieve significant savings on land man- McHenry County. ag e m e n t . ✔ Chicago Wilderness should map and catalog the H o w e v e r, the integrity of Nature Preserves can still be extent of private properties in the region that could c o m p romised by impacts from surrounding land uses. play an important role in broader ecosystem res t o r a - Thus, continuing efforts are needed to expand and buffe r tion effo r t s . these preserves, as well as to link them to a bro a d e r res t o r ed landscape. Buffer zones can be established with any of the other mechanisms described in section 8.2.

97 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

8.2.4 Illinois Land and Water Reserve Many of these properties can perform very important roles within the Chicago Wilderness because of their loca- Illinois Land and Water Reserves are approved by the tion within large potential bioreserves. These prop e r t i e s land owner and re g i s t e red with the Illinois Nature also are the primary source from which future conserva- P reserves Commission and the Illinois Department of tion easements, Illinois Nature Preserves, and Land and Natural Resources. Eligible sites include high quality Water Reserves will be drawn. Because of their grow i n g habitats, large blocks of habitat that support area sensi- and dispersed nature, an important task for Chicago tive species, natural community restorations and endan- Wilderness members will be to catalog their extent, to ge r ed species relocation sites. Land and Water Reserves determine their roles in larger preservation and res t o r a - may also be used to buffer nearby or adjoining Illinois tion efforts, and to establish a process through which N a t u re Preserves. Examples include the Bro o k l a n d s p roperty owners can participate in the overall eff o r t . Wood Reserve in Antioch Township, Lake County, Examples include the Abbott Laboratories prairie res t o r - Illinois; and the Webber Reserve in Antioch To w n s h i p , ation and native orchid habitat protection in North Lake County, Illinois. Chicago, the Perle Olsson prairie and woodland res t o r a - tion in Ringwood, and the Joan and John Knoll prairie 8.2.5 Transfer to restricted trust restoration in Bull Val l e y . Apr operty owner may establish a limited trust that owns the property and has trustees who operate the trust with 8.2.7 Landscape restoration to serve specific instructions to preserve and manage the tru s t . a corporate purpose The trust can take ownership during the owner’s life- An increasing number of corporations are using native time, allowing the owner to continue residence on the landscape restoration to minimize groundskeeping costs, pro p e r t y , or it can come into existence upon the death of to provide areas of interest for employees, and to achieve the owner. Such a trust needs to be funded in perpetuity good public relations with a conservation-minded local in order to pay taxes, insurance, normal maintenance, c o m m u n i t y. In most cases, these restorations have no and natural-area management. This is not a common underlying long-term commitment, but nonetheless they method of land preservation because of the commitment open up such a possibility. These restorations can play a needed from the trustees, but it is a possible strategy in strategic role in protecting on-site habitat, buffering or certain situations. linking nearby habitats, or increasing stormwater absorption. As one example, Commonwealth Edison has seeded 8.2.6 Commitments, less prairie plants into its rights of way in Cary, Orland Park, than perpetuity Zion, Mokena, and the south side of Chicago. As another example, Modine Corporation has seeded prairie plants The vast majority of property owners in the Chicago on its property in Ringwood. For discussion of natural Wilderness area who maintain their lands in a natural landscaping, see section 11.3.2 and Appendix 9. condition have not made long-term, legally binding commitments to restrict changes or development of their p ro p e r t y, nor have they participated in coord i n a t e d 8.2.8 Transfer of private property ef forts to res t o r e habitat within their local watershed or to public ownership or to their neighborhood. Yet thousands of private pro p e r t y conservation organizations owners actively enhance or res t o r e their lands for habitat purposes because of a personal commitment. P roperty owners who wish to preserve their lands for habitat protection and public use have various options Because of the positive news reports of native landscape for transferring their property to a public land-holding restoration, as well as the educational initiatives of envi- body or to a not-for-p r ofit conservation organization in ronmental advocacy groups and individuals, more the region. Each of these agencies operates under finan- p roperty owners every year are attempting to re s t o re cial limitations as well as a strategic acquisition plan or communities of associated native flora and fauna (prair- set of criteria for purchases or acquisitions. In certain ie, woodland, wetlands) or to enhance habitat for indi- cases, property owners may find no agency willing to vidual species (butterfly gardens, bluebird boxes, bat p u rchase property or to accept a donation. This is a boxes). Their level of success in establishing optimum region-wide issue that needs to be resolved. One source biological integrity depends wholly on the quality of of information on local public agencies and land trusts is information and advice they rec e i v e . the OpenLands Proj e c t .

98 Chapter 8. Preserving Land and Water Resources for Biodiversity

Donation by property owner Recommended actions for Chicago Outright donation: Full title and ownership of property is Wilderness member organizations to donated to a conservation agency. Income tax deductions facilitate transfer of private property ar e usually available for this charitable donation. ✔ Educate the land-owning public about the options and Donation by devise: A gift of land to a conservation agency incentives available for transferring open space to is accomplished through a will, expressly stating that, if public and not-for-p r ofit conservation agencies. accepted, the land will be used for conservation purposes ✔ and not sold or developed. An income tax deduction is A s s u re that all areas within the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s not received, but estate taxes may be substantially region are served by one or more organizations that red u c e d . will take title to important habitats in order to manage them. Donation with reserved life estate: Land is donated to a con- ✔ Look for funding mechanisms so that lack of res o u rc e s servation agency, but with a provision that the donor for ongoing ecological management is no longer an retains a right to live on it or otherwise use it. The chari- impediment to the donation of important habitat. table contribution is computed based on the fair market value of the donation minus the value of the life interes t in the property as determined using IRS actuarial tables. 8. 3 Sale by property owner Local governments: plans, Sale at fair market value: A conservation agency pays the fair and reasonable appraised value for property if it falls ordinances, contracts, within its strategic acquisition area, and if the agency has the funds to make such a purchase. The seller is liable and strategies for income tax on the capital gain. Local governments already have the framework for pre- B a rgain sale: The seller sells the land for less than the serving and restoring habitat in their codes. In most cases, appraised market value and gains a charitable IRS st a n d a r ds for protecting and restoring habitat may need deduction, thus avoiding some or all of the capital-gains to be added, but rarely do new approaches need to be cre- ta x . ated. However, a well-implemented policy for pres e r v a - tion and restoration of habitat by a local government will Installment sale: A portion of the land is sold yearly rather include evaluating and amending all plans, ordi n a n c e s , than all of it at one time, lessening the capital-gains tax. contracts, codes, and strategies and making amendments w h e re needed. P rotecting Nature in Your Community: A Sale with reserved life estate: P roperty is sold to a conser- Guidebook for Protecting and Enhancing Biodiversity w a s vation agency while the seller retains the right to live on pre p a r ed by NIPC to educate local governments on the the property for all or a portion of his or her lifetime. This importance of biodiversity, and to provide tools for mechanism can provide the means to meet both the restoration and protection. Additional roles for local needs of the seller and the long-term objectives of the municipalities are discussed in Section 11. 2 . 2 . bu y e r . Recommendations for local governments Le a s e - b a c k : Pr operty is sold with a pre-established right ✔ of the seller to retain its use through a lease for an agree d - Encourage local citizens to offer ideas for habitat upon period of time. It is similar to a life estate in meeting pr eservation and restoration in community visioning the needs of the seller while satisfying the objectives of ex e rc i s e s . the buyer. ✔ Identify lands with high habitat value and lands with good restoration potential and designate them as nat- Right of first re f u s a l : A conservation agency is usually ural re s o u rce preserves in comprehensive, strategic, negotiating with several property owners at any given and special–area plans. Consider municipal owner- time, and its yearly budget may not allow it to purch a s e ship and management of these lands for open space all potential properties on the market. Or the agency may and biodiversity values. not offer a seller as much as the seller wishes to receive. In ✔ these situations, a conservation-minded property owner Designate stream corridors, swales, and hydric-soil can assign a right of refusal to the conservation agency. networks as open-space links in comprehensive plans This guarantees the agency the right to match a price and in strategic and special-area plans. off e r ed by another potential purch a s e r .

99 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

✔ Develop five-year capital improvement programs for ✔ Adopt subdivision regulations that req u i re : stormwater management that minimize infrastruc t u r e • Inventory of natural habitats, designation of hydric investment, replacement, and maintenance by using soils, and location of underg round tiles at the best management practices that: sketch-plan stage • Use natural swales • Design of detention areas to achieve or appro a c h • “Daylight” storm sewers by converting them to ze r o discharge for two-year storms open swales • Pr eservation of habitats and hydric soil systems • Encourage infiltration with perforated pipe • Bu f fers for wetlands, streams, and drainage corri- • Adopt zero- d i s c h a r ge standards when approp r i a t e do r s • Plant deep-rooted native vegetation on the banks of • Designation of lands with conservation easements st r eams and detention ponds to control eros i o n or dedication to local government at the pre l i m i- nary planning stage. • Develop programs to minimize use of pesticides and fertilizers on municipal lands through Integrat- ✔ Use engineering standards and practices that incor- ed Pest Management policies or other means. porate measures to protect and re s t o re natural res o u r ces, that emphasize infiltration over discharge • Use other best management practices such as those of storm water, and that are flexible enough to res p o n d identified by NIPC (1992, 1994, 1997) to varying environmental situations. ✔ Develop five-year capital improvement programs for ✔ In s u r e the municipal code allows and encourages the sewage treatment that minimize infrastruc t u r e invest- restoration of natural plant communities and habitats ment, replacement and maintenance costs by using for native wildlife in residential and commercial land- best management practices that: sc a p i n g . • Use land-treatment systems ✔ Use native landscaping on municipal lands and • Use res t o r ed wetlands as absorption fields re s t o re existing natural areas to create wildlife habitat, protect water quality, and demonstrate these land- • Use created wetlands for “polishing” scaping practices for residents and businesses. • Use other best management practices such as those ✔ Cr eatively design annexation and development agree - identified by NIPC (1992, 1994, 1997) ments to protect and res t o r e natural res o u r ces to the ✔ Develop general-purpose capital improvement pro- highest possible degree, including immediate identi- grams that minimize infrastru c t u re investment, fication and protection of major re s o u rces and a replacement, and maintenance using best manage- p rocess for identification and protection of other ment practices that: res o u r ces in later stages • Use native plants to landscape rights of way ✔ Use TIF districts to acquire or res t o r e natural habitats and community open space as part of red e v e l o p m e n t , • Encourage stormwater infiltration via swales, veg- to provide habitat and implement hydrological best etated filter strips, and perforated pipe management practices such as those recommended by • Make roadway widths no wider than necessary to municipal consultants and by NIPC (1992). e n s u re public safety and to accommodate other ✔ Adopt intergovernmental agreements between or modes of travel such as bicycling among neighboring communities to coordinate pro- • Avoid seeps, springs, and organic soils when locat- tection and restoration of natural re s o u rces and of ing new roads and facilities hy d ro l o g y . ✔ Adopt zoning ordinances that incorporate natural- ✔ Undertake municipal conference initiatives that focus re s o u rce overlay zoning districts and hydric-soil on the protection and restoration of natural res o u rc e s , overlay districts, which supplement other zoning the identification of local ecosystems, and the modifi- req u i r ements that apply to specific areas. Adopt zon- cation of stormwater systems as described above in ing ordinances that req u i r e developers to protect and this section. res t o r e natural res o u r ces, to provide buffers for wet- ✔ Chicago Wilderness organizations should develop a lands and streams, to minimize impervious surfaces, training and technical assistance program for munici- and to cluster home sites. pal and county officials by which they would rec e i v e information on how to incorporate biodiversity in their plans, programs, ordinances and reg u l a t i o n s .

10 0 Chapter 8. Preserving Land and Water Resources for Biodiversity

8.3.1 Examples of public and private ows, and parks. The development is designed to have initiatives for open space and habitat ze r o discharge for two-year storms. Parkland dedication: Nunda Township accepted title to Habitat associated with golf courses: The Ruff l e d 30 acres of drained hydric soils from the developer of Feathers Golf Course in Lemont incorporates 29 acres of adjoining land. The township converted a portion to a res t o r ed wetlands and uses the design principles advo- prairie restoration, created several soccer fields, and left cated by Audubon International for habitat pro t e c t i o n . the remainder as passive open space. The Village of Lakewood purchased a bankrupt 18-hole golf course in 1992; learned that it included a 36-acre , Watercourse dedication: The Kane County Fore s t high-quality fen, and dedicated it in 1995 as the Pr eserve District obtained title to Otter Creek and adjoin- Kishwaukee Fen Illinois Nature Pres e r v e . ing wetlands from the developer of the Thornwood development in South Elgin. Restoration projects funded with fines from regulatory enforcement actions or mitigation agreements: The Oak Greenway dedication: The Kane County Forest Pres e r v e Lawn Park District rec r eated meanders for three quarters District obtained a broad greenway through the Mill of a mile of Stoney Creek into a broader floodway, res t o r - C reek development, which includes Mill Creek and ed riparian native vegetation, and established a public adjoining wetlands and uplands. g reenway and trail in place of a deeply incised, over- g rown stream channel with little public access. Fifty Road corridor dedication: Most roads in the Village of species of birds, fish, and other fauna have red i s c o v e re d Long Grove include habitat easements that are dedicated the area. See box for case study from Northwest Indiana. as part of the process of reviewing development plans.

Wetland dedication: The Valley Hill Estates developer 8.3.2 Regulation in the Village of Bull Valley established a conservation Short of purchasing or leasing a piece of land or acquir- easement on the Boone Creek Fen, an Illinois Natural ing some of the rights that constitute land ownership, Ar ea Inventory site, and an adjoining oak ridge that acts governments at all levels have various rights to reg u l a t e as a buffe r . the development or use of land. This authority is most commonly delegated by state governments to counties Habitat dedication: Due to planned-development agree - and municipalities, whose zoning regulations are the ment, annexation agreement, or other development principal local tool for regulating the use of land. Zoning a g reement, 120 acres of a 191-acre, 74-lot development or dinances often req u i r e specified amounts of permanent we r e preserved as open space and for habitat res t o r a t i o n open space, typically in the form of lot-size req u i re m e n t s , t h rough an agreement among seven diff e rent parties, setback req u i r ements, or maximums for a building’s site including the Lake Forest Open Lands Association, Lake coverage. These ordinances can be applied to pre s e r v e County Forest Preserve, and City of Lake Fores t . small natural area s .

Cooperation between government units to protect habi- Counties and municipalities may also regulate develop- ta t : The Village of Inverness postponed consideration of ment to prevent specific environmental impacts. For an annexation proposal for 90 days to allow the Cook example, many of the local governments throughout the County Forest Preserve District to purchase a five-acre Illinois portion of Chicago Wilderness have adopted bu f fer to the Baker’s Lake Nature Pres e r v e . model local ordinances for stream and wetland prot e c - tion, erosion and sedimentation control, floodplain man- Open space associated with sewage treatment for agement and stormwater drainage and detention, or they b u ffering effluent: The Northgate development in have developed and adopted their own codes. NIPC has Huntley will use a land-treatment system that pipes p re p a red model ordinances for use by local govern- tr eated effluent to dedicated open space. This avoids dis- ments, including the Model Floodplain Ordinance, Model ch a r ge from a sewage-treatment plant into the Class-A- Stormwater Drainage and Detention Ordinance: A Guide for rated Kishwaukee River system, while also pro v i d i n g Local Officials, Model Stream and Wetland Pro t e c t i o n expanded habitat for the upland sandpiper in a portion Or d i n a n c e , and the Model Soil Erosion and Sediment Control of the treatment area . Ordinance: A Guide for Local Officials.

Habitat as part of common private ownership of open Regulations affecting the development of flood plains s p a c e : The 667-acre Prairie Crossing development in may aid in the preservation of natural communities. Grayslake retains 463 acres of open space, including 160 H o w e v e r, these regulations usually do not pre c l u d e ac r es of res t o r ed wetlands, res t o r ed prairie, fields, mead- development unless it diminishes flood storage capacity

10 1 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Conservation and restoration of Karner blue butterfly habitat A case study at National Steel Corporation’s Midwest Division in Portage, Indiana

n July of 1992, National Steel Corporation, Midwest Division (Midwest Division) applied to the United States En v i r onmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and Indiana Department of Energy Management (IDEM) for a IClass 3 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit modification to expand the existing Gree n - belt Hazardous Waste Landfill currently in operation on its prop e r ty in Portage, Indiana. As part of permi t t i n g req u i r ements, U.S. EPA and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (U.S. F&WS) conducted several site visits to determine whether the landfill expansion would negatively impact any state or federal, proposed/listed threa t - ened or endangered species.

During a U.S. EPA site visit to the project area (known as “Greenbelt II”) in 1992, lupine plants were discovered gr owing in the area to be impacted. This plant serves as the sole larval host for the Karner blue butterfl y , which was known to occur nearby in the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. On a subsequent visit with personnel from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, one adult male Karner blue butterfly was observed at the impact site. Due to rapid population declines over the past 15 years, this butterfly species is listed as federally endan- ge r ed under the Endangered Species Act.

All permits issued under RCRA must be in compliance with other federal laws, including the Endangered Species Act. As part of this req u i r ement, U.S. EPA must consult with U.S. F&WS if any actions under its jurisdiction have potential to impact any proposed/listed threatened or endangered species. Because a Karner blue butterfly population occurred in the impact area, U.S. F&WS req u i r ed that U.S. EPA provide a Biological Assessment to determine if the proposed landfill expansion would adversely affect the Karner blue butterfly or its habitat. Midwest Division prep a r ed the Biological Assessment and provided it to U.S. EPA and U.S. F&WS for rev i e w

Fr om data gathered during the Biological Assessment, it was determined that approximately 17 acres of moderately suitable habitat for the Karner blue butterfly would be impacted by the 30 acre expansion of the existing Gr eenbelt landfill and clean-up of the Eastside Solid Waste Management Unit (Eastside SWMU). Pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. F&WS prep a r ed a Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement, outlining the expected damages to the Karner blue butterfly and measures for mitigating these disturbances. An unused portion of Midwest Division’s prop e r ty (known as the Conservation Area) was selected as the mitigation site because of the presence of relatively undisturbed oak savanna habitat, lupine, and a variety of Karner blue bu t t e r fly nectar sources. The Conservation Area totaled 45 acres in size, of which approximately 25 acres was relatively undisturbed oak savanna with a dense understory of young black oak, sassafras and cherry trees. The remaining 20 acres consisted of old agricultural fields, black locust thickets, and areas recovering from prev i o u s sand mining operations.

Pa r t of mitigation for the loss of habitat req u i r ed by the Greenbelt expansion permit included translocating lupine plants from the Greenbelt II site to the Conservation Area. It was thought that any over-wintering Karner blue bu t t e r fly eggs would also be translocated with the lupine plants. In March and April of 1993, 759 plugs of soil containing 1,610 lupine plants were moved from the Greenbelt II landfill expansion site to the Conserva t i o n Ar ea. Each of the soil plugs containing lupine was placed in one of 13 “Lupine Translocation Areas” located on the edges of the wooded portions of the Conservation Area. Each lupine plant was marked with a metal tag and a colored pin flag. In May and June of 1993, 7,987 additional lupine seeds and 2,063 lupine seedlings were planted on the translocated plugs. This was done to ensure that Karner blue butterfly larvae occurring there would have sufficient food sources. In addition to the translocated lupine, seeds and seedlings, dense native populations of lupine (over 30,000 plants) already occurred throughout the Conservation Area .

(Continued on next page.)

10 2 Chapter 8. Preserving Land and Water Resources for Biodiversity

Following lupine translocation, Midwest Division was req u i r ed to conduct habitat restoration activities at the Co n s e r vation Area. The Karner blue butterfly req u i r es a mosaic of open to partially closed canopy oak savanna with a ground cover dominated by lupine (the only known foodplant for the larvae of this species), grasses and adult nectar sources. Lupine and many of the adult nectar sources are dependent on fire for their continued su r vival. Fire suppression over the past 20-30 years had resulted in the growth of a dense understory of young tr ees at the Conservation Area. These trees shaded out the herbaceous layer, making much of the area unsuit- able as Karner blue butterfly habitat. Over 35,000 young trees and shrubs were removed manually in the winters of 1993 and 1994. In addition, more than 9,000 black locust trees and saplings were cut and trea t e d with herbicide.

Midwest Division was also req u i r ed to implement biological monitoring programs to track shifts in various habitat characteristics following restoration. They were also req u i r ed to monitor the survivorship of translocated lupine and any Karner blue butterflies that may have been moved to the Conservation Area. Over 65 percent of the translocated lupine plants had survived as of 1997 and 75 percent of the plugs had at least one lupine plant present. Initial butterfly surveys in the spring of 1993 found that no Karner blue butterflies were translocated to the Conservation Area. However, these surveys did identify a previously unknown population of the but- te r fly already occurring at the Conservation Area. Between 1993 and 1997, this population steadily increa s e d in size from approximately 160 individuals to more than 1,000. In 1998, the Conservation Area was deeded to the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (IDNLS) for inclusion in their West Beach Subunit.

In addition to the Conservation Area, Midwest Division also purchased a privately-owned, 50 acre parcel of land along Stagecoach Road and adjacent to the Inland Marsh Subunit of IDNLS. This parcel of land is known to contain a viable Karner blue butterfly population and numerous plant species considered very rare in the gr eater Chicago reg i o n .

or exposes stru c t u res to flood damage. Thus without ha z a r d to threatened or endangered species can be chal- added specific habitat protection regulations, flood plain lenged under both federal and state law. or dinances alone are insuffi c i e n t . In the area of wastewater management in Illinois, the State and federal rules also apply to development affe c t - E n v i ronmental Protection Agency has authority to set ing wetlands. Permits to dredge or fill wetlands are sub- boundaries for systems that collect and treat wastewater. ject to the approval of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers A natural area lying outside any designated service area and state agencies. However, other damaging impacts, thus enjoys a limited form of protection from develop- such as excavation or vegetation removal, may not be ment that would normally re q u i re sewers. The Illinois co v e r ed by federal or state regulations. The permit can be En v i r onmental Protection Agency has been reluctant to obtained only if appropriate mitigation measures are limit the expansion of wastewater service areas upon taken. For high-quality wetlands, mitigation may not be request, even if the expansion would expose high-qual- permitted. Often, developers search for an entity to ity streams to discharges of treated wastewater. It is rec - which they might donate wetlands as permanent open ommended that the Illinois EPA establish a process for space. This search is often frustrated by a lack of local reviewing and approving the expansion of wastewater conservation management organizations or their inabil- service areas that takes into consideration the impacts on ity to take on the management of small or fragmented the total natural environment within affected watersheds. wetlands unless adequate long-term funding is prov i d e d . One of the best tools available to local governments for Development projects using federal dollars may be sub- p rotecting natural areas is their power to pre p a re and ject to an environmental impact statement (EIS). An EIS adopt comprehensive plans. While such plans carry only has, in some instances, provided the impetus for com- advisory authority, they can set the stage for action to pr omises or adjustments to the design of a project for the pr otect important areas long before development could benefit of natural-area preservation. Projects that pose a cause harm or destruc t i o n .

10 3 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

A mo r e specialized type of plan that has proven benefi- flooding but also have often resulted in severe environ - cial for preserving natural areas is one specifically mental degradation. By the same token, water- q u a l i t y a d d ressing future needs and opportunities for parks, management planning has tended to focus solely on open spaces, and greenways. The forest preserve and wastewater collection and treatment and has typically conservation districts in Illinois, the Illinois Department failed to achieve the original national purpose of attaining of Natural Resources, and a growing number of park dis- st r eams, lakes, and rivers fit for swimming and fishing. tricts and townships have adopted plans that identify key areas to be prot e c t e d . Examples of integrating various aspects of water management are evolving in several parts of the region, most An increasing number of local governments and orga n i - notably where local governmental and citizen-based zations have been actively planning and implementing gr oups have taken an active interest in addressing their g reenways (generally defined as open space corridors local problems in a comprehensive fashion. A Vision for with multi-functional values). Many greenways are Butterfield Creek (Pre p a red by Johnson, Johnson, and based on river and stream corridors and on abandoned Roy for the Butterfield Creek Steering Committee, 1994) rail lines, which often encompass one or more natural is an excellent model for local action. Countywide agen- communities. The Northeastern Illinois Planning Com- cies also have played a lead role in organizing stormwa- mission and the OpenLands Project have jointly spon- ter planning. Local councils of governments have also s o red a Regional Greenways Plan for the six Illinois p rovided leadership such as with the South Suburban counties in the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n . Mayors and Managers Association’s South Suburban Stormwater Strategy: APlan for Watershed Management (1 9 9 8 ) . 8.3.3 Watershed planning and ma n a g e m e n t 8.3.4 Best management practices Recent attention has been focused on the unfulfilled for new urban and suburban potential of comprehensive watershed planning, involving multiple government units and addressing all aspects de v e l o p m e n t of managing water re s o u rces. This concept brings NIPC (1992) gives a survey of best management practices together the various aspects of water management, for the process of urban and suburban development is which have heret o f o r e been planned separately, if at all. contained in the NIPC publication. Among the topics Watershed management includes regional management c o v e red are site planning and design, soil erosion and of storm water, of flood plains, of water supply, and of sediment control, stormwater drainage and detention, water quality, covering both non point source and point and the protection of water bodies and wetlands. Each so u r ce water pollution. of these topics is directly related to the preservation of the region’s biodiversity. Further information can be This more comprehensive approach to planning has obtained from the Center for Watershed Management, arisen, in part, because many of the costly flood control located in Silver Spring, Maryland. p rojects of past years not only have failed to eliminate

10 4 Chapter 9 Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring

agers in planning, training, and working with other land- 9. 1 management agencies and volunteers. In t r o d u c t i o n The objectives of the guidelines are: A major conclusion of this plan is that increased manage- • To endorse the use of effective restoration and man- ment is essential if the biodiversity of the region is to be agement techniques pr eserved. To balance the losses being caused by disturbance of natural processes, ecological restoration and • To identify appropriate (safe, efficient, economical, management of this region’s natural communities must and effective) approaches and solutions for typical in c r ease substantially. Years of experience and res e a rc h management prob l e m s have demonstrated that certain basic management activ- • To identify gaps in knowledge and to develop and pri- ities are necessary and effective for the health of natural oritize related res e a r ch questions communities and the conservation of biodiversity of the region. While continuing re s e a rch is important to im- • To inform planning efforts with practical information pr ove management techniques, ongoing management is on techniques, costs and benefits, and expected res u l t s essential for all of our natural communities. A p p l y i n g • To identify situations that re q u i re discussion and adaptive management in a context of monitoring and information-sharing among land managers res e a r ch is the best way to improve on existing techniques while reducing and reversing the ongoing rate of loss. • To foster communication among agencies on issues that req u i r e collaborative decisions • To provide regional support for good land-manage- 9. 2 ment decisions Techniques and guidelines • To provide information to decision-makers with juris- for ecological restoration diction over natural res o u rc e s Guidelines cannot identify the specific practices or tech- and management niques to be applied at any given site. No single best method or combination of methods can be applied acros s 9.2.1 Purpose of the guidelines the region for all situations. Instead, management plans need to be developed for each site using management To facilitate increased management in the region, the practices adapted to site conditions and appropriate to the Chicago Wilderness Land Management Team has begun goals for the site. However, guidelines can point out fac- the task of developing Ecological Restoration and tors and concerns that are helpful in thinking through site Management Guidelines. These guidelines will function plans and use of various practices throughout our reg i o n . at two levels. First, they will provide general information about why, how, when, and where certain tech- Guidelines can help in selecting management techniques niques are used. Second, the guidelines will pro v i d e to eliminate an ecological stress from a natural commu- mo r e detailed information that will summarize the state n i t y. Some sites with invasive brush can be managed of knowledge about various techniques to aid land man- with prescribed fire alone, while others may req u i r e hand

10 5 Biodiversity Recovery Plan clearing, and still others will warrant mechanical clear- gr ow taller, they flower more and longer, and they pro- ing. The goal of all of these treatments is to maintain the duce more seed. Fourth, fire exposes the soil and sprou t - site using only prescribed fire. But due to diffe r ent dening plants to sunlight and warmth earlier in the year than sities of brush and other site conditions, diffe r ent res t o r a - in unburned areas, allowing earlier growth and more tion techniques are needed to get to this stage. In this robust plants (Pauly 1997). example, the effectiveness of the restoration technique can be measured in more than one way. First, one can A good burn plan includes a clear statement of goals and check the reduction of the invasive brush. Second, one objectives, a map of burn units, and a prescription that can see the intensity and coverage of the prescribed burn. defines the safety parameters: re q u i red limits for wind A th i r d, longer-term measure would be the recovery of di r ection and speed, relative humidity, and temperature. the natural community. The plan also should include optimum timing and conditions, and it should describe the tools and personnel In most cases, land managers are trying to correct damage re q u i red. Ty p i c a l l y, it includes a smoke-management done from as many as 200 years of neglect. Restoration is st r a t e g y , a notification list, and evidence of all req u i re d a process that req u i r es time, and some sites may take sev- pe r m i t s . eral years before beginning to show significant signs of pro g r ess. It is advisable to fully inform the public of what Some important re f e rences for developing pre s c r i b e d - can be expected and, where possible, to include practices burn plans are Collins and Wallace (1990), Henderson that yield short-term as well as long-term res u l t s . and Statz (1995), Hulbert (1988), Wright and Bailey (1982), Packard and Mutel (1997), Ladd (1991), and In developing guidelines, the Land Management Tea m McClain (1994). has assigned high priority to specific practices. The following sections explain why these techniques are While all land managers for major natural areas in important, give basic prer equisites for their use, and offe r Chicago Wilderness currently use burning in their pro- recommendations for enhancing their use across the grams, some actions that would increase the capacity of reg i o n . all managers to use prescribed burning as a management tool. These include the following.

9.2.2 Prescribed burning Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s Chapters 3 and 5 have identified fire as a fundamental ✔ Land-management agencies should develop a com- tool in the restoration and management of natural com- pr ehensive training program for crew members and munities in our region. This tool allows land managers to burn leaders that emphasizes prescribed burning e ffectively and economically manage sizable natural in Midwest ecosystems and burning in metrop o l i t a n ar eas using a natural process. It is by far the single most se t t i n g s . important management technique at their disposal. ✔ Land-management agencies should proc u r e suffi c i e n t equipment and workforce so that enough natural Planning is the key to successful use of fire as a manage- ar eas can be burned within the appropriate time peri- ment tool. Although prescribed burns are essential to ods to achieve the goals of this plan. long-term health of natural areas, they can have short- term impacts upon some plant and animal (primarily ✔ Chicago Wilderness members should work with the insect) life. For this reason, sites are either burned in por- Illinois Nature Preserves Commission to monitor and tions or on a landscape level that allows natural patchi- participate in the development of new legislation that ness to provide refuge. More re s e a rch needs to be af fects prescribed burning in Illinois. Similarly, mem- conducted to see how several key species and gro u p s bers should work with state Environmental Prot e c t i o n respond to prescribed burns of various intensities, cov- Agencies as they develop air-quality regulations to erages, and freq u e n c i e s . facilitate prescribed burns. ✔ Land-management agencies, in conjunction with Pr escribed burns as applied today have several beneficial other Chicago Wilderness members, should develop ef fects upon degraded natural communities. One of the ou t r each programs to educate local officials, fire chiefs, most important effects is controlling brush by setting pr eserve neighbors, etc., about the use of fire in man- small saplings and seedlings back. A second important aging natural ecosystems. ef fect is stressing plants that are not adapted to fire. This allows native species to compete better with the inva- ✔ Chicago Wilderness members should cooperate to sive species. A t h i rd effect is the recycling of nutrients, im p r ove knowledge about res e a r ch questions such as: which are released from dead vegetation by the fire . Studies have shown that immediately after a fire, plants

10 6 Chapter 9. Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring

• What are the positive and negative effects of pre- Examples of management techniques include rem o v i n g scribed burning on endangered, threatened, and drain tiles, either in part or in their entirety; filling watch species? ditches; removing berms and spoil piles; re m o v i n g w a t e r-level control stru c t u res; remeandering stre a m s ; • What is the optimum timing and frequency of fire c o n t rolling invasive species; and re i n t roducing native to conserve designated ecological targe t s ? species. Monitoring of groundwater levels before and • What are the effects of various pres c r i b e d - b u r n i n g after restoration is an essential component of a success- regimes on native shrub s ? ful proj e c t . • What are the best uses of fire to control invasive Some important re f e rences in planning hydro l o g i c a l sp e c i e s ? restorations are Brooks et al. (1997), Payne (1992), Mitsch and Gosselink (1993), Galatowitsch and van der Va l k 9.2.3 Restoration and management (1994), and Hammer (1992). of hydrology Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s Hy d r ology includes surface water (ponds and wetlands), ✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agencies gr oundwater (springs, seeps, and subsurface flow), and should create a database of current hydrological data riparian systems (streams and rivers). A co m p re h e n s i v e fr om restoration and mitigation projects and make it ap p r oach to restoring and managing the natural commu- available on the Internet. nities of any site should include a thorough review of that ✔ site’s hydrol o g y , both historic and present. Chapters 3, 5, Chicago Wilderness members and local agencies and 6 describe ways in which the hydrology throu g h o u t should standardize the methods for collection of the region has been altered, typically by the installation of h y d rological data, including the use of remote data- subsurface drain tiles, the channelizing of streams, the sensing equipment. c o n s t ruction of dams, dikes, and ditches, the filling of ✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agencies wetlands, and the construction of impervious surfaces. should provide training to land owners and land managers in techniques for identifying hydrological dis- Modifications to hydrology in the past century and a half turbances, locating and removing agricultural field w e re usually attempts to make land more suitable for tiles, and installing groundwater monitoring wells. farming and development, or to convey water off site as ✔ quickly and efficiently as possible. Changes in drainage Local agencies should identify large, artificially by ditches, tiles, storm sewers, and other means have drained wetlands and prioritize them for res t o r a t i o n . g reatly altered the habitats and ecology of the re g i o n . ✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agencies Instead of infiltrating into the soil and then moving as should further develop education and outreach pro- g roundwater through the natural communities, most grams on wetland ecosystems, making use of demon- storm water and melt water now run off the surface, stration and restoration proj e c t s . changing the quantity and timing of water availability. ✔ Hy d r ologic alteration eliminates some communities and Chicago Wilderness members and local agencies degrades the quality of others. should address key res e a r ch questions, such as: • How do offsite factors affect hydrology at a site, A review of historical information and a field inspection and what are the implications for restoring the site’s should determine whether a site has undergone hydro- hy d ro l o g y ? logical modification by human actions. A number of information sources can be useful. These include soil • What are the best methods for restoring hydrol o g y , analysis, physical evidence of drainage alterations such and when should they be implemented? as field tile or straightened stream channels, aerial photos, topographic maps, and personal contacts with pre- 9.2.4 Reestablishment of native species vious owners and local officials. The analysis should also consider the effects of off-site alterations to hydrol o g y . Most restoration management is not focused on individual species. Instead, management seeks to impro v e B e f o re recommending the restoration of hydro l o g y, a diversity and health in general through removal of inva- land manager must determine if proposed alterations sive species, re i n t roduction of fire, etc. The goal is to comply with state drainage laws. For example, will they i m p rove and enlarge habitat for native plants and ani- a ffect surrounding or downstream property owners? mals and to ensure long-term regional viability of native This information is essential for obtaining necessary fed- species. In some circumstances, however, the approp r i a t e eral, state, and local permits. management technique is the re i n t roduction of native

10 7 Biodiversity Recovery Plan species previously lost from a site. Five possible objec- • the status and ecology of the species or groups of tives for the rei n t r oduction of native species are: species to be rei n t r oduced • To res t o r e natural biodiversity • the effect the re i n t roduced species will have on the ecosystem and on species currently occupying the • To provide expanded habitat for listed or critical req u i r ed habitat sp e c i e s • the rate of rei n t r oduction, the optimal number of indi- • To promote conservation awaren e s s viduals to be re i n t roduced, and the composition of • To develop expanded sources of native plants and the rei n t ro d u c t i o n seeds and native genetic diversity The site must be within the historic range of the species • To provide better infiltration of storm water being introduced and should offer long-term prot e c t i o n . Pr evious causes of decline for the species should be elim- Species re i n t roduction can reverse the twin trends of inated or significantly reduced. Habitat restoration should habitat and ecosystem loss and can help sustain rare be at a stage to sustain the rei n t r oduced population. species. Reintroduction artificially disperses and increa s - es native biota where natural dispersal patterns have To retain functioning native communities within Chicago been disrupted or fatally compromised. For example, Wilderness, we need seeds and plants of local origin. In nest predators that prosper in today’s fragmented habitat some cases, the supply has run short, and some species have severely curtailed re p roduction of the Blanding’s ar e not available in the commercial market. Some actions turtle; captive rearing and rei n t r oduction programs are to pursue to develop a larger supply of seed and plants of mechanisms to sustain the species. Reintroduction also local ecotypes include the following. serves as a tool for re c reating the large blocks of native plant communities and community complexes now missing from the Chicago Wilderness region. Seeds Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s ✔ and/or plants are rei n t r oduced to degraded natural com- Land management agencies that have not alre a d y munities or to former agricultural lands to fill gaps. Large done so should develop in-house nurseries to prod u c e blocks of the native landscape are crucial for the viabil- seeds and plants. A nursery can produce large quan- ity of area-sensitive species, to avoid edge effects, and tities of seed at low cost and can also produce prop a g - they reduce the chance that a chance event will wipe out ules irrespective of natural environmental conditions. an entire population. ✔ Expand seed and plant exchanges. Member orga n i z a - tions can trade for seed or plants of the local or Native-species re i n t roduction in the Chicago re g i o n regional ecotype that are not available within their began early in this century with the extirpated white- own land. This creates a market for the seed and tailed deer. In the 1960s the region saw its first prairie plants that are surplus for one organization but use- restorations, most notably the 100-acre project at the ful to another that year. Morton Ar b o r etum. Large r -scale projects have now been ✔ undertaken, such as the 1000-acre Fermilab prairie res t - Donate or exchange the use of facilities. Local conser- oration, where a phased series of projects on old farm- vation organizations and landowners can make use land is creating valuable habitat. In another example of of each other’s facilities or landholdings to build up re i n t roduction, the formerly abundant prairie white the number of available propagules. The collabora- fringed orchid is being returned to appropriate sites. tive efforts create a regional economy of scale and assist individual organizations whose re s o u rces are When planning to rei n t r oduce a native species or a mix of st r etched thin. species, the site manager must consider several issues ✔ Conduct propagation res e a r ch. The task of rec o v e r i n g about the species’ biology and the site, to insure that the over 1500 native plant species is a daunting one. Only re i n t roduction has a chance of succeeding and will not about 350 of these species have been propagated com- harm other conservation or restoration efforts. The fol- me r cially or for restoration. The personnel and facili- lowing items should be considered, especially for sites ties of significant botanical re s e a rch org a n i z a t i o n s that contain established high-quality communities or rare within Chicago Wilderness provide great potential for species or when working with rare or threatened species: re s e a rch into propagating native plants for re s t o r a- • taxonomic status of individuals to be rei n t ro d u c e d tion and could act as a clearinghouse for such work. Such botanical facilities include the Chicago Botanical • historical information about the loss and fate of Ga r den and the Morton Ar b o r etum. Staff from these species populations from the region and from the rei n - facilities can and also do help in preparing re c o v e r y t roduction site, including losses from any pre v i o u s plans for rare species. rei n t r oduction

10 8 Chapter 9. Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring

✔ Work with home gardeners. Volunteers have prov i d e d least as important as eradication and that identifying and their backyards as nurseries for several plant species resolving the cause of the invasion is a critical step in con- identified for inclusion in restoration seeding. tr ol. Some invasive species are of region-wide concern, Ga r deners receive seed or plants to grow in their back- not only causing impacts where they occur, but also pos- ya r ds. The seed from these plants is collected and used ing a threat to parts of the region not yet invaded. In such in restoration proj e c t s . cases it is important for Chicago Wilderness to develop a regional component to planning, res e a r ch, and control . Re s e a r ch topics of importance to enhance the success of Decisions about specific methods for controlling invasive species rei n t r oduction projects include how undergro u n d species depend on several variables including the species biota influence re i n t roduction of flora; autecology and involved, the nature of the invasion, surrounding envi- synecology of little-known species; and propagation and ronmental conditions, res o u r ces available, and the man- dispersal re q u i rements for selected species. Specific agement objectives for the area. In most cases a res e a r ch and recovery needs for priority plant species are combination of control methods works best. Three cate- included in Chapter 7. gories of control are available:

Re f e r ences useful for planning plant species re- i n t ro d u c - Physical control tions include Bowles (1990), Falk et al. (1996), Packard Physical controls include prescribed fire, mowing, and Mutel (1997), and Swink and Wilhelm (1994). restoration of hydrological function, cutting, pulling, g i rdling, and other methods that physically remove or weaken the invasive species, promoting successful com- 9.2.5 Control of invasive plant species petition by natives. Mowing can be effective for the con- The invasion by aggressive species is an international tr ol of some annual and biennial pioneering invaders if conservation issue of the most serious concern, because native plants are available to provide long-term compe- it threatens native biodiversity in regions and pres e r v e s tition. The timing of mowing is important, both to ac r oss the globe. Invasive species are those that become achieve control and to avoid injury to nesting grassland established in natural or semi-natural ecosystems or habi- bi r ds. Hand pulling or removal of seeds can be effe c t i v e tat, are an agent of change, and threaten native biological for small areas, but is labor intensive. Girdling is an d i v e r s i t y. The international Convention on Biological important tool when working in high-quality areas or for Diversity recognizes invasive species as one of the major cr eating habitat for cavity-nesting birds or bats. Sections t h reats to biodiversity and calls upon the governments 9.2.2 and 9.2.3 discuss management with fire and hydro- of the world to take steps to prevent the introduction and logical restoration. Flooding by manipulating water lev- manage the impact of invasive species. The Field els can be effective in some wetland situations where Museum hosted an international symposium addres s i n g some species such as cattails can be drow n e d . this subject in 1997. Locally the goal is to reverse the tren d of degradation caused by invasion and to minimize the Biological control negative alteration of natural communities. Biological control uses the natural enemies and competi- tors of a species to control its population. Predators or Ap p r oximately two dozen invasive plant species are cur- diseases not currently known in the area are used. These rently causing serious and sometimes devastating dam- should be host-specific to avoid negative impacts on non- age to natural areas in our region, reducing native plant t a rget species. The USDA closely regulates such intro- diversity (and thereby associated animal diversity) by ductions. Currently biological controls are being successfully competing for space, water, sunlight, and implemented for purple loosestrife and Eurasian water nutrients. Once established, these plants are difficult to milfoil. Early indications look positive. The use of bacte- eliminate or control. Most of our invasive species are rial sprays to combat gypsy moths is of some concern, i n t roduced from the Old World, but others are native since the bacteria also destroy some native moths and species that have become similarly aggressive with the butterflies. Another form of biological control is the seed- di s r uption of normal ecological processes, such as altering of native plant species that may in time out-compete ation to natural hydrology or suppression of natural fire. invasive species under res t o r ed natural conditions. The spread of these species is recognized as a direct threa t to natural communities and to some endangered species, Chemical control and it is arguably the greatest single threat to the integrity Herbicides are by far the most commonly used pesticide of the flora and fauna of the Great Lakes reg i o n . in management of natural areas. They are often used in combination with physical or biological controls. In most Aplan to control invasive species is an important element cases, they are used on a temporary basis with the objec- in any management plan. In dealing with invasive tive of establishing a balanced condition where the nat- species, two important maxims are that prevention is at

10 9 Biodiversity Recovery Plan ural processes of fire and competition by native plants Native species can become invasive under some condi- will be sufficient to exclude the invasive species. tions. One example is the invasion of prairies and wood- Herbicide is commonly used to control brush when it has lands by gray dogwood, box elder, elm, ash, etc. in the g rown beyond the size controlled by fire and when its absence of regular fire. The control of these species shade has limited the availability of fuel. should be addressed in management plans.

B e f o re any pesticide can be sold in the United States, it In addition to these problem plants, several invasive ani- must be re g i s t e red and approved by the U.S. Enviro n- mal species are causing harm to or threatening biodiver- mental Protection Ag e n c y . How the pesticide may be used sity in the reg i o n . is governed by terms specified in the product label, which has regulatory authority and limits the amounts to be Many of the actions to protect terrestrial and aquatic used and the conditions under which application occurs. communities from the threat of invasive species are dis- State governments test and license individuals seeking to cussed in earlier chapters. apply pesticides commercially or on public land, usually th r ough their departments of agriculture. Land-owning Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s entities may have additional rules about use of pesticides ✔ Continue to develop and share cost-effective prot o c o l s and qualifications of those applying them. for controlling targeted invasive species. ✔ Used according to label req u i r ements, herbicides prov i d e Monitor species locally and regionally to identify and a cost-effective and safe means of controlling invasive anticipate problems before they reach epidemic pro- vegetation, especially in short-term situations where the po r t i o n s . pr oblem has arisen because natural processes have been ✔ Develop region-wide collaborative efforts to contro l di s r upted by human activity. In most such cases, the best invasive species on all public land not already man- long-term solution is to res t o r e the natural processes to aged for biodiversity, including utility and transporta- the maximum extent possible. For example, buckthorn tion rights-of-way can be controlled by prescribed burns, but only after the ✔ l a rge buckthorns and their roots have been contro l l e d Develop and promote native landscaping rec o m m e n - with herbicide. dations for residential and commercial properties that s t rongly discourage the use of potentially invasive It is important for each landowner to establish priorities species in landscaping, working through nurseries for invasive-species control. Of highest importance are: and other outlets. • pr eventing new infestations 9.2.6 Management of problem wildlife • t a rgeting the existing problems that are the fastest gr owing and fastest sprea d i n g The fragmentation of ecosystems in the Chicago Wil d e r - ness region and the growing populations of some wild- • ta r geting species that are the most disruptive to nat- life species (especially deer) present real challenges to the ural ecosystems conservation of biodiversity. Each native plant and ani- • monitoring for new threats and stopping them before mal species is valued as a component of ecosystems. the new species becomes established Some wildlife species, however, are having quantifiable negative impacts upon plant and animal communities The following species are particularly problematic inva- and ecosystems. As discussed in sections 3.3.7 and 5.7.9, sive plants in the Chicago Wilderness region. These many species and natural communities are threatened by species are currently causing biodiversity loss and, if left overabundant animals. Over abundance can destroy eco- unchecked, will cause irreparable damage to our native logical balances, destabilizing relationships within the species and communities. community and making it vulnerable to invasive species. Such species (native or introduced) are problems that Garlic mustard Tea s e l re q u i re careful attention. Some animal species cause Canada thistle Tartarian honeysuckle damage or inconvenience to people, and some are a Purple loosestrife Reed canary grass th r eat to rare species and healthy natural communities. Black locust Cr own vetch Mo n e y w o r t White and yellow sweet clover In aquatic communities, the zebra mussel, round goby, Giant reed grass Glossy buckthorn rusty crawfish, and common carp can drive other species Common buckthorn Multiflora ros e to local extinction. Research on the national or larg e r Leafy spurge Oriental bittersweet regional level is badly needed to find ways to pro t e c t Autumn olive Na r r ow-leaved cattail high-quality ecosystems from these species. The Canada

11 0 Chapter 9. Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring goose, though native, has become so abundant (in the 2. Evaluating possible solutions and techniques for abat- absence of natural predators and through creation of arti- ing the damage and selecting techniques ficial habitat) that it pollutes some waterways and con- 3. Educating the public, agency personnel, and decision flicts with human uses of its favorite local habitat, makers about the problem and the need for the re c- mowed lawns. It is also very destructive of efforts to ommended solution res t o r e wetlands. 4. Obtaining all necessary local, state, and federal permits In terrestrial communities, some native species have 5. Developing a monitoring program to evaluate suc- become overabundant due to the loss of large pred a t o r s cess and making changes as needed (wolves, mountain lions, and human hunters). Thus in many areas, breeding birds are heavily impacted fro m high numbers of smaller predators such as raccoons, Important tools in deer-management programs are mod- skunks, and opossums. els that predict the response of a population to management or lack thereof. With the high degree of scru t i n y A s e v e re threat to many songbird species is nest para- that wildlife-management programs receive, models are sitism by the brown-headed cowbird. The cowbird once essential to the careful choice of a management solution. had only temporary impact, as it followed wandering Apr oject funded by Chicago Wilderness has developed a h e rds of bison. Today it thrives in mowed areas and is simple deer management model, based on data fro m able to invade all parts of most of the region’s fragmented local studies, that helps managers predict trends in a deer fo r ested habitats, permanently thwarting most rep ro d u c - population (Etter 1999). tion by some species. In forest preserves and other public lands in Chicago Thousands of stray and feral cats roam the Chicago area , Wilderness, deer are removed by state-qualified sharp- the suburbs, farmlands, and natural areas. These animals shooters. Work occurs when preserves are closed. have significant impacts on wildlife populations and can Venison is donated to local charities, including the be health risks to other cats, wildlife, and humans. Recent Gr eater Chicago Food Depository. This is the best avail- re s e a rch suggests, for example, that rural cats in able method and is used by agencies nationwide. Wisconsin are killing an estimated 39 million birds per Contraceptives may one day offer an effective form of year (American Bird Conservancy 1998). population control, but no practical programs have been de m o n s t r a t e d . One of the most serious threats to woodland and other communities in the region comes from white-tailed deer. In c r easing the efforts to limit the damage from deer and The continuing development of open lands re m o v e s invasive animals is of great importance to biodiversity available deer habitat, concentrating deer in limited conservation in the region. The following actions would remaining open space. These deer consume a great num- enhance the effectiveness of such prog r a m s . ber of plants and, if unchecked, their consumption leads to the loss of native plants and animals, including endan- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s g e red species. The effects of excessive browsing are • De e r ma n y . (See Crawley (1983) for a summary.) ✔ Until effective alternative methods become avail- Deer populations can grow rapidly in the absence of nat- able, deer should be harvested regularly to limit ural predators and regular management. A study of numbers to levels that support a balance that sus- r a d i o - c o l l a red deer from DuPage and Cook counties tains a full range of native plants and pro v i d e s fr om 1994 through 1998 found that adult deer have high diverse habitat for birds and other animals. annual survival rates (>80%) and few natural pred a t o r s . ✔ Disseminate any new information on alternative Automobiles and trains accounted for more than 60 % of co n t r ol methods to land managers. urban deer mortality (Etter 1998). Populations can more than double annually in the absence of predators if left ✔ Disseminate models that predict responses of deer un c h e c k e d . populations to management to managers and encourage their widespread use. Continue to improv e Deer management in the Chicago region currently occurs existing models based on additional field res e a rc h under approved management plans. A plan for manag- and the incorporation of stochastic functions and ing deer (or other wildlife) involves: spatial components. 1. Identifying the problem and measuring the extent of ✔ As deer populations are managed and reduced in damage caused by the wildlife size, there will be an increased need for more accurate census techniques. Additional res e a r ch should

11 1 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

be carried out to develop more effective census Depending on the pre f e rence of the landholder, a site techniques in general. plan can cover a few acres or thousands. For a large site with multiple habitats and ecological communities, a set ✔ State and federal agencies should provide support of plans for smaller areas may be appropriate. Especially for collecting information from deer harvests that for publicly owned lands, plans need to provide a logi- can provide a basis for future decisions about deer cal basis for conservation and restoration that informs management. This information would include col- and enrolls support of all stakeholders. Such plans lection locations; gender; the number, gender, and should also reflect other plans, such as those for re c o v- age of fetuses; and rep r oductive information. ery of endangered species, greenways, stream re s t o r a- ✔ Public agencies (and private landowners where rel - tion, and water trails. evant) should cooperate more closely to manage deer across borders of managed lands. Between the regional recovery plan and the site plans th e r e may be multiple levels of plans by landowners such • Zebra mussels and the round goby as the counties or states, based on their needs and policies. Plans at all levels must support each other, prov i d - ✔ Support continued res e a r ch on limiting the sprea d ing a clear path to rec o v e r y . of zebra mussels. Promising re s e a rch pursued by Chicago Wilderness members shows that control of The content of management plans varies greatly depend- zebra mussels in river systems would be most effi - ing on the needs of the organizations involved. In addi- ciently focused on particular upriver source sites tion to addressing the questions of where we are now, rather than on the entire river. Illinois Natural wh e r e we are trying to go, and what actions are needed, History Survey (INHS) found that removing zebra other important questions are: what natural pro c e s s e s mussels or constructing barriers to prevent down- have been disrupted, what human activities are causing river dispersal of larvae would have a strong nega- pr oblems, and how will prog r ess be monitored ? tive effect on down-river populations. Plans are underway to construct a dispersal barrier to the The Science and Land Management Teams of Chicago round goby, another invasive species, in the Wilderness are continuing to define management tech- Chicago Ship and Sanitary Canal. niques, suggested content of site plans, and rec o m m e n - ✔ Pr ovide more public outreach and education call- dations for site monitoring. One recommendation can ing for boat owners to take responsibility for clean- be made now. ing boats and boating equipment prior to transporting them from one water body to another. Re c o m m e n d a t i o n ✔ ✔ Pr omote res e a r ch on methods to control zebra mus- Chicago Wilderness members should support reg i o n - sels and round goby. al ecological performance standards, monitoring techniques to measure attainment of the performance • Feral cats st a n d a r ds, and evaluation techniques (such as a reg - ional report card) to evaluate land restoration and ✔ Chicago Wilderness members should lead a public ma n a g e m e n t . education effort explaining the problems caused by feral cats and advocating that people not feed stray cats, support cat licensing laws, support humane removal of stray cats from neighborhoods and 9. 3 wildlife areas, and keep domestic cats indoors. Monitoring and adaptive 9.2.7 Management plans ma n a g e m e n t To guide and coordinate conservation of biodiversity in the Chicago Wilderness region, management plans are 9.3.1 Introduction needed at several levels. At the broadest, regional scale, While land managers use the best available knowledge this Biodiversity Recovery Plan seeks to describe and gain about communities and species, there is always oppor- consensus on existing conditions, goals for rec o v e r y , and tunity and need to improve management techniques and the major steps needed to reach the goals. At the other end to learn more about ecosystems. Management and mon- of the geographic scale, each managed site should also itoring need to be organized so that they help evaluate have a site plan that describes its current condition, the effectiveness of current techniques, and management de s i r ed conditions, and the steps needed to attain them. needs re s e a rch projects that answer questions re l e v a n t

11 2 Chapter 9. Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring to management. Research, monitoring, and inventory are • Ecological inventory is a snapshot of conditions at one distinct activities, yet they must be linked to make their time (e.g., species richness, population distribution, results immediately useful to conservation practitioners. pattern of vegetation on the landscape) that estab- Management within an experimental framework, mak- lishes a baseline against which to measure change ing use of results in future management decisions, is over time. re f e r red to as adaptive management. Developing and implementing a regional monitoring program and pur- Conservation design focuses our efforts in monitoring, suing a prioritized res e a r ch agenda will provide signifi- res e a r ch, and inventory so that they contribute directly to cant contributions to conservation of biodiversity. conservation action. Each of these three activities incorporates human elements into the larger context of Central to the adaptive approach proposed here is multi- regional biodiversity, with the ultimate goal of improv i n g scale ecological monitoring, a process for measuring quality of life. pro g r ess toward goals for conservation and ecologically sensitive development. Chicago Wilderness members are We approach conservation design through a series of designing a region-wide monitoring program that will questions that allow us to identify biological (including detect change in pattern and process at three levels: (1) human) values, threats to these values, and adaptive the landscape, (2) natural and human communities, and action to protect these values from these threats. The (3) species. At every stage of design and implementa- questions include: tion, this monitoring program will involve a broad spec- t rum of stakeholders in the region’s ecological health: • What is the geographic scope of our conservation p rofessional scientists, citizen scientists, volunteers, eff o r t s ? schools, land managers, local businesses, community- • How does this site work (at scales ranging from indi- based organizations, and urban planners, among others. vidual preserves to the whole reg i o n ) ?

Much ecological monitoring is already underway in the • What do we want to protect or enhance within this region. Chapter 11 describes many of these on-going si t e ? ef forts under the roles of county and state agencies and • What do we want these targets to look like in x years? volunteers. Now is the time to unify and strategically add to these efforts, so that their results can keep pace with • What could prevent us from achieving this vision for rapid region-wide change. Critical for this effort will be our targe t s ? a monitoring framework that allows integration acros s • What should we accomplish to offset these threats to space and time, as well as across organizations, and that specific targe t s ? st r engthens and streamlines the participation of diverse contributors. Here we propose a flexible thought proc e s s • What will we do to reach these goals and objectives? for designing such a framework, to be tested among the complexities of this metropolitan ecosystem. The work to produce this recovery plan has provided initial answers for several of these questions. Chapters 4 and 6 identify our initial conservation targets to answer 9.3.2 Adaptive management and the third question. Chapters 4 and 5 offer vision state- conservation design ments to answer the fourth question. Immediate next steps are to complete the conservation design and to Conservation design is a process for deriving conserva- begin implementing an integrated program of inventory, tion goals and strategies directly from assessment of bio- monitoring, and res e a rc h . logical values and the threats to those values. Al t h o u g h conservation design is site-based, the "site" can scale from One result of this process will be the identification of con- a single natural area to an entire region. A re g i o n - w i d e servation and development strategies. These become the ecological monitoring program is just one outcome of the experimental treatments of adaptive management. conservation design process. Others are a program of sci- Ad d r essing the most severe threats may req u i r e a mix- entific res e a r ch and an agenda for ecological inventory. tu r e of innovative strategies drawn from science, policy, We consider monitoring, res e a r ch, and inventory distinct st e w a r dship, and institution building. Once a strategy is but closely rel a t e d : in place, conservation and development actions define • Ecological monitoring is an iterative process for mea- the schedule, people, and funds necessary to implement suring prog r ess toward conservation goals. it. Ongoing work will link strategies to goals; ultimately, our aim is to address human and natural communities • Ecological re s e a rch is a systematic approach of pos- si m u l t a n e o u s l y . Like the rest of the plan, these strategies ing and answering questions to reveal cause-and- a re evolutionary: we will learn both from our mistakes ef fect rel a t i o n s h i p s . and from our successes.

11 3 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

9.3.3 The link between management the health of an entire ecosystem. More useful will be and monitoring suites of indicators, perhaps including composite variables that are indices of quality or integrity. Ecological monitoring is the mechanism regulating the loop between our management goals (including goals for Set thresholds restoration) and our strategies for conservation and A th re s h o l d is a value of an indicator that, when cros s e d , development. How can we make that mechanism both sends up a “red flag” calling for a management res p o n s e . c o n c rete and adaptive? In Chicago Wilderness, we are The response might be a policy change in a human com- testing an approach to monitoring design that builds on munity as well as a change in the practice of ecological the process of conservation design. As in conservation s t e w a rdship of a natural community.) This thre s h o l d design, our emphasis is on action. may be tied to status (e.g., “respond if the population of species A declines to 500 individuals”) or to trend (e.g., Ecological surveillance is the measurement of long-term “ respond if the population of species A is declining by tr ends in the ecological condition of species and commu- 10 individuals per month”). Like establishing a vision nities. Though not goal- or action-oriented, surveillance for conservation or development targets, deciding on can complement ecological monitoring by pro v i d i n g ap p r opriate thresholds involves many uncertainties, and additional spatial and temporal context. hence discomforts, for the decision-makers. In Chicago Wilderness, we will rely on a combination of targ e t e d Our approach to monitoring design is as follows: res e a r ch and the extensive experience of land managers to set and refine these thres h o l d s . Choose indicators An in d i c a t o r is a variable that measures change toward a goal/objective or in completing a strategy/action. Plan options for management responses Outcome indicators show whether we are reaching our Knowing wh e n to intervene does not imply that we know th re a t - r elated management goals and objectives; pe r f o r - h o w to intervene. Red flags may go up quickly, and we mance indicators show whether we actually have imple- must be prep a r ed to act. Given the uncertainties inher- mented the strategies and actions that we devised to ent in systems as complex as ecosystems, we are unlikely accomplish these goals. Although in a few cases we may to be successful in specifying a fixed management re s- find a single variable that is sufficient to answer our ques- ponse when a particular threshold is crossed. Instead, we tions about prog r ess for a particular goal or strategy, usu- must plan a range of options. For the most part, we will ally we will use multiple indicators that draw fro m d i rect our responses toward sources of threats, rather several levels of organization and that address some com- than the stresses associated with them. Once again, the bination of composition, struc t u r e, and function. The key wealth of knowledge in Chicago Wilderness institutions is to find the smallest set of indicators that will give us and individuals will supply options for management confidence in our conclusions. Chicago Wilderness mem- intervention. Research and cycles of monitoring will bers are interviewing land managers, planners, and sci- modify these options as time goes on. entists to reveal potential monitoring indicators for the landscape, human and natural communities, and species. Design sampling protocols Later we will determine the optimal subset of these pos- Once we have laid out monitoring indicators, thres h o l d s , sible indicators related to our goals and strategies. We will and responses, we will focus on sampling design, includ- rank these indicators by analyzing threats and will aggre- ing intensity of monitoring and methods of data collec- gate them across geographic scales. Even if we find some tion. Our methods must be not only scientifically sound indicators that we can use successfully at all sites in the but also as simple and cost-effective as possible. In our region, we still will use many site-specific indicators. interviews of land managers, planners, and scientists, we will use current and past monitoring methods as guides We emphasize that indicators are variables, not org a n- for the future. In addition, a workshop will pro v i d e isms. We may use the population size of thre a t e n e d intensive training in sampling design, as well as prog r a m prairie species A, for example, as an indicator of prog re s s design, specifically tailored to the needs of the reg i o n . to w a r d a goal of reestablishing viability for species A. If we have good evidence that threatened species B or Implement the monitoring program prairie species C shares species A’s conservation needs, The monitoring program for Chicago Wilderness is we may feel confident in using A’s population size as a al r eady in prog r ess. Projects range from landscape-level p roxy in measuring pro g ress toward our goals and m e a s u res of change in vegetation cover to measures of strategies for B and C. Very rarel y , if ever, will we find an change in the populations of individual species in par- indicator related to a single taxon that will “speak for” ticular preserves. Through the process of monitoring

11 4 Chapter 9. Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring design described above, we will consolidate, adapt, and baseline of human ecological data, as well; we are drawing unify this program so that stewards can benefit from the on existing databases of real-estate trends in Chicago- landscape-level results and the region can benefit from ar ea neighborhoods and are exploring the possibility of the data of individual conservation areas. Participation incorporating other social and economic information. by the broad range of actors in Chicago Wilderness will be central to success. 9.3.6 Information management for monitoring 9.3.4 The link between research and monitoring Th r ough the design process outlined here, we will work to w a r d a regional framework for conservation science in To have confidence in monitoring results, we must have which monitoring, res e a r ch, and inventory interlock and confidence in at least two kinds of linkages: between support one another. Holding this framework together so u r ce of threat and the stress that it creates on a targe t , will be a system of information management that allows and between a conservation or development strategy and us to scale across geography and across levels of orga n i - the goal that we hope to achieve thereb y . Through con- zation. Chicago Wilderness has begun to develop an elec- centrating res e a r ch effort on the linkages between threa t s t ronic catalogue of geo-re f e renced data sets held by and the highest-priority targets, and between strategies member institutions. One of our greatest challenges will and the highest-priority goals, we can ensure that invest- be to integrate data for human and natural elements ment maximizes conservation impact. ac r oss the entire region. One of our greatest strengths is a commitment to participation by a complete cross sec- As with monitoring, re s e a rch at many levels of org a n i- tion of stakeholders in information management. Partic- zation is flourishing throughout Chicago Wilderness. The ipatory data management not only strengthens our Recovery Plan outlines overall res e a r ch needs: the gaps scientific framework but also fosters the dedication of the between what we now know and what we need to know region’s human communities to conservation and eco- to promote the quality of human and natural communi- logically sensitive development. ties. Our next step will be to link these needs for res e a rc h mo r e specifically to the questions given in section 9.3.2. 9.3.7 Promoting management- related research 9.3.5 The link between inventory and monitoring The complexity of ecosystems and ecosystem function is gr eater than we are capable of imagining. This becomes Even in Chicago Wilderness, a landscape with a long his- mo r e apparent when we attempt the tasks of reb u i l d i n g tory of scientific study, we still lack inventories of some and restoring natural communities. Having a complete taxa and natural communities, both for particular con- understanding of these systems is not necessary to begin servation areas and for the region as a whole. As we pr eserving them, but improved knowledge is needed to design monitoring programs, biological and socioeco- support long-term preservation and restoration of all nomic inventory becomes critical for measuring change. species and communities and to improve effi c i e n c y . If we How can we make these assessments cost-effective, as begin to work while there are sufficient species and frag- well as connect them tightly to our goals and strategies ments of habitat left, under intelligent management and for conservation and development? with restoration of natural processes, the fabric of these natural communities may mend itself. Nonetheless con- We are experimenting with several nontraditional tinued res e a r ch is necessary to better guide res t o r a t i o n . a p p roaches to ecological inventory. Using satellite i m a g e r y, aerial photography, and Geographic Inform- Traditional science has enumerated and described ation Systems (GIS), we are conducting inventories at the species and communities. Tod a y , as management of our landscape level, such as vegetation maps and quantitative natural re s o u rces becomes more important, scientific analyses of cover type. As we couple this remote sensing res e a r ch is critical in guiding and in determining the suc- with ground truthing and rep r esentative assessment of cess and direction of these management efforts. To rea c h species and communities within cover types, we increa s e our conservation goals, a better understanding is needed our confidence in the use of these landscape units as sur- of the presettlement landscape conditions and proc e s s e s , rogates for units of biodiversity at smaller scales. We also of current landscape condition and processes, of the best ar e evaluating the effectiveness of rapid assessment meth- techniques to improve ecological health, and of req u i r e- od s for taxa that give clues to the current condition of nat- ments for sustaining biodiversity over the long term. ural lands and waters. We recognize the need for a Scientists and land managers in the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s

11 5 Biodiversity Recovery Plan region should work together to compile a prioritized list Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s of re s e a rch needs and to support re s e a rch projects that ✔ Compile a prioritized list of res e a r ch needs and sup- will lead to this improved knowledge. port targeted res e a r ch projects with internal and external grants. The Chicago Wilderness consortium has already brou g h t ✔ together scientists, restorationists, and policy makers to Set up a central source of information for students and focus attention on important res e a r ch questions and gaps pr ofessors about priority res e a r ch needs. in information. Now, an atmosphere needs to be fostered ✔ Pr omote the Chicago Wilderness region as a res e a rc h that will promote the investigation of these questions. A station. This would help students to identify appro- first step is to build better links between land managers priate sites and experts, as well as to receive permits. and academia and to promote more re s e a rch pro j e c t s ✔ within the reg i o n . Compile a thorough literature review of pre v i o u s studies reg a r ding management of natural communi- Existing scientific knowledge about regional natural ties and conservation of biodiversity relevant to effo r t s ar eas needs to be published and integrated. Integration of in the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n . this knowledge with programs to develop monitoring pr otocols, to conduct further inventories, and to addres s additional res e a r ch needs will help to ensure pres e r v a - tion of much of the biodiversity of the reg i o n .

11 6 Chapter 10 Education and Co m m u n i c a t i o n

In garnering support for biodiversity rec o v e r y , however, 10 . 1 educators and communicators face many challenges, The role of communication beginning with the term “biodiversity” itself. Ac c o rd i n g to a 1996 poll, only two out of ten Americans had heard of and environmental education the term “biological diversity.” Yet, when the concept was explained, 87% indicated that “maintaining biodiversity was important to them” (Belden and Russonello 10.1.1 Background 1996). In order to strengthen and broaden public aware- Public awareness and support are inherent elements in ness, conservation communicators need to not only the recovery of this region’s biodiversity. As we head into define but also to make biodiversity real and to convey its the next century, we are faced with a variety of threats to connection to our own quality of life. the unparalleled natural wealth of the Chicago re g i o n . The decisions to address those threats will be made by a While it will take time for the word and the concepts of variety of groups, including elected officials and public biodiversity to enter the public vocabulary and con- landowners, as well as by individuals. Individuals not sciousness, concerned organizations must act with a only drive the larger decisions with their votes but also sense of urge n c y . As earlier chapters indicate, the reg i o n ’ s make daily decisions affecting the health of our natural remaining natural communities and habitats urg e n t l y ecosystems, ranging from home building to checking need to be protected and res t o r ed in landscapes of suffi - their boats for zebra mussels before transportation. cient size and quality to protect biodiversity. In order to Individuals are also the past, present, and future of the inform the public, organizations must, theref o r e, employ region’s renowned volunteer stewardship eff o r t s . short-term communication strategies while building Indeed, the future of our native landscapes depends lo n g e r -term educational approa c h e s . upon the support and involvement of our citizenry. By definition, environmental education is long term in F o r t u n a t e l y, most Americans consider enviro n m e n t a l scope and takes significant investment in res o u r ces and p rotection a priority, and there is widespread concern time, but it produces powerful results. Enviro n m e n t a l about air and water pollution, destruction of tropical rain education is characterized as a process addressing the f o rests, and toxic waste contamination (Gallup News knowledge, awareness, attitudes, skills, and participation Service 1999). While not ranked as highly, habitat lost to of a target audience. The following specific objectives, as development also elicits broad concern (Belden and outlined by UNESCO in 1978, have been adopted by the Russonello 1996). On a local level, people have a stron g Chicago Wilderness Education and Communication af finity for our parks and forest preserves, and they have Tea m : demonstrated solid support for increased land acquisi- • Fostering clear a w a re n e s s of, and concern about, tion. Conservationists, then, have a base upon which to economic, social, political, and ecological interde - build public support, a base that includes appre c i a t i o n pendence in urban and rural area s for the beauty of nature, a sense of responsibility to future generations, and the desire for a healthy environ m e n t . • Helping social groups and individuals gain a variety of ex p e r i e n c e s in and acquire a basic un d e r s t a n d - in g of the environment and its associated prob l e m s

11 7 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

• Helping social groups and individuals acquire a set 10.1.2 Communication opportunities of values and feelings of c o n c e r n for the enviro n- ment and the motivation for actively participating T h rough the work of professionals and forums in in environmental improvement and prot e c t i o n market res e a r ch, much has been learned about the communications challenges for Chicago Wilderness. The • Helping social groups and individuals acquire the Consultative Group on Biodiversity initiated the Biodiv- s k i l l s for identifying and solving enviro n m e n t a l ersity Project in 1995 to assess public opinion on biodi- pro b l e m s ve r s i t y , develop collaborative strategies to increase public • P roviding social groups and individuals with the aw a r eness and engagement, and lay the groundwork to opportunity to be actively i n v o l v e d at all levels implement those strategies. The Biodiversity Pro j e c t in working toward resolution of enviro n m e n t a l (1998) identifies six objectives to guide conservationists pro b l e m s to w a r d fostering public support: 1. Help the public recognize biodiversity in its everyday These objectives help guide the development of an envi- ex p e r i e n c e . ronmentally literate citizenry, capable of making well- informed decisions about protecting local biodiversity. 2. Help the public understand its dependence on nature. While short-term communications strategies can raise 3. Raise fundamental ecological literacy. aw a r eness and get the public involved at an entry level, both formal and nonformal programs in biodiversity 4. Help the public understand the specific human education are needed to sustain that interest and develop impacts on biodiversity. the deeper understanding that will lead to the active public support req u i r ed to ensure biodiversity rec o v e r y .

A new environmental education initiative in northwest Indiana

he Indiana Dunes Environmental Learning Center provides a new res o u r ce for biodiversity education for the entire Chicago Wil d e r ness region. Launched in October 1998, the Learning Center is a not-for-p r ofit residential facility Tdeveloped in partnership with the USDI National Park Service. Located in Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, the pr oject is receiving widespread support from area businesses and industry.

The new facility, located on the site of an old summer camp, has overnight capacity for eighty people in ten cabins, with plans to triple the capacity through expansion. One-fourth of the capacity of the Learning Center is res e r ved for classes that need financial assistance to attend, supported by funding from diverse sources. The primary service area is considered to be 1 a 90-mile radius, or a 1 ⁄2 hour drive, from its location near Chesterton in Porter County.

The initial program for 4th-6th grade classes aims to provide understanding of ecological principles and the importance of biodiversity through hands-on experience in the outdoors. Teachers and administrators are enthusiastic about how the cu r riculum helps them meet new state science curriculum req u i r ements. There are also art, language arts and social science elements. A high school program that involves students in ecological monitoring and stewardship will be expanded in the 1999-2000 school year.

The Learning Center has been successful in attracting classes from diverse ethnic and racial communities. This result also reflects the diverse membership and the high level of cooperation with local environmental organizations such as the Grand Calumet Task Force and the Minority Health Coalition of Michigan City. The Learning Center has also organized an En v i r onmental Education Network of agencies and private groups that is providing the means for outreach to educators and the general public. In May 1999, for example, twenty agencies participated in a res o u r ce fair for teachers, with a second such event scheduled for early in the 1999-2000 school year. Weekend and summer programs are also provided for adults and special groups including teachers and children. The Learning Center is also made available to other groups, provided at least 25% of their program schedule is devoted to environmental issues.

11 8 Chapter 10. Education and Communication

5. Help the public understand its capability to act to con- reach and implementation of biodiversity education has serve biodiversity. ce n t e r ed on in-school programs. There exists a need for the same type of documentation with out-of-school pro- 6. Motivate the public to act to conserve biodiversity. grams and life long learning effo r t s . The conservation agencies and organizations of the Biodiversity education does not appear to play a major Chicago region, in concert with our highly visible botanic role in the region’s public schools. Surveys from two g a rdens, zoos, and museums, have the opportunity to states in the Chicago Wilderness region (Sebasto-Smith realize these objectives and, working together, to eff e c t and Small 1997, Lane et al. 1994) show that, although positive change. They must integrate current efforts in teachers want to integrate environmental education into communication, marketing, and education and dire c t the curriculum, a number of barriers exist. Ac c o r ding to them toward these objectives. Local organizations and the surveys, 90% of Illinois teachers and 94% of agencies involved with conserving biodiversity need to Wisconsin teachers “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that it prioritize their efforts and devote more res o u r ces to com- is important to integrate environmental concepts into municating about local restoration efforts. They can then their subject or grade level. In addition, 87% of Illinois cr eate comprehensive campaigns and programs that con- teachers and 90% of Wisconsin teachers “agreed” or nect biodiversity conservation to core values that people “ s t rongly agreed” with the statement “a goal of my a l ready hold, applying the knowledge gained thro u g h teaching is to increase students’ level of environ m e n t a l public-opinion res e a r ch and thorough evaluation of the res p o n s i b i l i t y .” However, 65% of Illinois teachers rep o r t - ef fectiveness of various effo r t s . ed they were not infusing environmental education into their curriculum and 76% of Wisconsin teachers spend People get the information that forms their attitudes and less than 15% of their overall teaching time infusing envi- behaviors from a wide range of sources beyond the com- ronmental concepts. munication and education programs of conservation or ganizations. Schools, the media, and community lead- Why do teachers overwhelmingly say that environ m e n - ers contributing in important ways to the values held by tal education is important but dedicate less than an hour the public. They also interpret conservation issues for per week to the topic? The top five reasons given by the public. Outreach and education to these audiences is teachers in the two states are listed below: c rucial to developing “third-party” endorsements and af firmation of actions such as ecological res t o r a t i o n . Il l i n o i s : 1. Not enough res o u rc e s / f u n d i n g The most successful marketing strategies are those that 2. Not enough preparation time catapult issues into popular culture. Smokey the Bear is 3. Not enough knowledge or backgrou n d a prime example in the conservation arena. Another is 4. Not enough class time the attention drawn to the devastation of tropical rain 5. Other concepts more important fo r ests, which has resulted in a remarkably high level of Wis c o n s i n : aw a r eness for an issue occurring thousands of miles from our shores. If conservation communicators can employ 1. Concepts not related to subject matter these strategies to the local situation, they have the 2. Not enough knowledge or backgrou n d advantage of using issues that have a much more direc t 3. Not enough class time impact on our citizens’ quality of life. By working 4. Ot h e r t o g e t h e r, utilizing market re s e a rch, devoting more 5. Not enough preparation time res o u r ces, and adopting innovative approaches, we can engage the public and realize the goals of this plan. It is ironic that there are such similarities between the findings in both states, since there are major diffe r ences in how the two states mandate the integration of environ - 10.1.3 The current state of environmental education. Wisconsin has mandated 1) periodic mental education in schools in the assessment of the environmental literacy of its teachers and students, 2) pre-service training in enviro n m e n t a l Chicago Wilderness region education for teachers, and 3) consideration of environ - Since 1995, the Chicago Wilderness Education and mental education concepts in the development, imple- Communication Team has been working to identify and mentation, and evaluation of school-district curriculum resolve issues of biodiversity education specific to the plans. In contrast, Illinois has a relatively ambiguous and region. They have assessed and addressed the state of un e n f o r ced mandate for environmental education in its c u r rent biodiversity education efforts in a number of schools. While these surveys did not cover the status of ar eas. Information from this work is summarized below. biodiversity education in Indiana, the third state in the To date, the majority of re s e a rch about the collective Chicago Wilderness region, it is noteworthy that a posi-

11 9 Biodiversity Recovery Plan tion dedicated to integrating environmental education • uncertainties in knowing how to engage Hispanic and at the state level was recently left unfunded. In addition, non-white audiences the Indiana Department of Education currently has no • d i fficulties in adapting traditional strategies to non- mandated environmental education component for the formal environments within these communities K–12 curriculum. Further information on the importance of culture in shap- 10.1.4 Cultural diversity ing attitudes toward the natural environment can be and biodiversity gleaned from a 1998 survey of leaders and a cros s - s e c t i o n of citizens in two sample areas in the region, the Uptown R e s e a rch shows that, in addition to children, other n e i g h b o rhood of Chicago and the Butterfield Cre e k important audiences including minorities, low-income watershed in southern Cook County. The survey showed populations, and senior citizens are generally being left that one’s age, economic status, and place of residence are out of environmental education (U.S. Enviro n m e n t a l associated with attitudes about the environment. For Pr otection Agency 1996). An illustration of this void is the example, suburban environmental concerns included finding by Belden and Russonello (1996) that two in ten o v e r-development and flooding, while inner-city con- Americans said they had heard of “biodiversity.” These cerns included air pollution, poor water quality, litter, respondents were most likely to be men, upper-i n c o m e , asthma and lead poisoning (Babcock 1998). college-educated, and professionals. However, the same survey reveals the potential for building support among The survey also showed that open space evoked power- b roader audiences. In describing who is most likely ful images of home and cultural history for immigrants believe “maintaining biodiversity is very important,” as well as native residents. City parks are often used as Belden and Russonello state, “Demographically, they gathering places for ethnic communities, not to celebrate have lower incomes, live in cities, and are found in higher na t u r e per se, but to enable these groups to share in their pr oportions among African Americans and Hispanics.” common language and culture. Other findings indicated that fishing and gardening were viewed diff e rently by A summary of 1990 census data for the portion of di ff e r ent groups. Motivations for these activities ranged Chicago Wilderness in northeastern Illinois contains the fr om a desire to follow cultural traditions to simple eco- following. As of that year, 12% of residents were born out- nomic necessity. A key finding for conservationists to side the United States. In that same year, 20% of all house- consider was the respondents’ low level of familiarity holds spoke a language at home other than, or in addition with the natural res o u r ces found in the Chicago reg i o n , to, English. Perhaps a better measure of the human diver- especially among immigrant communities. sity in the region are the proportions of Hispanics (12%), non-Hispanic blacks (19%), and non-Hispanic whites In a study of nonformal outreach programs, Sayre et al. (69%) living in northeastern Illinois in that year. Forec a s t s (1997) interviewed Chicago residents to determine what p re p a red by the Northeastern Illinois Planning types of programming they might find interesting and Commission indicate the population of this same are a desirable, and why they may not be participating in exist- will be 22% Hispanic, 23% non-Hispanic black, and 55% ing programs. This study found that many of the institu- non-Hispanic white in the year 2020. As our population tions that are charged with educating the public about gr ows more racially and ethnically diverse over the com- the environment are not viewed as an educational ing decades, the long-term success of Chicago Wil d e r n e s s res o u r ce by certain population segments. Further, though will be determined in part by its ability to attract the sup- a myriad of good programs is available, people inter- port of all segments of the population. viewed were not aware of them. Most important, how- ev e r , was the finding that under-served communities are These numbers are particularly noteworthy because receptive to environmental outreach efforts, if awaren e s s today the large majority of members of most enviro n- of diverse communities is enhanced and input collected mental organizations are non-Hispanic whites. A co m b i - fr om them. nation of factors may account for this disparity, a c i rcumstance that local environmental org a n i z a t i o n s need to fully understand if their messages are to re a c h 10.1.5 Tools for communicating and all segments of the population. A recent report to teaching about biodiversity Co n g r ess by the U.S. Environmental Protection Ag e n c y Advisory Council (1996) offers several reasons for the While evaluating the current state of biodiversity educa- fa i l u r e to reach diverse audiences, including: tion in the Chicago region, Chicago Wilderness has also begun to create the tools needed to improve both the • lack of materials, commitment and, org a n i z a t i o n a l scope and methods of communication and education su p p o r t e fforts. Some of these tools, which are described in

12 0 Chapter 10. Education and Communication

“12 natural wonders of the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s ” A collaborative campaign to foster a connection to Chicago region natural area s

rom April 1998-May 1999, Chicago Wil d e r ness conducted a communications campaign called “12 Natural Wonders of the Chicago Wil d e r ness.” Its aim was to increase awareness of natural areas throughout the reg i o n , Fth r ough an integrated effo r t centered around the designation of 12 spectacular yet accessible pres e r ves. The elements of the campaign included both broad-based and targeted communications. At the core was the nature walks program, a ye a r -long series of 29 guided walks. Led by skilled interpreters from the collaborating partners, the walks involved more than 500 people over the course of the campaign.

Materials produced for the campaign included the Natural Wonders pres e r ve guide, (6,000 distributed), poster (4,000) and 1999 calendar (5,000). Designed to introduce biodiversity issues beyond the traditional conservation audiences, the materials featured spectacular vistas, colorful plants and animals, and clear messages about biodiversity and habitat res t o r a - tion. Media coverage provided not only continued awareness, but also encouraged a sense of community pride for those designated locations (more than forty print and electronic features were garne r ed). Another element of the campaign was the Media Workshop in December 1998, where journalists were introduced to a multitude of biodiversity issues. Direct outrea c h to 15 community groups surrounding the pres e r ves included slide presentations and participation in events that reached more than 450 people. In addition, the Chicagoland Environmental Network launched a database of people responding to the campaign for notice of future events and volunteer opportunities. Combined with additional sources, this provides Chicago Wil d e r ness with nearly 4,000 individuals as a base for building greater awareness and involvement.

The formal evaluation of the campaign (Fores t e r , 1999) included mail and phone surveys with the various groups rea c h e d th r ough the campaign. This data rev e a l e d :

Fr om nature walk par ti c i p a n t s :

• Nearly 40% of survey respondents have ret u r ned to the Natural Wonder pres e r ve they visited since their walk. • As a result of reading the Natural Wonders broc h u r e, 32% of respondents have visited other Natural Wonders described there. Another 66% plan to visit another site, while only 2% were unsure they would. • The majority of nature walk respondents heard about the walks through media coverage. • The most noted positive aspect of their walk was the walk leader’s knowledge (each walk had a theme relating to restoration and management).

Fr om outreach audiences:

• While a majority of the participants were non-Hispanic white (88%) the percentage of other racial and ethnic gr oups was higher here than that of the nature walks res p o n d e n t s . • Most participants heard about the presentations and other outreach activities through friends or other people. • The overwhelming majority felt that the programs increased their knowledge about “biodiversity in the Chicago region” (98%) and “habitat restoration in the Chicago region” (96%). • 20% of respondents rep o r ted they would be interested in volunteering to conserve natural area s .

Fr om media workshop participants and non-attending media who requested workshop packets:

• 90% of survey respondents have since used information learned in the workshop. • 100% of respondents are interested in attending future media workshops. • 80% felt that media coverage of conservation issues was inadequate, although half thought such coverage has been increa s i n g .

12 1 Biodiversity Recovery Plan gr eater detail in Appendix 7, are: 10 . 2 For Educators: • Biodiversity Kit Goals and actions for • Chicago Tr i b u n e Educational Services supplement, biodiversity education and “Chicagoland Ecosystem” communication • Chicago Wilderness Atlas Education Package

For Individuals, Agencies, Organizations: 10.2.1 Introduction • Chicago Wilderness: An Atlas of Biodiversity The overall goals for biodiversity education for Chicago • Chicago WILDERNESS Ma g a z i n e Wilderness are to improve the knowledge, aware n e s s , attitudes, skills, and participation of diverse stakeholders • Chicago Wilderness “Portable Resources” (video, slide in the recovery process. This effort req u i r es actions that sh o w , display) carry audiences through each level, culminating in active • Chicagoland Environmental Network (CEN) participation. The target audiences are diverse, so actions ta i l o r ed to each are req u i re d . • Chicago Wilderness Web Site at www.c h i w i l d . o r g Some recommendations for biodiversity rec o v e r y , how- A p reliminary assessment of the effectiveness of these ev e r , cannot wait until educational goals are met. Signifi- tools reveals varied awareness of the materials and a cant current challenges req u i r e immediate strategies to wide-range of implementation strategies. Specific needs in c r ease public awareness and understanding. The per- and solutions are addressed in sections 10.1.6 and 10.2. ception of ecological restoration, in particular, re q u i re s ur gent attention. While most local citizens agree with the idea of restoration, there is a lack of understanding of the 10.1.6 Biodiversity education needs in techniques req u i r ed (Barro and Bright 1998). Commun- the Chicago Wilderness region ication strategies need to address these perce p t i o n s — a n d Since its inception, the Chicago Wilderness Education mi s p e r ceptions—about restoration techniques. and Communication Team has used a matrix to determine specific needs for education about biodiversity in Agencies and organizations must, theref o r e, complement the Chicago Wilderness region. The matrix plots audi- their long-term approaches to environmental education ences versus the five essential components of education with actions aimed at achieving more focused, short- (knowledge, skills, awareness, attitude and participa- term biodiversity communication goals. The following tion). Existing environmental education pro g r a m s sections outline both long-term education goals and appear in the matrix cells according to the objectives they short-term communication goals. meet. Several conclusions about programming, which parallel re s e a rch findings in environmental education, 10.2.2 Long-term education goals have been drawn from the matrix: • Goal 1: Ensure that every student graduating from a • Although there are many programs aimed at school- school system in the Chicago Wilderness region is age children, the approach is by no means compre- “b i o d i v e r s i t y - l i t e r a t e . ” hensive and many students are not being rea c h e d . The most efficient way to educate the next generation • Most programs or res o u r ces available for biodiversity about biodiversity issues is to fully integrate the subject education for school-age children lack at least one of into the existing public and private school systems. the components of attitude, skill and participation Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s essential to quality education. ✔ Develop a commonly held definition of “biodiver- • Biodiversity topics pertaining to the Chicago re g i o n sity literacy”—what knowledge, skills, attitudes, do not appear to be emphasized at local colleges and and experience are essential to help people make un i v e r s i t i e s . informed decisions and participate in biodiversity • Although tools exist for biodiversity education, they pro t e c t i o n . a re not being used effectively for community-based ✔ In c r ease the visibility of biodiversity concepts and education and are not reaching diverse audiences. issues in state education standards to encourage teachers to integrate biodiversity content into other pro g r a m s .

12 2 Chapter 10. Education and Communication

✔ Give school staff the incentive to devote pre c i o u s ✔ P romote practicum opportunities by linking uni- in s t r uctional time to biodiversity topics by demon- versities with professional land managers in the strating to teachers how using biodiversity as a uni- reg i o n . fying theme could improve test scores . ✔ Support state plans that integrate enviro n m e n t a l • Goal 4: Expand and improve the use of existing tools education into schools. In particular, work to sup- for biodiversity education, and create new tools as port the passage of the Environmental Education ne e d e d . Literacy of Illinois Master Plan. A number of recent formal studies and informal surveys have highlighted the need for better ways of ✔ Develop “best practices” for teacher training, such developing and disseminating tools for biodiversity as the package being produced for the Mighty education. Steps to address this challenge are listed Acorns youth stewardship education prog r a m . be l o w . Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s • Goal 2: Expand the scope of existing and future programs in biodiversity education to include com- ✔ Work toward the better distribution of existing ponents for attitudes, skills, and participation in cur- tools by forming a distribution center and investing ricular design. in publicity about the center. One of the greatest challenges in biodiversity educa- ✔ Assess the effectiveness of tools for reaching their tion is getting students involved in the process of con- ta r get audiences. servation. To achieve this, programs need to include components for attitude, skills, and participation. ✔ C reate new tools for groups starting community- based, non-school projects in biodiversity educa- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s tion. For example, create a biodiversity pro g r a m ✔ Determine the effectiveness of existing biodiver- primer with a list of potential partners. sity education programs for achieving “biodiver- ✔ Pr oduce tools and materials in multiple languages. sity literacy,” and use successful programs as mo d e l s . • Goal 5: Increase the number of communities being ✔ Foster professional development for orga n i z a t i o n s reached with non-school-based programs in biodi- inaugurating biodiversity education, and increa s e versity education. the number of pre-service and in-service opportu- As described in Section 10.1.4, it is imperative that we nities for teachers to strengthen their qualifications pr ovide services for biodiversity education to cultures to teach biodiversity. and communities throughout the Chicago Wil d e r n e s s region. Reaching this wide range of people req u i re s • Goal 3: Make biodiversity in Chicago Wilderness a the variety of actions listed below. component of the degree programs of local colleges Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s and universities. Although students at many local institutions of higher ✔ Foster neighborhood- and community-based pro- education are peripherally exposed to the biodiversity grams aimed at improving the environment and of the region through courses that visit natural sites, biodiversity locally to unify diff e rent cultural t h e re are few efforts to make the region’s unique gr oups for concerted community action. res o u r ces a focus of study. Because of this, we are los- ✔ Identify specific leaders in cultural and ethnic coming an excellent opportunity to inform our most edu- munities who can inform educators and commu- cated citizens. nicators and serve as partners for collaborative Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s pro g r a m s . ✔ Survey existing course selections at local universi- ✔ C reate a diverse base of spokespeople, including ties. Identify courses that effectively and thor- p rofessionals and volunteers, who can serve as oughly communicate key information about local “ambassadors” for biodiversity to a wider variety biodiversity and work to increase their visibility. of communities. ✔ Develop a degree program in restoration ecology ✔ Develop collaborations between Chicago Wi l d e r- at a local university with an accompanying field ness member organizations and cultural, ethnic, st a t i o n . and arts and humanities organizations to foster the exploration of nature through cultural avenues.

12 3 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

✔ I m p rove the infrastru c t u re within conservation versity protection is needed, including ecological agencies and organizations to better support com- restoration and knowledge of or access to avenues of munity-based biodiversity proj e c t s . public involvement. ✔ Develop links between school-based biodiversity Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s pr ograms and community proj e c t s . ✔ Compile existing local market res e a r ch, including ✔ Find new ways of providing urban populations that gathered through land-acquisition bond cam- with opportunities to become aware of and explore paigns, to determine gaps in the understanding of the region’s natural communities (for example, a public values and perce p t i o n s . “biodiversity bus” to bring urban residents to out- ✔ Commission professional market res e a r ch locally to lying natural area s ) . better inform communications strategies and mes- ✔ Devote more effort to re c ruiting citizen scientists sa g e s . f rom more diverse communities. Build eff e c t i v e ✔ Disseminate res e a r ch findings to decision-makers tools to track the success of rec r uiting techniques, and conservation agencies and orga n i z a t i o n s . and use the effective techniques to expand the reach of volunteer-re c r uitment prog r a m s . • Goal 2: Increase the public’s understanding of the ✔ Encourage the providers of non-formal education role of management in natural areas. pr ograms to rec r uit and employ professional edu- Many people believe nature should be left alone. In cators who reflect the diversity of the communities the Chicago Wilderness region, however, only aggres - they serve. sive land management can res t o r e the natural proc e s s - es that allow an ecosystem to “take care of itself.” • Goal 6: Measure local citizens’understanding of bio- Communication strategies must emphasize the diversity by developing appropriate gauges for long- human role in nature as healer and must show that term effectiveness of education programs. management is necessary to alleviate the pre s s u re s The only way to assess success in reaching Goals 1–5 is placed on ecosystems in a large metropolitan are a . to measure the target audiences’ understanding of bio- Understanding these messages can lead to endorse- diversity issues. To accomplish this, res o u r ces should ment of ecological restoration, even though its meth- be dedicated to creating appropriate measures and ods (such as prescribed fire) may appear damaging in systematically collecting data. their early stages. Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s ✔ Cr eate appropriate gauges and gather baseline data ✔ Craft a common lexicon that describes res t o r a t i o n on targeted communities. ef forts, and create methods to evaluate and adapt the messages to grow in effe c t i v e n e s s . ✔ Gather data at set intervals to measure long-term ch a n g e . ✔ Foster the delivery of essential message points not only through conservation agencies and orga n i z a - ✔ Disseminate findings to agencies and orga n i z a t i o n s tions, but also through a broader range of institu- involved in biodiversity education. tions and channels. ✔ Engage and educate those who interpret conserva- 10.2.3 Short-term tion issues for the public, including community communications goals leaders, media, and elected offi c i a l s . • Goal 1: Gain a better understanding of the views of a • Goal 3: Improve communication with those immedi- broader segment of the Chicago-area population on ately affected by management decisions. biodiversity issues such as ecological restoration. Neighbors and users of forest preserves and other nat- The current concerns and viewpoints of diffe r ent pop- ural areas should be aware of management decisions ulation segments must be understood before commu- and understand their necessity. In the early stages, nication can be effective. While national market habitat restoration is typically not aesthetically pleas- res e a r ch is valuable to decision-makers and conserva- ing. Whether conducting demonstration burns or tion communicators, unique circumstances (such as distributing broc h u r es house-to-house, staff of land- county forest preserve systems) exist in the Chicago management agencies and stewards need to let people region, and they may affect our citizens’ values and know what’s going to happen and why. They should views. More local res e a r ch on issues related to biodi-

12 4 Chapter 10. Education and Communication

also work with user groups (such as birders, hikers, ✔ Develop innovative campaigns and programs that and canoeists) on issues of common concern. position habitat restoration in mainstream culture (such as museum exhibits, ad campaigns, and ret a i l Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s pro m o t i o n s ) . ✔ En s u r e that restoration efforts, particularly in new a reas, include plans for communications to local • Goal 5: Improve the credibility and public percep- residents, and that res o u r ces are available for effi - tion of the people involved in restoration effo r t s . cient and appropriate communication effo r t s . The perception exists in some communities that ✔ C reate a communication guide that re s t o r a t i o n restoration is the folly of misguided volunteers or out- agencies can use to help develop these plans, siders. Better explanations are needed of the role of the including res o u r ces that already exist and success- pr ofessionals and volunteers in restoration projects, as ful examples from other agencies. well as of the volunteers’ experience and training of and their value to land management agencies. ✔ Conduct direct outreach to organizations in the local communities, such as block clubs and re l i- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s gious groups, that are interested in environ m e n t a l ✔ Seek trusted local spokespeople who rep r esent the wo r k . sound, scientific thinking behind restoration and/ ✔ Engage advocacy organizations that work on envi- or exemplify the role of the local volunteer. ronmental issues (such as air and water quality or ✔ Pr ovide support for volunteers who interact with sprawl) and educate them about biodiversity loss. the public, and offer training in public speaking, ✔ Seek opportunities to inform journalists and ecological concepts, interpretation, etc. i n c rease media coverage of restoration and land ✔ Emphasize the public service provided by volun- ma n a g e m e n t . teers and the leverage of public funds thro u g h ✔ Review current mechanisms for public involve- donated time. ment in land-management decisions and make ✔ En s u r e that decision-makers are aware of the value im p r ovements, using models that are successful in of conservation volunteers. other aren a s . ✔ C reate a stru c t u re for collaborating partners not • Goal 6: Improve communication about biodiversity only to react quickly but also to anticipate issues with key decision-makers such as elected off i c i a l s that arise in public forum s . and their staff, land managers, and planners. These key decision-makers need information about • Goal 4: Communicate documented benefits of local local biodiversity before issues arise in order to make restoration efforts, especially those of most value to informed decisions. They also need quick access to hu m a n s . new information as issues are being considere d . To accept restoration techniques as necessary, people Communication programs and tools need to addres s need to know that these efforts are producing the their needs. d e s i red results, that habitats are being re s t o re d . Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s Restoration efforts also need to be connected with tangible benefits—showing that biodiversity is a neces- ✔ Assess current tools and programs to inform key si t y , not a luxury. decision-makers for content, availability, and effe c - tiveness in increasing understanding of the impor- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s tance of local biodiversity. ✔ Gather data on the results of restoration eff o r t s , ✔ Su r v e y , as necessary, to assess key decision-makers’ translating the data into easily understood benefits. knowledge, attitudes, and information needs. ✔ Cr eate communications tools that connect res t o r a - ✔ Develop vehicles to keep decision-makers re g u- tion results to core values: the beauty and wonder larly informed, such as tours, literature, up-to-date of nature, our responsibility to future generations, scientific information, and contacts for further and the desire for a healthy environ m e n t . in f o r m a t i o n . ✔ Include illustrations of restoration results in programs, nature walks, signs, and other communication vehicles.

12 5 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

the metropolitan area is more than twenty minutes from 10 . 3 a natural area. Communicators can build on the public’s Co n c l u s i o n af finity for our parks and forest preserves and the unique opportunities they provide. While Chicago and urban While the challenges to conservation educators and com- centers worldwide struggle with issues such as quality municators are many, they ca n engage the public on bio- of life, over-development, pollution, and traffic conges- diversity by working together, understanding their tion, Chicago Wilderness also has the potential to crea t e audiences, devoting more res o u r ces, and adopting inno- a new model of a metropolitan citizenry that is aware , vative approaches. While the American public is re l a- a p p reciates its natural ecosystems, and takes action on tively unaware of the loss of biodiversity, we in the their behalf. Chicago region have the tangible demonstration to motivate positive change right before our eyes—no citizen in

12 6 Chapter 11 Role of Key Players

c o n t rol, etc. Only very recently have we realized that 11. 1 some conservation needs are not adequately addres s e d In t r o d u c t i o n by existing governmental agencies. No one governmental body has responsibility for conserving biodiversity. Achieving the objectives of this plan req u i r es the team- In addition, the science of conservation biology has work of many agencies, institutions, corporations, and em e r ged fairly rec e n t l y , and conservation issues exist on individuals. This chapter identifies key players and scales that do not neatly coincide with governmental describes their current roles in preserving biodiversity. bo u n d a r i e s . Except where stated to the contrary, this plan calls upon all of these key players to continue performing their current roles and, in a few instances, to take additional 11.2.2 Local governments actions. In addition to the roles and actions outlined here, Forest preserve and conservation districts Chapter 8 includes many recommendations for actions These special districts are among the most important of that government agencies can pursue to contribute to the many actors involved in biodiversity recovery in the land and water protection. Also, each of the rec o m m e n - Chicago region, simply because they hold extensive dations in the preceding chapters needs to be addres s e d lands containing natural communities. (See Table 11. 1 . ) by one or more of the key players identified here. The If this plan is to succeed, these county agencies must con- or der of presentation that follows is not intended to sug- tinue their selective acquisition efforts and must increa s e gest relative importance. Those who own and manage a p p ropriate land management to assure that natural sites containing natural communities are obviously cen- communities are being pres e r v e d . tral actors, but so too are those who provide the funding, the expertise, and the volunteer hours re q u i red to While subject to property-tax caps, most Chicago-are a make this plan succeed. counties have gained or plan to seek voter approval for funding substantially more land acquisition in the com- Both governmental and non-governmental orga n i z a t i o n s ing years. Public support for increased spending on the ar e now moving to protect and res t o r e the rich biodiver- active management of natural lands is also critically sity of the region. One aspect of this is their cooperation important and may req u i r e more extensive public educa- in the development of this plan. tion. An alternative may be legislative relief from caps for this type of expenditure.

11. 2 The Forest Preserve District of Cook County has not yet announced any ref e r endum. Aland-acquisition plan was Role of government agencies developed in 1994 and was pending approval by the County Board as of September 1999. 11.2.1 Overview The Forest Preserve District of DuPage County, in the As the greater Chicago region developed, governments fall of l997, gained voter approval by re f e rendum to we r e created and modified to provide desired services: spend $75 million for open-space pres e r v a t i o n . police, fire, transportation, zoning, rec r eation, pollution

12 7 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

12 8 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players

The Forest Preserve District of Kane County has spent vation of biodiversity. Many of the 148 park districts in $23 million over the last five years and plans to pres e r v e the Illinois portion of Chicago Wilderness have the another 5,000 acres over the next 20 years. On April 13, opportunity to acquire or manage natural communities 1999, a re f e rendum for $70 million for land acquisition falling within their jurisdiction. Such sites are sometimes passed by 66%. too small to meet the acquisition criteria of the local fores t p reserve or conservation district. The St. Charles Park The Lake County Forest Preserves’ ref e r endum on Ap r i l District, for example, has adopted policies for pre s e r v- 13, 1999, passed by 66%, providing $35 million to buy ing and maintaining natural areas and is a leader in land and $20 million for habitat restoration, trails, and restoring natural areas in their ownership. Pilcher Park, other improvements. Avo t e r- a p p r oved 1993 ref e re n d u m an Illinois Natural A reas Inventory site, sets a good had previously provided $20 million for land acquisition example of working with volunteer stewards and with and $10 million for restoration, trails, and improv e m e n t s . the state Nature Preserves Commission to manage its fine re s o u rce. Many park districts, including the Chicago The McHenry County Conservation District hopes to Park District, have become involved in restoring wet- double its current inventory of 10,500 acres over the next lands and in reestablishing native prairies and wood- 10 years. lands. Lake County Parks and Recreation in Cro w n Point, Indiana, has been actively acquiring and res t o r i n g The Forest Preserve District of Will County, on April 13, natural areas. Park districts can and should play the l999, won 57% voter approval for $70 million to buy 6,500 important role of educating the public on the importance ac re s . of maintaining biodiversity.

Additional roles of forest preserve and conservation dis- Like forest preserve districts, park districts are subject to tricts are public education and outdoor rec r eation. These pr operty-tax caps and may have to hold public ref e re n d a roles derive from the statutory responsibilities outlined in in order to finance acquisitions or major projects. Public their enabling legislation. The districts also serve as pri- education by all parties reg a r ding the importance of bio- mary coordinator of volunteer stewardship and monitor- diversity can be vitally important to the success of such ing work on the land they own and manage. Prov i d i n g ref e re n d a . such opportunities for public enjoyment, learning, and involvement helps build understanding of the mission of Sanitary districts the districts and support for public funding to pres e r v e The role of sanitary districts in recovering biodiversity is and res t o r e the districts’ lands. limited principally to the collection, treatment, and dis- ch a r ge of wastewater that meets federal and state stan- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s da r ds. Some are also responsible for treating storm water ✔ In keeping with their central role as land managers, that reaches their plants through combined sewer sys- the forest preserve and conservation districts should tems. Hence they have an interest in storm water man- continue to play lead roles in identifying, evaluating, agement. Treated effluent can have major impacts on and acquiring unprotected natural communities aquatic biodiversity depending on both its quality and within their jurisdictions. the location of the point of discharge. Unfortunately, the regulatory practices determining discharge locations ✔ Federal and state agencies should support these usually consider only engineering standards such as the ef forts with funding and technical res o u r ces. The most availability of stream flow for dilution rather than the recent example of such a partnership was the Chicago impact on the ecology of the receiving stream. The state Wilderness collaboration that produced the natural- governments have regulatory authority for discharg e ar eas inventory for McHenry County. locations and limits. ✔ Fo r est preserves should use all tools available to add land to their holdings. It is also recommended that Sanitary districts may also own land that supports sig- existing natural areas be protected from purc h a s e nificant biodiversity. Such land affo r ds opportunities for requests by commercial and other interests or conver- partnering with organizations more directly charg e d sion to intensive rec r eational uses. with conservation of biodiversity. The largest landowner of this type is the Metropolitan Water Reclamation Park districts District, which encompasses most of Cook County. The The mission of park districts more heavily emphasizes District has effectively used intergovernmental agre e- rec r eation than does the mission of conservation and for- ments and other cooperative agreements to enhance the est preserve districts. However, this does not pre c l u d e use and maintenance of District lands to support biodi- them from making a valuable contribution to the conser- v e r s i t y. This good practice should be continued and ex p a n d e d .

12 9 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Sanitary districts also have indirect impact on biodiver- financial capacity, municipalities can provide assistance sity when extension of their service areas facilitates more t h rough cooperative agreements. This is especially the intense development. While the primary function of san- case with Illinois home rule communities that are not lim- itary districts is to provide service, they can work actively ited by tax caps. Chapter 8, section 8.3 discusses other with other governmental units that have a more dire c t possible actions by municipalities related to plans, ordi - role in directing development and protecting natural nances, etc. a reas. Such cooperative effort can be important to protecting biodiversity. Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s ✔ Counties and municipalities should amend their com- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s pr ehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and other reg u - ✔ Since the concern for maintaining biodiversity is not lations to incorporate relevant re c o m m e n d a t i o n s one of the purposes for which sanitary districts were contained in this plan. c reated, enabling legislation should be amended to ✔ When a state infrastruc t u r e investment such as a toll specify the authority and obligation of districts to pro- road or major airport is likely to trigger substantial tect biodiversity. residential, commercial, or industrial development, ✔ In the case of private utility companies that pro v i d e af fected governments (including state, county, munic- wastewater collection and treatment services, and ipal and other local jurisdictions) should enter into whose franchises are regulated by the Illinois Com- i n t e rgovernmental agreements designed to pre v e n t me r ce Commission, a similar broadening of authoriz- adverse environmental impacts, including the loss of ing legislation would be approp r i a t e . biodiversity Such agreements were developed as part of the process for considering a proposed expres s w a y Illinois counties and municipalities in central Lake County, Illinois. County governments regulate land in unincorporated ✔ Municipalities should play an active role in pro t e c- a reas and, in some instances, play important roles in tion and management of biodiversity by managing stormwater and/or wastewater management. Municipal their lands to support native ecological communities governments regulate the use of land and also have the and consider acquisition of additional land for these authority to annex new land, typically for the purpose pu r p o s e s . of facilitating new development. Anumber of municipalities also own and operate their own wastewater tre a t- ment systems and theref o r e can extend sewer service as Northwest Indiana municipalities part of an annexation agree m e n t . The municipalities in Indiana, such as the City of Gary and the City of Hammond, have unique roles in pres e r v - Illinois, with its heavy emphasis on the property and ing and protecting biodiversity. This stems from the large sales taxes to fund municipal governments, has crea t e d impact of business and industry in northwestern Indiana. a strong incentive for municipalities to expand into new These businesses and industries are key elements of local ar eas. Several recent tax-reform initiatives have looked economies and, in many instances, owners of enviro n- at the problem of over-r eliance on the local property tax mentally sensitive land. and have made recommendations that would lessen the incentives for territorial expansion. To effectively protect biodiversity in northwestern Indiana, partnerships need to be nurtured among the Some municipalities operate their own park systems and various agencies of the federal, state, and county gov- th e re f o r e may be the most appropriate bodies to pres e r v e ernments, city departments, and private org a n i z a t i o n s natural areas within their boundaries. Also, both county that own and oversee land requiring preservation and and municipal governments have the authority to pre- long-term management. For example, this is important p a re and adopt comprehensive plans. These plans for the City of Gary since it contains portions of the should identify open spaces meriting preservation and Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore as well as several specify who should be responsible for their preservation. pieces of dune-and-swale ecosystems that are prot e c t e d and managed by the Indiana Department of Natural Municipalities can also take direct action in managing Re s o u r ces and private conservation grou p s . lands that they own to support biodiversity and they can ac q u i r e and manage additional land. Even in municipal- These cooperative partnerships may evolve into com- ities that have separate park districts, they can play an pr ehensive and cooperative planning and management important role in funding the acquisition and manage- initiatives among the various agencies, departments, and ment of open space, wetlands and other natural areas. In o rganizations. At present there is no compre h e n s i v e , situations where park districts do not have suff i c i e n t co o r dinated, or cooperative relationship between the var-

13 0 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players ious habitat managers and landowners in the City of Mosquito abatement districts: Alternative approaches to Ga r y , such as the City Park Department and the Redevel- mosquito control that do not harm other fauna need to be opment Commission. identified through round-table discussions among the mosquito abatement districts and Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s The cities of northwest Indiana may develop guidelines rep re s e n t a t i v e s . for the staffs of economic-development departments and planning departments urging them to include, where Drainage districts: Drainage techniques that serve agri- possible, habitat preservation in development pro j e c t s cu l t u r e while also improving habitat, controlling eros i o n , that impact sensitive areas and habitat restoration in pre- and controlling storm water should be identified and viously disturbed areas. While these cities are developing used along channelized streams managed by drainage the capacity to manage natural res o u r ces, state, federal, di s t r i c t s . or private agencies and organizations may assist in providing technical assistance for city-owned natural The Fox River Waterway Management Agency: Wat e r - res o u rc e s . way-management agencies should implement strategies to protect and enhance habitat throughout their jurisdic- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s tions, especially for fish migration and spawning, water ✔ In northwest Indiana, city departments should enter bi r d migration and nesting, restoration, control of exotic into partnerships aimed at protecting biodiversity species, shoreline erosion control, and protection and with federal, state, and county agencies and with pri- enhancement of mussel beds. vate organizations that own and oversee land req u i r - ing preservation and long-term maintenance. Illinois Prairie Trail Authority: This authority, re p resenting the five Illinois collar counties, could play an ✔ Indiana cities and their regional planning and devel- important role in coordinating region-wide public access, opment agencies should develop a process for taking education, and activities related to natural areas adjoin- inventory of natural areas and prioritizing areas for ing the collar-county trail network. pr eservation and restoration in conjunction with economic-development initiatives. Local highway departments: These departments can ✔ Indiana cities and their partner agencies should play a leading role in habitat restoration and prot e c t i o n develop plans and allocate funds to preserve land and by detaining storm water on site, managing salt use, pur- to manage preserved land consistently. suing environmentally benign alternatives to salt, and using native landscaping within rights of way more ex t e n s i v e l y . Special units of government The Chicago Wilderness region is home to a number of Illinois International Port District: The Port District specialized units of government that can play an espe- includes Lake Calumet, one of the largest and most im- cially important role in providing for expanded habitat. portant habitats for birds and fish in southeast Chicago. The argument is often raised that enabling legislation Th e r e is a need for a long-range management plan, devel- does not specifically identify habitat protection and oped with community involvement, to provide a balance restoration as an activity of such districts. Yet various between habitat preservation and economic develop- governmental bodies nonetheless can play a major rol e ment. Such a plan should deal with restoring water qual- simply by administratively choosing to do so. Thus, the ity and providing access to Lake Calumet for approp r i a t e Illinois Department of Transportation plants prairies rec r eational activities. along its rights of way because it saves maintenance dollars over the long run and the program is well rec e i v e d by the public. Grade schools and high schools plant 11.2.3 State agencies prairie gardens; community colleges res t o r e large natural a reas on their grounds. The Metropolitan Wa t e r Illinois Department of Natural Resources Reclamation District of Greater Chicago grants long- The Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) has term, low-cost leases on its important natural areas for played a lead role in conserving biodiversity in north- habitat management. None of these public agencies are eastern Illinois by establishing and maintaining the legislatively enabled to accomplish these activities, nor Illinois Natural Ar eas Inventory (INAI), by acquiring and a re they legislatively precluded from doing so. They managing land, and by providing technical assistance to choose to do so for the community good and, often, public and private agencies and groups interested in because it means lower maintenance and operation costs. re s o u rce conservation. IDNR also administers several grant programs to fund biodiversity-related initiatives. This section describes various IDNR prog r a m s .

13 1 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

The Illinois Natural History Survey (INHS), founded county region of northeastern Illinois. Nearly half of in 1858, is recognized as the nation’s premier natural his- these protected areas are owned by the county forest pre- tory survey. INHS scientists study plants and animals serve and conservation districts. The Illinois Department and how they interact among the variety of ecosystems. of Natural Resources, park districts, municipalities, and Scientists from the Illinois Water Survey and Ge o l o g i c a l private parties own the rem a i n d e r . Su r v e y also study critical factors involved in ecosystem function such as hydrological patterns and soil struc t u re . Many high-quality natural areas in northeastern Illinois, h o w e v e r, remain unprotected. A number of the high- As for land protection, IDNR is the third largest non-fed- quality Chicago lake-plain prairies and wetlands, for eral public landowner in the six-county region (see Tab l e example, have not been formally prot e c t e d . 11.1) with over 21,300 acres of state parks, natural area s , conservation areas, and re g i s t e red Land and Wa t e r The Nature Preserves Commission staff also pro v i d e s Reserves. The Office of Resource Conservation (ORC) and recommendations and assistance reg a r ding res t o r a t i o n the Office of Land Management and Education (OLME) and management of protected sites. The staff also works a re responsible for identifying and managing these cooperatively with landowners, municipalities, and reg - ecosystems. The Surveys, ORC, and OLME are involved ulatory agencies to prevent or minimize impacts associ- with watershed management, restoration ecology, long- ated with changing land uses on Illinois Natural Are a s term monitoring of natural communities, contro l l i n g Inventory sites and protected sites. invasive species, and fish and wildlife ecology. They foster im p r oved management of the state’s biological res o u rc e s The Nature Preserves Commission is an important part- and public appreciation of Illinois’s natural heritage. ner in the Volunteer Stewardship Network, providing the legal basis for volunteers to apply herbicides by indem- The Of fice of Water Resources has regulatory res p o n s i - nifying those who become licensed through the state. bilities in stream channels, floodways, and floodplains. The Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board is an The Illinois Nature Preserves Commission works with independent board of nine members appointed by the landowners who wish to voluntarily protect high-quality g o v e r n o r. The board was created by the Illinois natural areas as either Illinois Nature Preserves or En d a n g e r ed Species Protection Act of 1972 and is dedi- Re g i s t e r ed Illinois Land and Water Reserves. These high- cated to protecting Illinois’s endangered and threa t e n e d quality natural areas have frequently already been iden- species. Following from this mandate is the evaluation tified on the Illinois Natural A reas Inventory, either as and listing of animal and plant species as state-endan- relatively undisturbed natural plant communities or as ge r ed or -threatened. The list is updated and published habitat for state-listed endangered or threatened species. every five years following a two-year review proc e s s .

Dedication of these natural areas is a legal pro c e s s Duties of the board include the following: wh e r eby the owner voluntarily restricts future uses of the land in perpetuity for the purpose of preserving the land • Listing, delisting, or changing the listing status of in its natural state. The owner retains custody but rel i n - species of plants and animals quishes the right to develop the land or make any changes • Advising the Department of Natural Resources on the that negatively affect the natural qualities of the prop e r t y . assistance, protection, conservation, and management Sites dedicated as Illinois Nature Preserves or reg i s t e re d of native endangered and threatened plants and ani- as Illinois Land and Water Reserves are protected under mals and their habitats the auspices of the Illinois Natural Ar eas Preservation Ac t . That act states that “areas dedicated as nature pres e r v e s • Encouraging and promoting res e a r ch and investiga- ar e hereby declared to be put to their highest, best, and tions that determine status of native plants and ani- most important use for the public benefit.” mals that may be eligible for listing, and pro m o t i n g res e a r ch and management that may enhance the pos- After the land is dedicated, it becomes part of a statewide sibility of success of a listed species and ultimately system of nature preserves or land-and-water re s e r v e s lead to recovery and delisting that is overseen by the Illinois Nature Pre s e r v e s • Informing the public about matters pertaining to Commission, a nine-person citizen body appointed by th r eatened and endangered species the Governor. To date, 285 sites totaling 37,778 acres have been dedicated as Illinois Nature Preserves, and 33 sites • Working with other agencies and organizations to totaling 14,675 acres have been reg i s t e r ed as Illinois Land conserve threatened and endangered plants and ani- and Water Reserves. Of that total, 106 nature pres e r v e s mals and their habitats and five land-and-water reserves are located in the six-

13 2 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players

IDNR has a long re c o rd of providing financial support a g reements with not-for- p rofit organizations on land for land acquisition in northeastern Illinois. The depart- ac q u i s i t i o n . ment administers the state’s Open Space Lands Acquis- ition and Development Program (OSLAD), the Na t u r a l Re c o m m e n d a t i o n Areas Acquisition and Development Program (N A A F ) , ✔ The State of Illinois should continue its grants pro- C-2000 Ecosystem Program, and the Open Land Tr u s t grams for open space with more funds for acquisition (O LT ) . di r ected to northeastern Illinois. Open Lands Trust Ac t funds should primarily protect lands with current or O S L A D has helped local park and forest preserve dis- potential biodiversity values. tricts acquire and develop substantial open spaces. ✔ The state should continue to acquire high-quality nat- Funded by the Illinois real-estate transfer tax, OSLAD is ural areas through the NAAF. budgeted statewide at $17,715,000 for FY 99. In FY 9 8 , applications from local governments in Cook County we r e approved at a level of $3,925,000, while applicants Indiana Department of Natural Resources in the collar counties were awarded $5,466,000. Since its The mission of the Indiana Department of Natural beginning in FY 86 through FY 98, OSLAD has prov i d e d R e s o u rces (DNR) is to protect, enhance, preserve, and $27,735,000 to Cook County applicants and $31,656,000 to wisely use natural, cultural, and re c reational res o u rc e s the collar counties. OSLAD req u i r es a 100% local match. for the benefit of Indiana’s citizens. It does so thro u g h public information programs to promote awareness and NA A F was established in 1989 with a portion of the rea l - conservation of Indiana’s natural re s o u rces, by acquir- estate transfer tax. The fund is dedicated for acquisition ing public lands with programs such as the Indiana and stewardship of natural areas, including habitat for Heritage Trust, and by using a watershed-based multi- en d a n g e r ed and threatened species, high-quality natural disciplinary management approach in its prog r a m s . communities, wetlands, and other areas with unique or unusual qualities of natural heritage. Lands acquire d The Division of Nature Preserves is responsible for remain in state ownership. A p p roximately $2 million i n v e n t o r y, protection, dedication, and management of each year is used for acquisition and stewards h i p . Indiana’s remaining natural areas. In addition, the Indiana Natural Heritage Data Center, within the C - 2 0 0 0 Ecosystem Program funds watershed- and Division of Nature Preserves, collects, manages, and pro- ecosystem-based local partnerships that seek to main- vides data on Indiana biodiversity, including endangered tain and enhance natural areas and coordinate conserva- species, natural communities, and conservation lands in tion efforts with other local interest such as business. the state. Among the projects eligible for grants are those for land acquisition or the purchase of conservation easements for In the Chicago Wilderness area of northwest Indiana, the the purpose of habitat protection or restoration. To t a l Division conducts field inventories for endangere d grants for the statewide program are expected to aver- species and natural communities, manages several age $3 million per year. Partnerships within northeast- na t u r e preserves, and works with various conservation ern Illinois include Chicago Wilderness, the Fox River partners protecting some of the most diverse natural Ecosystem Partnership, Lake Calumet Ecosystem ar eas in the state. Two funding sources allow the Division Partnership, Prairie Parklands Partnership, Thorn Cree k to acquire (or assist in acquiring) natural lands: the Ecosystem Partnership, Wisconsin-Upper Des Plaines Indiana Natural Heritage Protection Campaign and the Partnership, and the Upper DuPage River Coalition. Indiana Heritage Trust program. The former is a public/private program to fund conservation that has suc- The C-2000 Ecosystems Program has established pilot cessfully protected the best remaining natural are a s pr ojects in four downstate watersheds designed to “fix” ac r oss the state. The latter program, which is funded by local streams by a variety of methods including better sale of the environmental license plates, has proven to land management. These will serve as important case be one of the most successful conservation-funding pro- studies for application within the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s grams ever in Indiana. reg i o n . Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources OL T is Governor Ryan’s landmark initiative to dedicate The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) $160 million over four years to acquire natural areas and has broad responsibility and involvement in managing open space and to provide rec r eational opportunities for biodiversity in Wisconsin. It manages the state owned the citizens of Illinois. The program will allow the IDNR wildlife areas (such as the New Munster Wildlife Are a ) , to acquire land; create a grant program for units of local rec r eational areas (like the Bong State Recreational Are a ) , government to acquire land; and enter into management and state parks (such as Big Foot Beach State Park). In

13 3 Biodiversity Recovery Plan addition, the Department often works in partnership One of the program covers municipal storm-sewer sys- with other public and private agencies and groups to tems that do not receive sanitary sewage and that serve ac q u i r e, preserve, and manage unique sites and natural populations of 100,000 or more, construction activities ar eas (such as the Chiwaukee Prairie). The Department that disturb five acres or more, and numerous industrial regulates modifications to waterways and wetlands, activities. In the fall of 1999, Phase Two will extend the establishes and enforces effluent standards for industrial pr ogram to small municipalities and construction activi- and municipal wastewater facilities, and approves mod- ties disturbing one or more acres of land. ifications to sewer service areas. Wisconsin DNR oversees local implementation of zoning regulations for In addition to regulating discharges to streams and lakes, floodplains and shores. Wisconsin DNR maintains the IE P A administers state water-quality standards that are Natural Heritage Inventory in Wisconsin and imple- set by the Illinois Pollution Control Board to establish ments the state law on endangered and thre a t e n e d conditions that must be maintained in streams and lakes. sp e c i e s . The standards include limits for various chemicals, to pr otect both human health and aquatic life. In May 1995, the Wisconsin DNR issued a report entitled Wis c o n s i n ’ s Biodiversity as a Management Issue. This rep o r t IE P A regulation of air pollution and contaminated land pr esented the department’s strategy for the conservation also benefits both aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity. A of biological diversity. It provided DNR employees with specific aspect of air-pollution control that is important an overview of the issues associated with biodiversity for protection and restoration of biodiversity is the and provided a common point of ref e r ence for incorpo- issuance of permits to landowners for conducting pre- rating the conservation of biodiversity into DNR’s man- scribed burns. agement framework. In June 1995, the Wisconsin DNR published a land-use report entitled Common Gro u n d . I E PA’s Office of Pollution Prevention encourages busi- Common Grou n d focuses specifically on improving DNR nesses to prevent pollution before it becomes a prob l e m . p rograms and policies that relate to making decisions The agency also promotes holistic approaches that elim- about land use. This report reflects the DNR’s desire to inate the sources of waste in products, processes, and raw have strong public policies that not only pro t e c t ma t e r i a l s . Wisconsin’s environment but also enhance the state’s economy and maintain a high quality of life. In 1996, the Illinois Department of Tra n s p o r t a t i o n Wisconsin DNR reo r ganized so that program implemen- As a major landowner, the Illinois Department of tation and land management are carried out in Transportation (IDOT) sets an example when it employs Geographic Management Units (GMUs). GMUs re f l e c t best management practices in its highway design and the natural boundaries provided by watersheds and river maintenance. To its credit, IDOT has demonstrated a basins. The Wisconsin DNR has formed “partnership willingness to establish and maintain native landscap- teams” with the public and private sectors to guide plan- ing along many state roads including some in northeast- ning and implementation within the GMUs. Wis c o n s i n ern Illinois. DNR is currently working on a map of terrestrial ecological regions based on the National Hierarc h i c a l IDOT also participates in the regional transportation Framework of Ecological Units. planning process in northeastern Illinois, including identification and mitigation of environmental impacts of Illinois Environmental Protection Agency transportation facility decisions. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) reg - ulates waste discharges to water, air, and land. A ma j o r Re c o m m e n d a t i o n role for maintaining biodiversity is oversight of water- ✔ IDOT should incorporate biodiversity principles into quality management planning as mandated by the fed- all transportation infrastru c t u re planning and all eral Clean Water Act. In that capacity, IEPA ap p r oves the implementation decisions. sizing, location, and limits on effluents for sewage-trea t - ment plants. IEPA also determines the boundaries of Illinois State Toll Highway Authority ar eas to be served by treatment plants, and it thereby can Planning the widening or extension of major toll ro a d s influence patterns of growth and development. in the Illinois portion of the Chicago Wilderness reg i o n is a part of the official regional transportation-planning The Agency also administers the national permit pro- pr ocess. The authorization to build is made solely by the gram for stormwater discharges. This program has the Illinois General A s s e m b l y, with actual constru c t i o n potential to significantly reduce the adverse effects of di r ected by the Illinois State Toll Highway Au t h o r i t y . stormwater run o f f on the biodiversity of streams. Phase

13 4 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players

One of the most recent major additions to the Chicago- government units. Second, NIPC studies growth and ar ea system of expressways and toll roads is the north- development patterns, and it prep a r es forecasts for pop- south toll road in DuPage County. The enviro n m e n t a l ulation, households, and employment. Also, NIPC mon- impact statement (EIS) prep a r ed for that project identi- itors water quality in streams, lakes, and wetlands, and fied a number of potential adverse impacts and prop o s e d it promotes good planning and the use of best manage- remedies. It specifically discussed erosion controls to pro- ment practices for these re s o u rces. Third, NIPC works tect adjacent streams during construction. with local governments to promote interg o v e r n m e n t a l activities through means such as interg o v e r n m e n t a l Re c o m m e n d a t i o n ag r eements and planning processes for joint area s . ✔ Fu t u r e toll-road construction projects must assure full compliance with EIS rec o m m e n d a t i o n s . Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Illinois Department of Agriculture The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Comm- This agency supports farmers who participate in conser- ission (NIRPC) promotes biodiversity through various vation programs under federal farm bills and in general activities of planning, implementation, and policymak- habitat restoration. The Illinois Department of A g r i- ing. As the federally recognized planning org a n i z a t i o n cu l t u r e has sought to curb excessive conversion of farm- for Northwest Indiana, NIRPC recently adopted the land to other uses by commenting on proposed actions Vision 2020 Transportation Plan for Northwest Indiana, involving federal or state monies that could cause the loss which incorporates environmental sensitivity, prom o t e s of farmland. This advisory review is conducted under the wise use of land, and encourages the use of alternative authority of the Illinois Farmland Protection Act, PA 82 - fuels. NIRPC’s Environmental Management Policy Com- 945. There is some possibility that this act could be used mittee serves as a regional advisor and facilitator for dis- to block land acquisition by forest preserve districts or cussion and public education on air quality. It also acts other conservation agencies. as a point of contact for discussion, coordination, and action on a wide range of programs and projects for air, Other Illinois legislation pertaining to farmland pres e r - land, and water quality. NIRPC is assisting in the prep a - vation include: 1) the Agricultural A reas Conservation ration of an inventory and functional assessment of and Protection Act, PA 81 - 1 173; 2) Protection of Farming wetlands in the three-county region. It also pre p a red a Operations from Nuisance Suits, PA 82-509; and 3) management plan for the Trail Creek watershed. NIRPC Illinois Soil and Water Conservation District Ac t . serves as staff to the Quality of Life Council, a re g i o n a l roundtable of public and private leaders that prom o t e s sustainable development in Northwest Indiana. NIRPC 11.2.4 Intergovernmental organizations is currently reactivating its role in community and eco- In the Chicago Wilderness region, three intergo v e r n m e n - nomic development to promote Smart Growth for the tal planning agencies cover multiple counties: 1) the region. NIRPC also provides staff support to two river- Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, 2) the North- basin commissions whose missions include wetland and western Indiana Regional Planning Commission, and 3) habitat res t o r a t i o n . the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Comm- ission. Given the cross-section of local governments serv- Southeastern Wisconsin Regional ing on their boards, they are well positioned to facilitate Planning Commission co o r dinated, intergovernmental planning and to prov i d e The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Comm- technical assistance on local environmental matters. A ission (SEWRPC) is the official area-wide, compreh e n s i v e fourth agency, the Chicago A rea Transportation Study planning agency for southeastern Wisconsin, which com- ( C ATS), is the designated MPO specifically for trans- prises Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Wal w o r t h , portation planning for northeastern Illinois. Washington, and Waukesha Counties. SEWRPC prov i d e s the basic information and planning services necessary to Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission solve problems that transcend the boundaries and fiscal The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC) capabilities of the region’s local units of government. has a threefold role in preserving biodiversity. First, it develops and adopts regional plans, such as the Regional Since its inception, SEWRPC has placed a high priority G reenways Plan, which has been widely accepted and on the identification, protection, and wise use of the nat- used by local as well as state government. Like the ural re s o u rces of the region. In 1997, the commission Gr eenways Plan, the Biodiversity Recovery Plan can set a completed a Regional Natural Areas and Critical Species di r ection for the region and, once adopted by NIPC, can Habitat Protection and Management Plan for Southeastern serve as a guide for municipalities, counties, and other Wis c o n s i n . This plan is the product of almost ten years of

13 5 Biodiversity Recovery Plan intensive work conducted under the guidance of a ar eas. Many EPAfunctions affect biodiversity. Examples Technical Advisory Committee consisting of individuals include review of environmental impact statements pre- particularly knowledgeable about the natural areas and p a red by other federal agencies, incentive programs to the habitats of critical species of the region. Through an a d d ress land ru n o ff to surface waters, identification of extensive inventory, this plan identified all of the high- high-quality wetlands, wetland permit reviews, and wet- quality natural areas and habitats of critical species land enforcement. The agency also has a small pilot pro- remaining in the seven-county region. It formulated rec - gram encouraging the use of native plants in private land ommendations for the protection, wise use, and prop e r holdings such as corporate campuses. management of those areas and habitats. This report also pr ovides information to promote sound rural and urban U.S. Army Corps of Engineers development, avoiding conflicts between development The Corps of Engineers, under Section 10 of the Rivers pr oposals and res o u r ce prot e c t i o n . and Harbors Act, regulates construction in navigable waters, including major waterways and Lake Michigan. Chicago Area Transportation Study The Corps also has authority under Section 404 of the The Chicago Ar ea Transportation Study (CATS) is feder- Clean Water Act to issue permits for the deposition of ally recognized Metropolitan Planning Org a n i z a t i o n dr edged and fill materials and for excavation in waters of (MPO) for transportation planning for the six-county the United States, which include most wetlands and Chicago region. CATS leads the region in producing s t reams. Wetlands are still vulnerable to deterioration the long range transportation plan, the 2020 Regional since such activities as vegetation removal, ero s i o n , Transportation Plan (1997) which identified levels of de s t r uction of buffers, conversion to impoundments, and investment for existing transportation facilities and for the discharge of storm water into wetlands are not reg u - transportation system expansion. The Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n la t e d . Plan calls for priority investments in our existing system and at the same time includes new expressways, toll The Corps has various authorities allowing them to roads and transit lines. Each of these projects, if built, evaluate, design, and implement solutions to aquatic re- could affect a number of wetlands and other natural so u r ce problems. Projects req u i r e a local partner or spon- co m m u n i t i e s . so r . The authorities include those specifically authorized by Congress, plus the Continuing Authorities Prog r a m , ✔ The regional transportation planning process should particularly Section 206 (Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration), incorporate biodiversity principles into the trans- Section 204 (using dredged material to res t o r e wetlands portation planning and programming proc e s s . or other aquatic systems) as well as others. Studies may be accomplished through the “Planning Assistance to States” program, which supplies technical expertise to Municipal associations evaluate, design, and implement solutions to the ongoing Like regional planning commissions, municipal associa- loss of biological integrity in and around strea m s . tions facilitate joint action by their member governments. They are usually organized within a single county but The Corps has the authority to grant permits for proj e c t s can collaborate across county borders when necessary. To that affect wetlands, provided the impacts are no more date, their chief activities related to the environment have than minimal. Mitigation of project impacts is considered been in the areas of water supply and solid-waste man- as part of the overall evaluation of a project. The Chicago agement. Their support of biodiversity recovery as a District has developed some innovative practices that municipal concern would be very helpful to the objec- have greatly aided the region’s ability to improve and tives of Chicago Wil d e r n e s s . re s t o re degraded habitat. Mitigation banks, in-lieu fee p rograms, and the use of enforcement and noncompli- 11.2.5 Federal administrative agencies ance resolutions to improve impacted habitat are no t e w o r t h y . While res o u r ces have been somewhat con- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency strained in the last few years, the Corps continues to look The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) carries for ways to maximize its effectiveness and to develop out a wide array of federal statutes having to do with the partnerships with many of the diverse groups involved physical, chemical, and biological environment. It has in wetlands. major authority to regulate discharges of pollutants to wa t e r , air, and land. It regulates these discharges either U.S. Department of Agriculture: d i rectly or by delegating authority to those states that US D A Forest Service demonstrate capacity and willingness. It also has res p o n - “Caring for the land and serving the people” is the mis- sibility for re s e a rch and technology transfer in re l a t e d sion of the USDA F o rest Service. The Forest Service,

13 6 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players t h rough partnerships with state and local natural- tance, NRCS provides technical leadership for the many res o u r ce agencies, works in Northeastern Illinois to man- pr ovisions of the 1996 Farm Bill, including the Wet l a n d age forests, prairies, and related natural re s o u rces for Reserve Program, Wildlife Habitat Incentives Prog r a m , long-term sustainability and for improved quality of life and Conservation Reserve Program. These programs can for all citizens. The Chicago area is home to three USDA be used in the protection and restoration of biodiversity F o rest Service offices: the Midewin National Ta l l g r a s s in the Chicago Wilderness area . Prairie in Wilmington, the North Central Researc h Station in Evanston, and the Northeastern Ar ea State and U.S. Department of Interior: U.S. Fish and Private Forestry office in Evanston. Wildlife Service, National Park Service The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service operates an Ecological The Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie is part of the Services field office in northeastern Illinois that imple- National Forest System. A d m i n i s t e red by the Fore s t ments the Endangered Species Act, including listing, Service in close cooperation with the Illinois Department rec o v e r y , and consultation. The Service offers consulta- of Natural Resources, Midewin is the largest piece of pro- tion to other federal agencies on their permits, licenses, tected open space in northeastern Illinois. Although pub- and funded projects. It provides technical and monetary lic access to Midewin is currently restricted because of the support to private and public landowners for habitat Army’s ongoing cleanup of the former Joliet A r s e n a l , restoration. It also investigates effects of environ m e n t a l Midewin’s mission is to conserve and enhance native contaminants on fish and wildlife, participates in populations of plants and animals, provide opportunities regional conservation planning, and provides education for res e a r ch and environmental education, support con- and outreach to schools and the general public on biodi- tinuing agricultural uses in some areas, and provide a versity conservation. variety of re c reation opportunities. Prairie re s t o r a t i o n and new res e a r ch have already begun at Midewin, and The Service also operates the 93 million-acre National opportunities for the public to visit and work on the site Wildlife Refuge system, which provides habitat for mig- will grow over the coming years. ratory birds, endangered species, and other fish and wildlife. The Service could play a major role in the Chic- North Central Research Station in Evanston conducts ago Wilderness region as a federal landowner, assisting social-science re s e a rch aimed at managing forest envi- in the acquisition of large parcels necessary to create habi- ronments for urban populations. Northeastern Ar ea State tat complexes identified in this plan and restoring habitat and Private Forestry provides financial and technical for area-sensitive species. assistance for managing forest ecosystems in populated a reas. This assistance includes conservation education, Also within the Department of Interior, the National Park woodland restoration, and management of trees in park- Service maintains the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore lands and streets, as well as management of exotic pests and conducts scientific studies. such as the Asian longhorned beetle and gypsy moth.

Natural Resources Conservation Service U.S. Department of Tra n s p o r t a t i o n The U.S. Department of Transportation provides over $1 The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is billion annually to the Chicago Wilderness region for a the federal agency that works with private landowners variety of programs relating to transportation. The cur- and communities to achieve their conservation goals rent federal transportation-funding act is called TEA-21, t h rough a voluntary approach to land steward s h i p . the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. While NRCS emphasizes voluntary, science-based assistance, the bulk of TEA-21 funding locally goes toward main- partnerships, and cooperative problem solving at the taining our existing systems of highways and mass tran- community level. NRCS employees are skilled in many sit, funding is also used for acquisition of bicycle- and scientific and technical specialties, including soil science, foot-trail rights of way, historic preservation, beautifica- soil conservation, watershed planning, hydro l o g y, and tion programs, landscaping (e.g. natural landscaping) of wetland science. Assistance is provided through a net- transportation rights of way, and environmental mitiga- work of local field offi c e s . tion. Each of these can help meet some of the biodiversity objectives of Chicago Wil d e r n e s s . NRCS can support aspects of the Biodiversity Recovery Plan through its efforts in community assistance and TEA-21 re q u i res a planning process and a funding watershed planning. Using the watershed-planning pr ocess for improving and expanding transportation sys- pr ocess, community members can determine local prior- tems. These processes can provide a mechanism to pro- ities for res o u r ces and can develop a plan of action that mote biodiversity re c o v e r y, both through the design of ad d r esses the needs of both the community residents and new and improved transportation systems and throu g h their environment. In addition to general technical assis-

13 7 Biodiversity Recovery Plan their consideration of actions to avoid or mitigate envi- they fill in the cracks, clear bottlenecks, and otherwise ronmental damage. cr eatively and adeptly make a diffe r ence. The large number of organizations contributing to biodiversity conser- Re c o m m e n d a t i o n vation in the region precludes including full discussion of ✔ Transportation designers and planners should care- their roles in this plan. This in no way implies that these fully follow the TEA-21 process, taking advantage of or ganizations are any less vital to the achievement of this its programs related to biodiversity in the Chicago plan than the other actors described in this chapter. Wilderness reg i o n . Appendix 8 provides an overview of the variety of non- governmental organizations in the region, their missions and significant accomplishments. U.S. Department of Energy Two Department of Energy (DOE) National Laboratories The region’s museums, zoos, arboreta, and botanic gar- have extensive land holdings in northeastern Illinois: dens contribute profoundly to the evolving “conserva- A rgonne National Laboratory and Fermi National tion culture” of the region. Hundreds of thousands of Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab). DOE has devoted people annually attend their exhibits and educational res o u r ces to establishing and maintaining native species events. Their large res e a r ch staffs, on the cutting edge of on both prop e r t i e s . conservation around the globe, bring a focus of solid science to the many challenging questions facing conserva- Ar gonne is a 1500-acre res e a r ch facility in DuPage County tionists here. that is surrounded by the Waterfall Glen Forest Pres e r v e . The approximately 700 acres of undeveloped land at Many conservation organizations are run largely or Ar gonne include woodland, wetland, and prairie habitats. e n t i rely by volunteers active in their communities on a Ar gonne has ecological res e a r ch capabilities in the areas of b road range of issues of conservation, enviro n m e n t a l my c o r r hizal fungi and soil ecology, carbon sequestration, education, and open space. Some of these orga n i z a t i o n s ph y t o r emediation (using plants to concentrate and brea k own and manage local lands for habitat. Many are active down pollutants), and ecological assessment. in land-use planning and community development.

Fermilab has one of DOE’s seven National Enviro n- Some larger organizations with staff play major roles in mental Research Parks (NERPs), re p resenting the tall- acquisition of natural lands, conservation science, policy grass prairie region for the country. The NERP is an and planning, and volunteer rec r uitment. They often col- outdoor laboratory, containing over 1000 acres of rec o n - laborate with public agencies in highly cost-eff e c t i v e st r ucted prairie, natural and constructed wetlands, agri- pa r t n e r s h i p s . cultural land, and open water. Since its dedication in 1989, res e a r chers from universities and from other DOE Public participation is often key to the effective function- sites (including Ar gonne) have used the park to conduct ing of government agencies in a democratic society. m o re than 40 projects, including investigations of suc- P reserve users, neighbors, and other taxpayers have a cession, soil struc t u r e, and microbial communities, evo- healthy and growing interest in wise management of lution of plant defenses, and pred a t o r- p r ey dynamics, as conservation lands. Not-for-p r ofit conservation grou p s well as surveys of vertebrates and invertebrates. have a long and valuable history of advocacy and other forms of public participation that can improve the responsiveness and focus of all types of institutions. Just 11. 3 as volunteer programs have contributed mightily in health, education, and youth sports, volunteer prog r a m s Role of private sector in conservation and environmental education have a g rowing importance. These programs owe their eff e c- 11.3.1 Non-governmental tiveness to partnerships between governmental and non- governmental orga n i z a t i o n s . or g a n i z a t i o n s The non-governmental organizations of the Chicago Non-governmental organizations have also been impor- region that focus on conservation have demonstrated the tant in building coalitions and have played important flexibility and creativity to contribute to conservation at roles in development of Chicago Wilderness itself, a high level. With a wide range of missions, they engage Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, the Vo l u n t e e r in various programs to preserve biodiversity, including St e w a r dship Network, and a wide variety of other condi r ect work on protected natural areas, community-based servation successes in the reg i o n . o rganizing and education, and advocacy. In addition,

13 8 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players

11.3.2 Business and industry plant communities in landscaping—is an opportunity to reestablish diverse native plants, thereby inviting the Commercial Club of Chicago: Hi s t o r i c a l l y , the private, bi r ds and butterflies back home. Using native plants pro- fo r- p r ofit sector has played an important role in open- motes biodiversity and stewardship of our natural her- space preservation in the Chicago region. The most itage. One approach to promoting biodiversity on private widely known examples include A a ron Montgomery lands is “naturalizing” the land using restoration tech- Wa rd’s defense in the 1890s of Grant Park as “fore v e r niques such as planting and prescribed fire. A n o t h e r open clear and free” and architect Daniel Burnham’s Pl a n a p p roach is using native plants in more formal land- of Chicago, p roduced in l909. It is noteworthy that the scapes in place of turf grasses. sponsorship of this “Burnham Plan” came from the Co m m e r cial Club of Chicago, an organization rep re s e n t - Several corporations in the Chicago region have chosen ing the leaders of most major corporations and pro f e s- to use natural landscaping on their own pro p e r t i e s . sions in the Chicago region. The introduction to the l970 Examples include Sears corporate headquarters in Hoff- reprint (Commercial Club of Chicago 1970) includes the man Estates, the AT&T corporate campus in Lisle, the following passage by architectural historian Wi l b e r t Lucent Technologies campus in Naperville, and several Ha s b r ouck, AI A : right-of-way sites belonging to Commonwealth Edison. Two vitally important results of the plan are the development of the lakefront and the extension of the Forest Pres e r v e Among the major reasons for natural landscaping is cost System of Cook County. Burnham often is given credit for saving. Appendix 9 compares costs of the two basic initiating the forest preserves which ring metro p o l i t a n options for landscape design and management. The first Chicago with a green belt…but this basic system had been option is to plant and maintain hybrid turf grasses and established before the plan came into being. The concept of other non-native ornamental plants and trees. These the Forest Preserve System was formulated by arc h i t e c t plants are now established throughout the non-agricul- Dwight Heald Perkins, who served his apprenticeship in tural portions of the region, especially in most parks and Bu r n h a m ’ s office during the Columbian Exposition. What residential areas and in most commercial and institu- Burnham did do was to encourage the extension and con- tional sites. NIPC (1997c) estimates that over a ten-year tinuation of the forest districts. There is no question that period, installation and maintenance of Kentucky blue without the plan, the forest preserves as we know them today grass cost $59,400 per acre. The second option is to use would not exist. native plants, and in some cases to re s t o re hydro l o g y, which in turn will support more animals, birds and other In 1999, the same Commercial Club of Chicago published native species. The NIPC study estimates that over a ten a sequel to the Burnham Plan, which includes a stro n g year period, installation and maintenance of either buf- endorsement of Chicago Wilderness (Johnson 1999). falo grass or prairie grasses and forbs cost under $10,000 per acre. Northwest Indiana Forum: This group, the leading orga - nization of businesses in northwestern Indiana, has It is important to note that natural landscaping comple- played an important role in promoting open-space ments the ecological restoration taking place across the pr eservation. It did so by helping to negotiate the settle- Chicago Wilderness. In natural landscaping, the pro p- ment of pollution claims by the US EPA against certain erty owner is concerned primarily with selecting fro m local industries. This settlement directed corporate con- the palate of native plants and is generally not interes t e d tributions toward the preservation of enviro n m e n t a l l y in restoring the hydrology or soils on the site. Nonethe- important sites rather than the payment of fines. less, replacing the monoculture of lawns with native plants enhances habitat for birds and insects and also H o m e b u i l d e r s : C h i c a g o - a rea homebuilders are in a pr ovides important public education for broader res t o r a - unique position to promote the conservation of biodi- tion proj e c t s . versity by means of good site design and the pres e r v a t i o n of open spaces such as wetlands contained on a building site. Some have done so, but many have found it diff i- 11.3.3 Farmland owners cult to find qualified organizations willing to receive and All of the highest quality streams in the Chicago pr operly manage small open spaces. This issue req u i re s Wilderness region are in primarily agricultural are a s , further analysis by Chicago Wilderness members before which suggests that most farming in the Chicago reg i o n recommending solutions. is more compatible with preservation of stream quality than is most suburban development. Croplands inter- Natural landscaping: Many businesses are also land- mixed with pasture and woodlands can result in a habi- owners. In the U.S., approximately 20 million acres of tat suitable for certain native bird species, such as lawn are cultivated, covering more land than any single meadowlarks, as well as a variety of mammals. c rop. Natural landscaping—using native plants and

13 9 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Agricultural areas offer the most feasible opportunity sions are incorporating open space and natural areas into for large-scale expansion of natural areas, although prime their design, such as the Prairie Crossing development farmland should be kept in production where at all pos- in Grayslake and the Coffee Creek development in sible. In evaluating land for its preservation potential, soil Chesterton. Other examples include golf courses, corpo- maps can be especially helpful, especially to find hydric rate headquarters such as the Sears property in Hoffm a n soils whose drainage has been altered by drain tiles. Estates, Tel Labs in Bolingbrook, and private res i d e n c e s on lots of five or more acres. Some, like those mentioned Various techniques to preserve farmland have been devel- above, are already using native landscaping or managing oped and applied nationally. In the Chicago area, tax natural communities within their properties. Their assessments can reflect agricultural land values if the accomplishments should be made more widely known owner agrees not to develop the land for ten years. Kane, so that other property managers can learn to develop Mc H e n r y , and Will Counties in northeastern Illinois have similar strategies. Section 11.3.2 discusses natural land- defined prime agricultural areas and sought, with mixed scaping; Appendix 9 details the cost savings it offe r s . success, to keep them from being developed. One tool available to counties is agricultural zoning, but their Any private landowner whose property contains or authority to zone is preempted once a nearby municipal- bu f fers remnant natural communities can grant prot e c - ity annexes the land. Few municipalities have identified tive easements or take other measures to help assure the farmlands to be preserved in their comprehensive plans. p reservation of biodiversity. Chapter 8 discusses the actions available to private owners. One farming practice that can affect biodiversity is the setting aside of certain lands for conservation purposes, using subsidies available under the U.S. Department of 11.3.5 Residential property owners A g r i c u l t u re Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Residential properties can play a role in Chicago Wi l d- C u r re n t l y, 7,348 acres of farmland have been set aside erness by providing habitat. Small yards in urban under ten-year contracts in the collar counties of Illinois. settings have limitations but they can play an eff e c t i v e C R P has already been shown to help stabilize or even role in enhancing bird habitat especially during the in c r ease previously declining bird populations, including migratory season, diversifying the native species com- those of Henslow’s sparrow , Grasshopper sparrow , and position of urban trees and shrubs, and providing local meadowlark. The more recently established Conserv- en v i r onmental education opportunities. For those with ation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) includes l a rger lots, homeowners can provide a broader base of state matching funds for contracts ranging from 15-year restoration activities with natural landscaping which cre- to permanent easements. However, in the Illinois porates micro-habitats for birds and insects. Natural land- tion of Chicago Wilderness, CREP is only available for scaping slows run o f f and increases water absorption, a floodplains and wetlands in the Lower Fox River Val l e y . h y d rological impact with benefits to stream and river biodiversity and grou n d w a t e r -fed wetlands. Farmers can also help preserve natural communities by maintaining vegetative filter strips of at least 25 feet adja- Lots which adjoin forest preserves or nature pre s e r v e s cent to streams and by keeping livestock waste out of may contain native soil organisms, seed and plant stock st r eams. Also, farmers owning wetlands and wood lots and may be migration corridors for amphibians, rep t i l e s , containing important native communities can help pre- insects and other fauna. Simple restoration techniques in serve them by establishing adjacent buffer areas. The fed- these situations may allow a yard to blossom into usable eral and state Departments of A g r i c u l t u re should use habitat in a very short period of time. educational programs to encourage the application of best management practices to such area s . Lots which adjoin, share or include detention ponds can play a role in enhancing the water quality and biodiver- 11.3.4 Private owners of large, low- sity of our region’s streams and rivers by creating wetland edges, planting deep-rooted plants on the berms de n s i t y , non-agricultural properties and higher ground, and if designed as “dry ponds,” sup- Many privately owned, non-farm properties scattere d porting their ret r ofitting into wet pond/wetland habitats. th r oughout the region contain extensive open spaces that support or could support natural communities or at least La r ger lots can play an important role in regional habitat a variety of native species. Prime examples are the enhancement. Aside from the suggestions described Morton A r b o retum, the Marshall Field estate in Lake above, larger residential acreages can create more diverse C o u n t y, Illinois, and the Max McGraw Wildlife Center restorations. An increasing number of private re s t o r a- in East Dundee. Some newer private housing subdivi- tions have sustained 100-200 native plant species. Large r lots can res t o r e natural hydrological functions (e.g., total

14 0 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players absorption of rainwater in most storm events). They can native ecosystems on public land. Restoring ecosystems also participate in cooperative long term natural res o u rc e includes controlling exotic species, removing brush, con- management efforts with nearby forest preserves and ducting prescribed burns, and gathering, processing, and natural area management agencies. For a list of tech- planting seeds. Considering the magnitude of the need niques for committing private property to local environ - to manage publicly owned land for biodiversity, a sub- mental management initiatives, see Section 8.2. stantial increase in volunteer activity appears to be the only practical option. In fact, one measure of the success Benefits to biodiversity are both direct and indire c t . of this plan will be the extent to which volunteers are Di r ect benefits include providing habitat for orga n i s m s involved in implementing its rec o m m e n d a t i o n s . that rely on native plants for food and shelter such as butterflies and migrating birds. Indirect benefits include Ch i c a g o - a r ea forest preserve and conservation districts educating people about native ecosystems and gaining have long recognized how volunteers can help them to their interest and support for protecting and re s t o r i n g carry out their mission. The Illinois Association of their natural heritage. Further benefit can be pro v i d e d Conservation and Forest Preserve Districts has encour- by owners of land close to natural areas by pro v i d i n g aged member districts to emphasize public participation native habitat that has the effect of expanding the size of in natural-res o u r ce management by providing opportu- the protected area . nities for volunteering. The recommendations emphasize that the districts should provide volunteer and service gr oups with staff support. Volunteers can be an impor- 11. 4 tant means of achieving the fundamental goals and purposes of conservation organizations. They are a valuable Role of volunteers extension of paid staff and can have a powerful pres e n c e because of their numbers, distribution, and willingness to be active after business hours and on weekends. 11.4.1 Importance of volunteers Volunteerism has a rich history in American tradition. Volunteer programs are strongest and most eff e c t i v e Volunteer firefighters and paramedics continue to play when they encourage volunteers to be deeply involved essential roles in many areas even today. Legions of and to have a sense of real connection to the places they volunteers provide vital assistance in hospitals, muse- work. The full potential of volunteers is not simply as ums, botanical gardens, and other institutions across the la b o r ers, but as self-motivated, creative owners involved co u n t r y . in planning, organizing, implementing, and evaluating pr ojects. Empowering volunteers to apply their energy In the Chicago region, volunteers have played vital rol e s and creativity under the guidance of land-owning orga - in preserving biodiversity. Many of the member orga n i - nizations offers immense potential. They are stewards of zations of Chicago Wilderness involve volunteers in a public land, acting on behalf of the public in the public wide variety of activities, ranging from hands-on res t o r a - in t e re s t . tion through teaching to advocacy. Volunteers often do important work that otherwise would not get done. 11.4.2 Strengthening volunteer C rucial management can sometimes be omitted or delayed because there are simply not enough staff programs for protection and res o u r ces available. Volunteers are motivated by know- restoration of biodiversity ing that species populations will die out without their Volunteers should be invited to be partners in planning help. Over the years, restoration volunteers have devel- and implementing land management. This stren g t h e n s oped techniques and a culture that makes this work both the ties between volunteers and the host org a n i z a t i o n ef fective and fun for thousands of people. Many volun- and ensures consistency and continuity. Time donated by teers have developed considerable expertise. These volunteers should result in accomplishing important skilled volunteers are an important part of the conserva- additional tasks, not performing work otherwise expect- tion team of many agencies. There is room for participa- ed of staff. Thus, the host organization should use vol- tion by many thousands more volunteers through the unteer help in defining and building the volunteer various programs of Chicago Wilderness member orga - pr ogram itself. ni z a t i o n s .

Volunteers provide a major res o u r ce as docents, guides, Re c o m m e n d a t i o n s ✔ monitors, and workers. Volunteers physically clean up Land-managing agencies should invite volunteers st r eams, monitor lakes and streams, maintain bird counts, to be partners both in planning and in implementing support scientific studies by gathering data, and res t o r e land management.

14 1 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

• Specific actions for host organizations participating in prescribed burns. In such cases it is important to establish clear req u i r ements and the ✔ Develop a strategy for involving volunteers. Ident- means of meeting them such as training or testing ify functions and tasks to be accomplished by vol- at convenient times and places. un t e e r s . ✔ P rovide opportunity for personal satisfaction in • Volunteer leaders accomplishing tasks that are needed for res t o r a t i o n . ✔ People serve as volunteers because they find satis- Leadership among volunteers develops as people faction in the work. Successful volunteer prog r a m s gain experience and knowledge. Those willing to build on this fact to accomplish the purposes of the accept and provide leadership should be encour- org a n i z a t i o n . aged to do so and should be given added res p o n s i - bility and rec o g n i t i o n . ✔ Remove barriers. Make it easy and inviting for vol- ✔ unteers to contribute time and energ y. If re q u i re- The Volunteer Stewardship Network (see below) ments and/or qualifications are necessary, prov i d e should be supported and recognized as a valuable ways for volunteers to earn them through training asset in developing leadership, expertise, and over- or certification based on tests of ability or knowl- all membership in conservation prog r a m s . ed g e . ✔ Pr ovide an organized context for volunteer activi- 11.4.3 Citizen scientists and the ties. At a minimum, provide a stable set of grou n d Volunteer Stewardship Network rules to accommodate volunteer efforts and involve volunteer leaders in developing them. An important type of volunteer is the citizen scientist, who enjoys learning scientific aspects of the local ecology. ✔ Encourage volunteers to adopt or take “owner- Such individuals may become involved in education, ship” for specific functions or places. monitoring, res e a r ch, or various stewardship activities. ✔ Identify a specific person within the host orga n i z a - They rep r esent a major res o u r ce and are often core mem- tion as the central contact for volunteers. bers of volunteer prog r a m s .

✔ Pr ovide recognition for volunteers reg u l a r l y . The Volunteer Stewardship Network is an unincorpo- ✔ P rovide support for a volunteer newsletter and rated organization of self-motivated site stewards and related communications that offer education and citizen scientist/ecologists who have worked with many information on volunteer opportunities. land managers to lead ecosystem protection and res t o r a - tion. These volunteers, who serve as leaders for thou- ✔ P rovide tools or other necessary re s o u rces where sands of other volunteers in our region, work to maintain po s s i b l e . communication among their groups and to build collec- ✔ P rovide opportunities for face-to-face contact tive expertise. As volunteers become more invested in between volunteer leaders and organization staff. the success of natural-areas management and assume leadership roles within the network, they both stren g t h - ✔ P rovide support with heavy equipment operated en the network and increase the number and quality of by staff if needed and possible. vo l u n t e e r s . ✔ Develop long-term site plans for restoration and pr otection and annual work plans for activities to The Illinois EcoWatch Network is a volunteer ecosystem complete them. Include volunteers in the planning monitoring program coordinated through the Illinois pr ocess and identify their role clearly. Department of Natural Resources, Division of Energ y and Environmental Assessment. EcoWatch volunteers ✔ Have experienced volunteer leaders, trained and a re trained as Citizen Scientists to monitor stre a m s , certified by the landowning agency, provide on-site fo r ests/woodlands, prairies, wetlands, and urban gree n supervision of most volunteer activities. spaces using biological indicators. EcoWatch arose from res e a r ch indicating a need for monitoring data collected • Training and certification at a large number of sites using systematic and consistent ✔ Develop criteria for various functions and tasks and methods. EcoWatch monitoring programs were designed facilitate training to ensure expertise in them. by state scientists who are responsible for analyzing the data collected, with input from the broader scientific ✔ Certification is appropriate for some activities, co m m u n i t y . including applying herbicide on public land and

14 2 Chapter 11. Role of Key Players

11.4.4 Examples of successful tion processes have been developed, but, at all geo- volunteer programs graphic scales from region-wide transportation planning to site design, the best outcomes usually involve crea t i v e One example of a successful volunteer-driven program is planning and compromise among all interested parties. the Mighty Acorns. This educational program involves Apurpose of this plan is to heighten local officials’ under- many adult volunteers, working through twelve partner standing of biodiversity and its dependence on place. agencies, who work with schools to introduce grade- Of ficials must know how to value local habitats and eco- school children to natural areas and to adopt a field site logical functions so that they can be fully considered in that they visit three times each year during diffe r ent sea- dealing with controversies and competing pres s u re s . sons. Working in groups of five to seven per adult volun t e e r , the children participate in restoration work such Governments, too, frequently compete for land. An n e x - as removing weeds and brush or gathering and planting ation disputes and disagreements over proposed uses of seeds. This hands-on approach with ample instru c t i o n land are common. One frequent course of action has been brings children into contact with nature in a way that to develop intergovernmental boundary agreements well most have not experienced. in advance of actual land development. The municipalities in the corridors for the proposed extensions of the Other very successful local volunteer programs include north-south toll road in Lake and Will Counties have the Butterfly Monitoring Network, the Orchid Recovery recently negotiated non-binding interg o v e r n m e n t a l Pr oject, the Bird Conservation Network, EcoWatch, the ag r eements on the future uses of land, including the des- I n t e r religious Sustainability Project, and many gro u p s ignation of permanent open spaces. The municipalities in engaged in on-the-ground ecological restoration in every the vicinity of the proposed third airport in Will County county in northeastern Illinois as well as several coun- have done the same. The effectiveness of these agre e- ties in Indiana. ments has yet to be tested, as none of these projects has yet received final approval for construc t i o n . 11. 5 To further the goals of this plan and to establish a smart and equitable approach to resolving conflicts, we rec o m - Conflict resolution and mend a coordinated, intergovernmental, re g i o n - w i d e , co m p r ehensive process for managing growth. Ap p e n d i x intergovernmental 10 contains a recommended set of proc e d u r es for establishing and carrying out such a process. To make this rec - cooperation: recommending ommendation tangible, the Appendix uses an example of a comprehensive process planning a transportation corridor (the example presented is for a major arterial corridor, such as Strategic for managing growth Regional Arterial, where complex, interg o v e r n m e n t a l issues call for such a process). This example illustrates the One of the thorniest issues in the management of public actions, pro c e d u res, and considerations that should be lands is how to satisfy competing user groups. Those included to ensure careful weighing of a full set of val- who enjoy active outdoor rec r eation such as horseback ues and outcomes before making decisions. The rec o m - riding, biking, and field sports often find themselves mendations in the example apply to re s i d e n t i a l - a re a competing with those who wish to see fragile natural planning, planning for economic development, and ar eas left undisturbed. Transportation planning often pits open-space planning. the need for transportation facilities against land-use plans and the need to protect natural re s o u rces. Since governmental agencies have an obligation to serve all reasonable interests, the resolution of disputes over use can become an arduous process. Various conflict-res o l u -

14 3 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 1 Chicago Wil d e r ness Ter restrial Community Classification System

This community classification system for The Chicago Wil d e rn e s s descriptions presented here only indicate what one is going to region has several purposes: 1) to facilitate the understanding of find in many cases, but not all cases. It is impractical or unrea l i s - biodiversity (genes, species, communities); 2) to serve as a tool tic to define communities based on exact criteria, such as “high for the assessment of the status of communities (how much is left, quality mesic savannas all have at least 5% coverage by bur how fragmented, how degraded are they, threats, etc.); and 3) to oak”. Such rules always seem to have exceptions, and there- aid land managers in their work of restoring and maintaining f o re, it is best to simply describe the average or most typical diverse native ecosystems. community characteristics.

It is important to be aware of the affects of past land uses on the In t ro d u c t i o n s t ru c t u re and species composition of modern communities. For example; presents of large lower branches, nearly sweeping the The most influential early systems for classifying the Chicago gr ound, on oak trees are very likely the result of historic pasturing re g i o n ’s natural communities for conservation purposes were on the site and not indicative of presettlement community struc - those of Curtis (1959) and White (1978). Both cases, depended tu r e. Frequent fires would have fire pruned such lower branches. on finding and describing “undisturbed” sites. These systems Abundance of some understory or canopy trees may be the res u l t we r e of tremendous value to conservation. But they worked best of grazing selection by various species of domestic livestock. for prairie and closed forest communities—not as well for the Ir onwood (Ostrya virginiana) and Hawthorne (Cr a t a e g u s sp p . ) , open oak communities that were so characteristic of this reg i o n u n d e r s t o ry species, are grazing increasers as is white ash and which are of special conservation concern today. The fire- (Fraxinus americana). Such grazing impacts can also be seen in dependent ancient timbered lands of the tallgrass region have the herbaceous layer as well. Pennsylvania sedge (Carex pen- been more carefully considered during the decades since the sy l v a n i c a ) and spring beauty (Claytonia virginica) increase under work of Curtis and White. The Nature Conserva n c y , the USDA light grazing while May apple (Podophyllum peltatum) is an Fo r est Service, the Midwest Oak Ecosystems Recovery Plan, the in c r ease under heavy grazing pres s u r e. Illinois DNR (Bowles, 1996) and others have developed a variety of approaches to handle the re g i o n ’s oak communities. These Deer browsing is also an important factor to be aware of, espe- di f fer from Curtis and the Illinois Inventory in two ways. First, they cially as it relates to natural communities within large urban add additional categories (for example woodlands) and they a reas. In these areas deer herds are usually uncontrolled and clarify the definitions of some of their original components (for communities are highly fragmented resulting in intense brow s i n g example savannas and shrublands). Second they seek to be more pre s s u r e. Deer browsing has been shown to be a strong influence applicable to degraded lands (including restorable lands). on the struc t u r e and species composition of natural communities. Deer selectively browse certain species such as oaks while hav- The community descriptions as presented here are based upon ing less impact on ash, maple, and a number of shrub species. relatively high quality sites (i.e. sites which are less disturbed Deer have a tremendous influence on the herbaceous layer as (closer to presettlement condition), and have a relatively high pro- well. Many palatable species such as orchids and trilliums are p o rtion of their species intact). Sites which are disturbed or g reatly reduced in number or eliminated while others, such as degraded tend to carry a lower portion of their original charac- Dentaria laciniata, ar e greatly increa s e d . ter and biota, and thus are less likely to smoothly fit the community description. However, it is still important to identify these It is important to realize that no communities possess discrete or degraded sites as a degraded variant of their original community definite boundaries, especially on larger less fragmented sites. type (rather than describing such areas as “new community Th e re f o r e, any of these communities is transitional between other types” or as “non-communities”). The more degraded a site communities, especially on similar substrates or with similar phys- becomes, the less it will tend to have in common with the high iognomic or moisture conditions. For example; a dry-mesic sand quality community description, and the more one may be force d prairie is transitional between dry and mesic sand prairie. This to rely on peripheral information to correctly identify a given transitional characteristic is especially true when either; physiog- ar ea. For example, a very degraded mesic savanna may have n o m y, moisture, substrate, or combinations of these characters 85% tree canopy cover, and no presence of grasses or sedges. ar e the same. Because of this transitional nature of communities, This will make site identification difficult if one simply relies on the any one community description needs to include those sites which literal description of high quality “mesic savanna”. However, if would almost meet the req u i r ements for the next wetter community one notices that the site in question has large, scattered bur oaks and those sites which would almost meet the re q u i rements for with large lower branch scars, and the site is on a very gently the next drier community as well as those which fall exactly in sloping moraine, one may determine that the site is a degraded the middle of the community type. It is important to be aware of mesic savanna. the transitional prop e r ties of classification. The system pres e n t e d he r e is of a coarser scale than some classification systems which The community descriptions are a summary of average condi- will serve to make some delineation of community less difficult. It tions. In rea l i t y , ecologists have found that no two sites are exactly should be easier to separate a wet community from a mesic com- alike. There f o re, classification is an exercise in aggre g a t i n g munity than it is to separate one which is wet from one which is unique sites which have some features in common. By pre s e n t- we t - m e s i c . ing average, or typical, or modal information, the community

14 8 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

Community descriptions include lists of dominant and character- Fo r ested communities istic species of both plants and animals. Dominant species are those which express the most influence on the rest of the commu- Upland fores t ni t y . In the case of wooded communities, this would refer to the (Developed under 80-100% canopy cover.) This natural commu- la r gest most frequently occurring trees. In herbaceous communi- nity has a multi-layered struc t u r e with canopy, sub-canopy, shrub , ties, this would refer to species exhibiting the greatest cover and and herbaceous layers. Microt o p o g r a p h i c – m i c r oclimatic varia- f re q u e n c y. Characteristic means those species, which although tion, fire ret u r n frequency and intensity, soil moisture, wind throw not necessarily abundant, have a relatively high probability of and its freq u e n c y , and disease outbreaks allowed for the devel- being found when in the community and a relatively low prob a - opment of structural and compositional features characteristic of bility of being found when not in the community. These lists best upland forests. Canopy tree species are well rep r esented in vary- describe the community when being found as a group of species ing age classes from seedling to canopy sized individuals. The rather than as individual species. fi r e ret u r n period is presumed longer for this community than for other woodland or savanna types. Longer fire ret u r n period and The classification system below was synthesized from the sys- lower fire intensities would result from fire barriers provided by tems currently most used in the Chicago region including all those woodlands, savannas, and large rivers or lakes on the south listed above. and west sides of these communities. Three subtypes based on soil moisture fit into the upland forest category.

Major vegetation types: forest, shrubland, grassland • Dr y-mesic. This is an oak dominated, multi-layered community with a higher incidence of disturbance from fire than the next Our forested communities include all communities that are dom- two subtypes. The under story is dominated by shade and par- inated by trees (that is the various forest, woodland and flat- tial shade tolerant herbaceous species. Topographic features woods types), with an average canopy cover of 50% or grea t e r . such as moraine slopes and/or soil types contribute to better T h e re are three characteristics: (1) wetness (that is whether an drainage. Due to the exposure to droughty conditions and a rea is wet, mesic (as it is used here, mesic refers to average higher fire freq u e n c y , there is less or no significant presence of mo i s t u r e, the soil being moist for most of the growing season) or sugar maple. d ry), (2) upland/floodplain, distinguished by the absence or p resence of regular flooding, and (3) forest/woodland, origi- Dominant plants: Quercus alba; Sub-dominant plants: nally 100-80% canopy for forests and 80-50% canopy for Quercus rubra, Quercus velutina healthy woodlands (but the canopy coverage of modern examples does not define these communities; the communities are Characteristic plants: Amelanchier arborea, Carya ovata, defined by the remnant biota). The woodland and forest com- Fraxinus americana, Ostrya virginiana, Poa sylvestris, Ribes munities occur mostly on loamy soils although some may occur missouriense, Trillium flexipes, Viburnum prunifolium on gravel. Another forested community, flatwoods, is the result of specialized soil conditions and the influence of ground water at Characteristic animals: or near the surface. Flatwoods occur on level or nearly level t o p o g r a p h y. Floodplain forests are classified separately fro m • Me s i c . Soil that have moisture available for most of the grow - upland forests because periodic flooding greatly affects the soil, ing season results in a dense overstory and a high importa n c e fauna, and flora in floodplains. of sugar maple and, in undisturbed stands, an under story of shade-tolerant species. These forests occur on nort h - f a c i n g The grassland communities include the prairies, shrublands, and slopes, in ravines, and on level soil with moderately high avail- savannas (those communities which developed with less than able moisture and in situations where topographic features , 50% tree cover). Compared to forest types, there are more, such as large rivers and lakes, affo r ded these sites prot e c t i o n relatively good, examples of grassland subtypes ( with the excep- fr om frequent or intense fires. The Ac e r spp. component of this tion of savannas) that have been carefully studied by conserv- type typically occupied small fire refugia but have spre a d ation biologists. As a result these grassland community widely since settlement. Although fire frequency was less than descriptions have been developed from a larger base of knowl- in dry-mesic forests, the fire frequency was thought to have edge. Grasslands, also unlike wooded lands, do not have the allowed for the rep r oduction of oak and other light demand- s t ructural complexity and post settlement disturbance factors to ing species which are gradually lost in the absence of fire. complicate their classification. Shrublands were a substantial component of the Chicago reg i o n ’ s original landscape. However Dominant plants: Acer saccharum, Quercus rubra; Su b - d o m i - no high quality examples of most types have survived, and they nant plants: Acer nigrum, Ostrya virginiana, Tilia americana have been relatively little studied. This community type may ex p r ess itself more clearly after more land is res t o r ed. Characteristic plants: Actaea rubra, Adiantum pedatum, Aralia racemosa, Carex laxiculmis, Carex woodii, Caulo- Levels of the community classification are defined as follows; phyllum thalictroides, Circaea lutetiana, Dicentra cucullaria, Fo r ested communities, prairies, etc. are community classes. Wit h i n Dryopteris goldiana, Hepatica acutiloba, Jeffersonia diphylla, community classes, using prairie as an example, the natural com- Orchis spectabilis, Staphylea trifolia, Trillium grandiflorum, munities are fine-textured-soil, sand, gravel, dolomite. Within nat- Uvularia grandiflora, Viburnum acerifolium ural community types, dry-mesic, mesic, etc. are subtypes. Characteristic animals: Wood thrush, ovenbird

14 9 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

• Mesic forest (variant). A variant of the mesic forest occurs in • Wet . Flooding in this community is so frequent or prol o n g e d the eastern portion of the Chicago Wil d e r ness region, espe- that the diversity of trees is lowered. The under story and often cially in Indiana, where Fagus grandifolia becomes a co- the overstory are open. Nettles and vines are often prom i n e n t . dominant with sugar maple. Dominant plants: Any of the following species may be locally Dominant plants: Acer saccharum, Fagus grandifolia dominant; Acer saccharinum, Populus deltoides, Salix nigra

Characteristic plants: Carex careyana, Carex leptonervia, Characteristic plants: Acer negundo, Ambrosia trifida, Carex plantaginea, Cornus rugosa, Dryopteris noveboracen- Boehmeria cylindrica, Carex grayi, Cinna arundinacea, sis, Galium lanceolatum, Lindera benzoin, Lonicera canaden- Echinocystis lobata, Elymus virginicus, Fraxinus pennsylvan- sis, Panax trifolius, Panicum commutatum ashei, Pyrola ica, Laportea canadensis, Pilea pumila, Rudbeckia laciniata, asarifolia purpurea Urtica procera, Vitis riparia

Characteristic animals: ovenbird, red-eyed vireo Characteristic animals: massasauga rattlesnake, barred owl, re d - s h o u l d e red hawk, acadian flycatcher, yellow-thro a t e d • Wet - m e s i c . This community experiences high moisture levels vi r eo, prot h o n o t a r y warbler and poor drainage due to level topography. The moist silty loamy soil conditions are associated with shallow drainage- ways and seepage areas. These forests are functionally, com- Fl a t w o o d po s i t i o n a l l y , and structurally diffe r ent from floodplain fores t s . (50-80% canopy cover or less.) Flatwoods occur on level or nearly level soil that has an impermeable or slowly perm e a b l e Dominant plants: Quercus rubra, Acer saccharum; Su b - d o m i - layer (Aquiclude) which causes a shallow, perched water table. nant plants: Juglans nigra, Ulmus americana The plants and animals must adapt to seasonally wet conditions fr om the perched water table; and then they must withstand sum- Characteristic plants: Carex davisii, Carpinus caroliniana, mer dry conditions because the slowly permeable soil layers Celtis occidentalis, Cornus alternifolia, Impatiens capensis, stop replenishment of soil moisture from capillary action and Quercus macrocarpa, Ulmus rubra restrict rooting and burrowing depth. Because soil moisture fluctuates so widely by the season, the moisture class is not in the nat- Characteristic animals: ural community name. Plants typical of dry and dry-mesic soil gr ow on slight rises, and depressions contain ephemeral and seasonal ponds. The temporary, fishless, ponds provide bre e d i n g Floodplain fores t habitat for amphibians and support diverse aquatic inverte b r a t e s . (>80% canopy cover.) Floodplain forests are on the floodplain Many flatwoods had a higher component of savanna vegeta- of rivers and streams. The communities are [determined] shaped tion in presettlement times. by the frequency and duration of flooding, nutrient and sediment deposition, and by the permeability of the soil. The canopy • N o rt h e rn . This community is found associating with the cover is similar to upland forest but with more open understories Valparaiso, Ti n l e y, and Lake Border Morainic Systems on due to the frequent flooding. The soil moisture classes range poorly drained, nearly level ground. Ver nal ponds are char- fr om wet-mesic to wet acteristic.

• Wet - m e s i c . This is the most common floodplain forest commu- Dominant plants: Quercus bicolor, Ulmus americana, Fraxinus ni t y . This subtype receives less frequent and intense flooding nigra than wet floodplains. As a result the understory is more well developed with a richer herbaceous layer. Characteristic plants: Aster ontarionis, Cardamine bulbosa, Carex bromoides, Carex crus-corvi, Carex lupulina, Carex Dominant plants: This forest is usually a mixture of trees, with muskingumensis, Carpinus caroliniana var. virginiana, no clear dominants. Cephalanthus occidentalis, Cinna arundinacea, Corylus americana, Fraxinus pensylvanica subintegerrima, Glyceria striata, Characteristic plants: Acer negundo, Acer saccharinum, Habenaria psycodes, Illex verticillata, Impatiens capensis, Actinomeris alternifolia, Asarum canadense, Celtis occiden- Iris virginica var. shrevei, Onoclea sensibilis, Ranunculus fla- talis, Chaerophyllum procumbens, uglans nigra, Laportea bellaris, Rubus pubescens, Saxifraga pensylvanica, Scutell- canadensis, Lindera benzoin, Lysimachia ciliata, Mertensia aria lateriflora, Ulmus rubra, Viburnum rafinesquianum virginica, Sambucus canadensis, Smilax tamnoides, Ulmus americana, Ulmus rubra Characteristic animals: Appalachian eyed-brown butterf l y, blue spotted salamander, tiger salamander, wood frog, tree Characteristic animals: massasauga rattlesnake, barred owl, f rog, spring peeper, chorus frog, wood duck, solitary sand- re d - s h o u l d e red hawk, acadian flycatcher, yellow-thro a t e d pi p e r , red-headed woodpecker vi r eo, prot h o n o t a r y warbler

15 0 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

• Sa n d . This is a flatwoods community which develops on soils Characteristic plants: Asclepias exaltata, Carex hirtifolia, with two distinct layers: a meter or more of acidic sand over Carex jamesii, Caulophylum thalictroides, Cirsium altissimum, silty clay. This community is not well pronounced in north e a s t - Geranium maculatum Lithospermum latifolium, Panicum lati- er n Illinois and is more typically found in the southern porti o n foliaum, Podophyllum peltatum, Prenanthes alba, Prunus vir- of the Chicago Wil d e r ness Region. In the region these com- giniana, Taenidia integerrima, Trillium flexipes, Vi b u r n u m munities are found associated with the Chicago Lake Plain lentago and old glacial lake beds in the southwestern portion of the region. Where natural fireb r eaks occur, sand flatwoods occur Characteristic animals: red-headed woodpecker, yellow-billed rather than shrub prairie or wet-mesic prairie. In the absence cuckoo, indigo bunting, Baltimore oriole, blue-gray gnat- of fire, these prairie communities can succeed to sand flat- c a t c h e r, eastern wood pewee, great crested flycatcher, wo o d s . Co o p e r ’ s hawk, ros e - b r easted grosbeak blue-winged warbler

Dominant plants: Quercus palustris, Acer rubrum; S u b - • Wet - m e s i c . These woodlands often interdigitate with north e r n dominant plants: Quercus alba, Quercus rubra, Fraxinus fl a t w o o d s . am e r i c a n a Dominant plants: Quercus bicolor, Salix nigra; Su b - d o m i n a n t Characteristic plants: Eleocharis tenuis var. verrucosa, p l a n t s : Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Quercus macrocarpa, Maianthemum canadense, Mitchella repens, Nyssa sylvatica, Quercus coccinea Osmunda cinnamomea, Vaccinium angustifolium Characteristic plants: Arisaema dracontium, Cardamine dou- Characteristic animals: glassii, Carex grisea, Cinna arundinacea, Floerkea proser- pinacoides, Isopyrum biternatum, Juglans nigra, Menispermum canadensis, Phlox divaricata, Polemonium reptans, Ranunculus Woodland septentrionalis, Ribes americanum, Sanicula gregaria (Originally 50-80% canopy cover.) Woodlands developed under a canopy cover intermediate between savanna and forest. Many original woodlands today have canopy cover greater than 80% Savanna communities (and thus appear to fit the forest stru c t u re category) due to fire su p p r ession. Such sites can be most easily recognized by failure (10-50% canopy cover.) Savannas are wooded communities with of the canopy tree species to rep r oduce with few if any canopy graminoid grou n d c o v e r . They developed under an average tree tr ee species rep r esented in the seedling or sapling layer. These canopy cover less than 50% but greater than 10%. A savanna communities may have had a well developed shrub layer which may have shrubby areas, and the tree canopy may locally be has become shade suppressed in modern times. A conserva t i v e gr eater or less than the above limits. Savannas often have soils woodland shrub and herbaceous layer may be present in the best that are transitional between forest and prairie, and they have quality remnants. Woodlands may differ from savannas in having distinctive plants and animals. These communities were main- significantly higher populations of spring ephemerals. tained by fire in presettlement times. They were among the most w i d e s p read and characteristic communities in Illinois, but few • Dry - m e s i c . These are woodlands situated on well drained soils high quality stands remain. Most remnants have obviously been and or the tops or south-facing slopes of moraines. These changed. The least-disturbed remnants are on sandy land that still soils and topographic conditions permit for better drainage is frequently burned, and on the very driest slopes where woody and drier soil conditions, and greater fire freq u e n c y . en c r oachment has been slowest. Two savanna natural communities can be named: fine-textured-soil savanna and sand savanna. Dominant plants: Quercus alba; Sub-dominant plants: Individual savanna subtypes are distinguished by soil moisture. Fraxinus americana, Quercus rubra, Quercus macrocarpa Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil savanna Characteristic plants: Agrimonia pubescens, Anemonella thal- This typical savanna natural community occupies fine-textured - s o i l ictroides, Aster shortii, Carex rosea, Carex cephalophora, on till plains and lowlands. Savannas occurred as an ecotonal Carex pensylvanica, Corylus americanus, Gallium triflorum, belt along streamside forests, as “islands” in prairie or forest, and Geranium maculatum, Heiraceum scabrum, Helianthus on extensive areas of hilly land. Three subtypes based on soil decapetalus, Krigia biflora, Luzula multiflora, Silene stellata, mo i s t u r e are described. Solidago ulmifolia, Trillium recurvatum, Viburnum prunifolium • D ry - m e s i c . In this community, soil moisture levels are analo- Characteristic animals: white-footed mouse(Peromyscus leuco- gous to dry-mesic upland forest. Grass height and the com- p u s), eastern chipmunk, great crested flycatcher, eastern position of the herbaceous vegetation are analogous to that of wood pewee, downy woodpecker, fox squirrel dr y-mesic prairie.

• Mesic. These woodlands occur on more level terrain with Dominant plants: Quercus macrocarpa, Quercus velutina; loamy soils of a higher moisture content than dry-mesic sites. Sub-dominant plants: Juglans nigra, Quercus alba, Quercus co c c i n e a Dominant plants: Quercus rubra; Sub-dominant plants: Ac e r nigrum, Quercus alba

15 1 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

Characteristic plants: Andropogon scoparius, Corylus ameri- Dominant plants: Quercus velutina, Quercus alba cana, Helianthus divaricatus, Silene stellata, Smilax lasion- eura, Sorghastrum nutans Characteristic plants: Aster linariifolius, Carex pensylvanica, Comandra richardsonii, Helianthus divaricatus, Phlox pilosa, Characteristic animals: eastern bluebird, red-headed wood- Stipa spartea p e c k e r, field sparro w, fox squirrel, prairie deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus bairdii) Characteristic animals: olympia marble-wing, karner blue bu t t e rf l y , Indian skipper. • Mesic. This community is found at the base of moraine ridges and (rarely) as islands in wetland vegetation. • Me s i c . This subtype is found only in Indiana and in close prox - imity to the shore of Lake Michigan. This type tends to occur in Dominant plants: Quercus macrocarpa; Sub-dominant plants: between ridges where microclimatic conditions tend to be Quercus alba, Quercus coccinea mo r e humid and soils wetter.

Characteristic plants: Andropogon gerardi, Andropogon sco- Dominant plants: Quercus alba, Quercus velutina, Betula parius, Heliopsis helianthoides, Lathyrus venosus, Sorgha- pa p y r i f e r a strum nutans, Thaspium trifoliatum Characteristic plants: Andropogon gerardi, Aralia nudicaulis, Characteristic animals: silvery blue butterf l y, re d - h e a d e d Maianthemum canadense, Cypripedium reginae, Salix wo o d p e c k e r , eastern bluebird, north e r n flicker, eastern king- hu m i l i s bi r d, black-billed cuckoo, blue-winged warbler Characteristic animals: • Wet-mesic. These communities often interdigitate with north e r n fl a t w o o d s .

Dominant plants: Quercus macrocarpa, Quercus bicolor Sh r ubland communities (often lacking in western sections); Sub-dominant plants: Quercus coccinea S h rublands, known also as barrens, were derived by dro u g h t - induced landscape-level fires in woodlands or savannas. Characteristic plants: Veronicastrum virginicum Win d s t o r ms and canopy-clearing fires combined to reduce these communities to grub sprouts and shrubs interspersed with grasses Characteristic animals: hobomok skipper, silvery checker spot and sedges. Animal- and wind-borne seed dispersal accounted for additional shrub invasion. Shrubland formation was favored Sand savanna in landscape positions with fire intensities reduced from that in The soils are very sandy, with little humus. Sand savannas are prairies, as on the leeward sides of wetland, at woodland/ associated with dune and swale topography and beach ridges. savanna edges, on coarse droughty substrates, and on more The undulating topography presumably limited the severity of rolling topography. Canopy coverage in shrublands is <10%, fi r es and allowed a savanna to develop instead of a sand prairie. as in prairies. Struc t u r e is characterized by a temporally and spa- The herbaceous vegetation of a sand savanna is quite similar to tially dynamic mosaic of shrubs, grubs (multiple-stemmed that of sand prairies. Three sand savanna subtypes are distin- res p r outed trees), grasses, forbs, and small tree saplings. Shrub guished by soil moisture. and grub coverage ranges from 30% to 80%.

• D ry. This community occurs on excessively drained soils of Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil shr ub l a n d du n e s . These shrublands occurred on rugged glacial moraines and kame complexes, and intervening undulating ground moraine and Dominant plants: Quercus velutina outwash plains, re s p e c t i v e l y. They were most often associated with the western edges of brushy woodlands, from which they Characteristic plants: Carex pensylvanica, Andropogon sco- w e re derived as hot fires followed prolonged droughts. Small parius, Koeleria cristata, Lupinus perennis, Opuntia sp., St i p a impenetrable copses of fire-tolerant shrubs alternated with large r sp a r t e a less densely woody areas and grassy openings. Two subtypes based on soil moisture are rec o g n i z e d . Characteristic animals: • Dry - m e s i c . Located on well-drained uplands, these shrub l a n d s • D ry - m e s i c . T h e re is some development of an A horizon in w e re especially characterized by copses of hazelnut and this community, because of its low topographic position or plum, and numerous oak grubs. A matrix of upland prairie, because it occurs on north-facing or east-facing slopes. These savanna, and woodland graminoids provided the major fuel topographic positions and slope aspect provide higher soil for the maintenance fires which prevented succession to wood- m o i s t u re, cooler temperatures, and higher relative humidity land. Diversity was very high in thinly wooded openings, which reduce fire intensity and freq u e n c y . and augmented by the intrusion of tongues of prairie during the hottest fires .

15 2 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

Dominant plants: Andropogon scoparius, Corylus ameri- Characteristic plants: Asclepias amplexicaulis, Lupinus peren- canus, Danthonia spicata, Prunus americana, Pyrus ioensis, nis, Opuntia humifosa, Phlox bifida, Staphylea trifoliata Quercus coccinea, Quercus macrocarpa, Salix humilis Characteristic animals: Edward ’s hairstreak, karner blue, Characteristic plants: Apocynum androsaemiifolium, Cean- bull snake, eastern hognose snake, six-lined racerun n e r , lark othus americanus, Lathyrus venosus, Polygala senega, sp a r row Pteridium aquilinum, Helianthus divaricatus • Wet - m e s i c . This community subtype is equivalent to the shrub Characteristic animals: silvery blue, coral hairstreak, Edward’ s prairie recognized by the Illinois Natural Areas Inventory, ha i r s t r eak, blue racer, bobwhite, field sparrow , lark sparrow , described as dominated by shrubs, prairie grasses, and a ye l l o w - b r easted chat, Bell’s vireo continuous ground layer of mosses. This shrubland is virtu a l l y restricted to the older better leached acid sands of the • We t - m e s i c . Wet mesic shrublands occupied poorly drained Chicago lake plain and Kankakee River sand area. Diversity undulating lowlands, often lying between wetlands, which is high and noted for acid, nutrient-poor soil indicators, includ- acted to reduce fire freq u e n c y , and woodland or savannas. ing heaths, eastern orchids, and even bog species. Wetland shrubs, such as willows and dogwoods, were the principal woody component of these shrublands. Tall thick Dominant plants: Andropogon gerardi, Gaylusaccia baccata, grassy openings acted as fuels for occasional high intensity Panicum virgatum, Polytrichum spp., Rubus hispidus, Salix fi r es. Diversity was highest on slightly better drained inclusions. humilis, Spirea tomentosa, Vaccinium angustifolium,

Dominant plants: Calamagrostis canadensis, Cornus Characteristic plants: Aronia prunifolia, Bartonia virginica, stolonifera, Elymus virginicus, Quercus macrocarpa, Salix Osmunda regalis, Parthenium integrifolium, Pedicularis glaucophylloides, Salix petiolaris, Spiraea alba canadensis, Vaccinium angustifolium, Viola lanceolata

Characteristic plants: Asclepias purpurascens, Aster lateri- Characteristic animals: acadian hairstreak, willow flycatcher, florus, Coreopsis tripteris, Gentiana quinquefolia, Heliopsis woodcock, yellow-breasted chat, yellow warbler helianthoides, Onoclea sensibilis

Characteristic animals: acadian hairstreak, silvery check- Prairie communities erspot, common yellowthroat, willow flycatcher, woodcock, yellow warbler This community class includes communities dominated by grasses on mineral soil. Trees may be present, but less than 10% of the a rea has a tree canopy. Four natural communities are re c o g- Sand shrub l a n d nized: fine-textured-soil prairie, sand prairie, gravel prairie, Dune slopes and swale margins of glacial lake plains were the dolomite prairie. principal location of sandy shrublands. Droughty soils allowed development of a larger graminoid component, facilitating hot- Fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie ter and more frequent fires than on fine-textured-soils. The shrub This natural community is termed simply fine-textured-soil prairie and grub component was consequently thinner and shorter in because it includes the typical, “black-soil” prairies. Soils are s t a t u re. Two subtypes based on soil moisture are again re c o g- deep and fine-textured, usually silt loam or clay loam derived nized. fr om loess or glacial till, although the prairies may occur on allu- vium. Prairie communities in some other natural communities (for • D ry-mesic. The extremely well-drained slopes and crests of example mesic sand prairie) may also have soils with deep, sand dunes are optimal dry-mesic sand shrubland locations. dark A horizons, so the term black soil is not applicable solely Black oak grubs, and in the Kankakee Sand Areas re g i o n , to this natural community. Soil moisture for these prairies ranges sassafras copses, are the common woody components, inter- fr om dry to wet. spersed with prairie grasses, sedges, and forbs characteristic of drier sand savannas and sand prairies. Thinly vegetated • Dr y. Ra r e for the Chicago region, elevated topographic posi- patches of sand structurally resembling central Illinois and tion provides better drainage than the other two subtypes of Wisconsin inland sand barrens communities and lake this community. Grass heights are usually under three feet. Michigan foredunes are present in areas of windblown sand or heavy grazing/browsing. Annuals, mosses, earth stars and Dominant plants: Andropogon scoparius, Carex bicknellii, lichens characterize these micro e n v i ronments, which burn Stipa spartea i n f requently compared to the dominant fire - m a i n t a i n e d g r a s s / s h rub matrix. Several species of sand savanna and Characteristic plants: Amorpha canescens, Euphorbia corol- sand prairie reptiles occur in dry-mesic sandy shrub l a n d s . lata, Helianthus occidentalis, Parthenium integrifolium, Petalo- stemum candidum, Prenanthes aspera, Zizia aptera Dominant plants: Andropogon scoparius, Corylus americana, Quercus velutina, Salix humilis, Sassafras albidum, Sor- Characteristic animals: ghastrum nutans

15 3 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

• Me s i c . Available moisture being present throughout the grow - Dominant plants: Andropogon gerardi, Andropogon scopar- ing season allows for maximum plant species diversity and ius, Sorghastrum nutans, Stipa spartea maximum grass and forb height. The grass layer may be only 1 meter tall if Sporobolus heterolepis dominates, but it is some- Characteristic plants: Aletris farinosa, Aronia melanocarpa, times 2 meters tall. Aronia prunifolia, Aster umbellatus, Calopogon tuberosa, Helianthus mollis, Liatris aspera, Parthenium integrifolium, Dominant plants: Andropogon gerardi, Sorghastrum nutans, Rubus hispidus, Scleria triangulata, Solidago speciosa, Vio l a Sporobolus heterolepis pedata

Characteristic plants: Asclepias sullivantii, Baptisia leu- Characteristic animals: Fowler’s toad, regal fritillary cophaea, Eryngium yuccifolium, Heuchera richardsonii, Liatris pycnostachya, Lithospermum canescens, Petalostemum can- • Wet . Su r face water is present in this subtype for as much as didum, Silphium laciniatum, Silphium terebinthinaceum on e - t h i r d of the year. Wet sand prairie is floristically very similar to wet fine-textured-soil prairie. Characteristic animals: Franklin’s ground squirrel, bobolink, me a d o w l a r k Dominant plants: Andropogon gerardi, Calamagrostis canadensis, Juncus spp., Spartina pectinata, Thelypteris palustris. • We t . S u rface water is present during the winter and spring, and the soil is nearly always saturated. Plant species diver- Characteristic plants: Osmunda cinnamomea, Osmunda sity is lower than in other prairie natural communities. regalis, Rhexia virginica, Viola lanceolata, Xyris torta

Dominant plants: Calamagrostis canadensis, Carex pellita, Characteristic animals: Carex sartwellii, Spartina pectinata

Characteristic plants: Cacalia tuberosa, Eupatorium macula- Gravel prairie tum, Eupatorium perfoliatum, Hypoxis hirsuta, Iris virginica This natural commuity includes prairies on gravel or very gravelly va r . shrevei, Lysimachia quadriflora, Lythrum alatum, Oxypolis soil. The soils are usually calcareous. Because the gravel prov i d e s ri g i d i o r , Phlox glaberrima, Prenanthes racemosa, Senicio pau- rapid perm e a b i l i t y, the soil moisture classes range from dry to pe r c u l u s me s i c .

Characteristic animals: • Dr y. These prairies are on steep gravel slopes, and the grasses average less than 1 meter in height.

Sand prairie Dominant plants: Andropogon scoparius, Bouteloua curtipen- Soils in this natural community are coarse-textured: sand, loamy du l a sand, and sandy loam can support sand prairie. However, prairies on sandy loam are considered sand prairie only if they Characteristic plants: Arenaria stricta, Asclepias lanuginosa, ar e acidic enough to have characteristic plants. Sand prairies are Aster ptarmicoides, Aster sericeus, Linum sulcatum, Litho- found on sandy outwash plains, lake plains, and valley trains, spermum incisum, Ranunculus rhomboides and the soil moisture varies from dry to wet. Characteristic animals: ottoe skipper, gorgon checkerspot, • Dr y. The soil lacks a dark A horizon, and grass is less than 1 grasshoppers in the genus A r p h i a , Pseudopomala brachy- meter tall. Dry sand prairies are rather rare because the pt e r a (grasshopper), plains frog h o p p e r pr oper topographic position for dry sand usually also red u c e s fi r e severity enough to allow a savanna to develop. • Me s i c . Soil moisture is relatively high because of the low topographic position. The height of the grass and the diversity of Dominant plants: Andropogon scoparius, Calamovilfa longi- plant species approach that of fine textured mesic prairie. folia, Koeleria cristata Calciphilic plants are common because the gravel is usually ca l c a re o u s . Characteristic plants: Arenaria stricta, Artemisia caudata, Callirhoe triangulata, Lithospermum croceum, Monarda punc- Dominant plants: Andropogon gerardi, Sorghastrum nutans, tata, Opuntia compressa Sporobolus heterolepis

Characteristic animals: Characteristic plants: Gentiana puberulenta, Psoralea tenui- flora, Scutellaria parvula, Satureja arkansana, Valeriana ciliata • Mesic. This subtype has a deep A horizon in acid sand. Mosses and low shrubs are common, although the shru b s Characteristic animals: Aphrodite, scurfy pea flower moth, ar e not dominant. Characteristic mesic prairie forbs such as leadplant flower moth, Ammoea lacticlava (b e e t l e ) Echinacea pallida, Ratibida pinnata, and Silphium lacinia- tu m ar e rare or absent.

15 4 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

Dolomite prairie Ma r s h Dolomite prairies occur where dolomite is less than 1.5 meters Marshes are hydrologically cyclical wetlands dominated by below the surface. Certain common prairie plants are absent em e r gent reed, graminoids, and cyperoids, and aquatic plants. because of the shallow soils and high pH. Many other species S t ru c t u re and water levels are determined by the interaction of a re restricted to dolomite prairies, but some of these (such as s h o rt - t e rm precipitation patterns, muskrat activity, and fire fre- Desmanthus illinoensis, Eleocharis compressa, and S a t u r e j a qu e n c y . Spatial variation in vegetation and wildlife composition a r k a n s a n a) are not restricted to specific natural communities. varies with water depth. The stages of the marsh cycle form a con- The subtypes range from dry to wet. tinuum from closed 100% cover by emergent vegetation to a ponded state in which open water covers all but the marsh’s • D ry. The soil is extremely shallow to negligible in this sub- shallow edges. Maximum structural and compositional diversity type, and patches of dolomite pavement are common. is reached at the 50% open water: 50% emergent vegetation hemi-marsh stage, in which these two structural features are com- Dominant plants: Andropogon scoparius, Bouteloua curtipen- pletely interspersed to maximize the internal water: vegetation du l a in t e r face.

Characteristic plants: Blephilia ciliata, Kuhnia eupatorioides, • B a s i n . Basin marshes occur in glacial kettles, potholes, and Muhlenbergia cuspidata, Penstemon hirsutus swales on morainal deposits and outwash and lacustrine plains. They are most often found in community complexes Characteristic animals: with savannas or prairies. Hydrological input is from run - o f f and some groundwater sources. The closed emerge n t – h e m i - • Me s i c . The soil depth is 15 or more centimeters over dolomite. marsh–pond cycle of stages is most typical of this marsh type. As bedrock depth decreases, the natural community inter- grades with mesic fine-textured-soil prairie, but deeply roo t e d Dominant plants: Carex aquatilis, Carex lacustris, Carex utric- forbs such as Baptisia leucantha, Baptisia leucophaea, ulata, Leersia oryzoides, Scirpus acutus, Sparganium Silphium laciniatum, and Silphium terebinthinaceum a re eurycarpum, Typha latifolia, Zizania aquatica absent from mesic dolomite prairie. Characteristic plants: Acorus calamus, Bidens cernua, Dominant plants: Andropogon gerardi, Sorghastrum nutans, Equisetum fluviatile, Lysimachia thyrsiflora, Polygonum coc- Sporobolus heterolepis cineum, Sagittaria latifolia, Scutellaria lateriflora, Sium suave

Characteristic plants: Galium boreale, Petalostemum foliosum Characteristic animals: broad-winged skipper, purplish co p p e r , Blanding’s turtle, muskrat, yellow-headed blackbird, Characteristic animals: least bittern, sora, Vir ginia rail

• Wet . The soil is usually quite shallow over bedrock and is fre- • S t re a m s i d e . S t reamside marshes are restricted to the flood- quently saturated, or surface water is present. This is a very plains of creeks and rivers. They border the streams them- r a re subtype even in extensive dolomite areas because selves or occupy connected backwaters and abandoned de p r essions usually have a deep enough soil layer to support oxbows. The standard marsh hydrological cycle is supple- a sedge meadow at this moisture level. mented and modified by multiple, or at least annual, strea m flooding. This flow through action by flooding removes and Dominant plants: Andropogon scoparius, Calamagrostis deposits sediment, nutrients, plant propagules, and small ani- canadensis, Carex pellita, Deschampsia caespitosa, Spartina mals. This short term instability is counter-balanced by grea t e r pe c t i n a t a long term water level stability for marshes closest to the strea m - co u r s e . Characteristic plants: Cacalia plantaginea, Solidago ohioen- sis, Solidago ridellii Dominant plants: Carex lacustris, Carex trichocarpa, Echinocloa walteri, Leersia oryzoides, Scirpus acutus, Scirpus fluviatilis, Typha latifolia Wetland communities Characteristic plants: Hibiscus palustris, Lobelia cardinalis, Wetland communities have saturated or flooded soils for all or Rudbeckia laciniata, Scutellaria lateriflora, Sicyos angulatus most of the year. This condition excludes or greatly reduces oxygen availability to plant roots and soil dwelling animals and Characteristic animals: Blanding’s turtle, map turtle, gre e n decomposers. This oxygen deficiency is the most important factor he r on, sora, Vir ginia rail de t e r mining the function and composition of wetlands. Importa n t factors diffe r entiating the six wetland natural communities rec o g - nized are fire freq u e n c y , water source, water chemistry, and topographic location.

15 5 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

Bo g Characteristic plants: Carex canescens, Carex chordorrhiza, Bogs are glacial relict wetlands restricted to hydrologically iso- Cypripedium acaule, Lycopodium lucidulum, Osmunda cin- lated kettles. Precipitation, naturally nutrient-poor, is the sole namomea, Osmunda regalis, Vaccinium corymbosum s o u rce of water. This factor, the cool basin microclimate, and the nutrient- and water- absorption pro p e rties of its dominant Characteristic animals: Nashville warbler, veery gro u n d c o v e r , Sphagnum moss, combines to crate a highly anaerobic, cold nutrient-deficient acidic substrate of Sphagnum peat with little biochemical decay. Prehistoric fires at bog edges and Fe n slow but gradual neutralization by calcareous seepages fro m Fens are created and maintained by the continuos internal flow of mineral rich bordering glacial outwash have converted the rims mineralized groundwater emanating from bordering upland cal- and even interior portions of many bogs to marshes and sedge ca r eous sand and gravel glacial outwash formations. An imper- meadows. Three developmental stages in bog succession are rec - vious layer of till below the outwash gravel lenses forces cold, ognized as distinct subtypes, but all are characterized by rel i c t oxygen-deficient, mineralized groundwater to seep laterally at the bo r eal wetland vegetation. bases of upland slopes. Peat enriched with magnesium and calcium carbonates forms the fen substrate, which supports many • Gr a m i n o i d . Graminoid bogs are the first stage in bog devel- calcophile, plants adapted to high concentrations of dissolved opment. They form a floating mat of Sphagnum peat either alkaline minerals. on the edges of kettle lakes or as remnant inclusions in other floating graminoid communities. Small shrubs and sedges add • Ca l c a r eous floating mat. This community exist as a thin float- ve r tical structural complexity to this community. ing, bed of peat in glacial lake basins. Diffused calcare o u s seepage from bordering upland and fire created this commu- Dominant plants: Betula pumila, Carex aquatilis, Carex lasio- nity from graminoid bogs, which they resemble in composi- carpa, Chamaedaphne calyculata, Dryopteris thelypteris, tion. The mat supports a tall matrix of sedge and grasses, Polytrichum commune, Sphagnum spp. l o w - s t a t u red boreal relict shrubs and boreal herbs, and in some cases, calcophiles typical of graminoid fens. Characteristic plants: Dulichium arundinaceum, Drosera rotundifolia, Menyanthes trifoliata, Pogonia ophioglossoides, Salix Dominant plants: Calamagrostis canadensis, Carex aquatilis pedicellaris, Sarracenia purpurea, Viola pallens va r . elatior, Carex lasiocarpa, Carex prairea

Characteristic animals: willow flycatcher, yellow warbler Characteristic plants: Aster borealis, Hypericum virginicum fraseri, Menyanthes trifoliata, Potentilla palustris, Salix can- • Low shr ub . This community exists as the second stage of bog dida, Salix pedicellaris, Utricularia intermedia succession on thick floating Sphagnum peat or, in only two Chicago Region sites, as grounded peat mats with thin float- Characteristic animals: swamp sparrow ing edges along an encircling moat. A dense mat of low s t a t u red leatherleaf heath on Sphagnum dominate the low • Graminoid. Sloping peat is either at the edge of a moraine/ diversity core of the moat borde r ed low shrub bogs. Diversity outwash formation or, more rare l y, is a raised island in a in c r eases considerably toward the moat edge where the com- marsh or sedge meadow. In the latter case, this has been munity closely resembles the graminoid bog subtype. attributed to an upwelling of gro u n d w a t e r. Dominant plants a re a mixture of mesic to wet prairie grasses and sedges. Dominant plants: Chamaedaphne calyculata, Polytrichum Although the peat is quite elevated, it resists decay due to the commune, Sphagnum sp p . high level of calcium and magnesium carbonate. Diversity is quite high since both mesic and wet prairie species can occur Characteristic plants: Aronia prunifolia, Eriophorum vir- side by side in addition to numerous calciphilic and hydro- ginicum, Osmunda cinnamomea, Rhus vernix, Rubus hispidus, philic species. Frequently fire helps maintain the grassland Vaccinium macrocarpon, Viola pallens s t ru c t u re of graminoid fens, which overlap physically and compositionally with calcareous sedge meadow. Characteristic animals: willow flycatcher, yellow warbler Dominant plants: Andropogon gerardi, Carex haydenii, • F o re s t e d . This community exist on fairly well consolidated Carex prairea, Carex sterilis, Potentilla fruticosa, Sorghastrum peat. Hummocks (which tend to be more acid) and small, nutans, Sporobolus heterolepis wet depressions are characteristic. Two distinct layers are added to the forb-sedge herbaceous stratum: a tree layer of Characteristic plants: Cirsium muticum, Gentiana procera, deciduous tamarack (greater than 20% coverage) and a stra- Lobelia kalmii, Lysimachia quadriflora, Muhlenbergia glom- tum of tall shrubs. This subtype includes both forested bogs erata, Parnassia glauca, Selaginella apoda, Solidago ohioen- with a markedly acid upper peat horizon and those with only sis, Solidago uliginosa, Valeriana ciliata sc a t t e r ed areas of acidity. The latter have been termed “half bogs” or “forested fens” by some authorities. Characteristic animals: Baltimore checkerspot, mulberryw i n g sk i p p e r , swamp metalmark, elfin skimmer, Nanothemis bella Dominant plants: Carex disperma, Carex oligosperma, Carex (d r a g o n f l y ) . trisperma, Ilex verticillata, Larix laricina, Rhus vernix, Sp h a g n u m sp p .

15 6 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

• Fo r ested. This community is a relict north e r n evergr een cedar Characteristic plants: Agalinis purpurea, Carex viridula, swamp restricted to deep, spring-fed forested ravines. White Eleocharis olivacea, Gentiana crinita, Linum medium var. cedar and other wetland trees (>20% coverage), wetland texanum, Triglochin maritima, Utricularia cornuta sh r ubs, and sedges from a complex multi-layered community harboring typical fen calcophiles, sedge meadow species, Characteristic animals: Fowler’s toad and many boreal wetland cedar swamp species. Fallen cedar t runks re s p rout new trees and in decay crate a hummocky te r rain and substrate for other specie, as in many old grow t h Seep and spring mesic forests. Only one example of this community, divided by This community subclass occurs where groundwater flows to the a tollway, remains in the Chicago Region. su r face. A seep is an area with saturated soil caused by water flowing to the surface in a diffuse rather than concentrated flow. Dominant plants: Carex leptalea, Carex sterilis, Cornus alterni- Seeps may have local areas of concentrated flow, and the water folia, Fraxinus nigra, Symplocarpus foetidus, Thuja occidentalis usually collects in spring runs. Seeps are usually smaller than 0.1 acre, and are most common along the lower slopes of glacial Characteristic plants: Caltha palustris, Conioselinum chinense, moraines, ravines, and terraces. A spring, as opposed to a seep, Cornus rugosa, Geum rivale, Habenaria hyperborea, has a concentrated flow of groundwater from a definite orifice. Polymnia canadensis, Rubus pubescens, Solidago patula, The various communities in this subclass are separated on the Angelica atropurpurea basis of water chemistry.

Characteristic animals: mottled sculpin (in associated spring • N e u t r a l . This common seep type most often occurs on small run s ) muck deposits in ravine woodlands and forests. It is saturated by circumneutral water and structurally a mix of trees, shrub s , and sedge/forb components. Sedge meadow Sedge meadows are sedge dominated grasslands with wet Dominant plants: Carex hystricina, Carex interior, Cornus prairie grass co-dominants on organic or sand substrates. alternifolia, Symplocarpus foetidus, Impatiens capensis, Pilea Gr oundwater seepage and/or shallow flooding are the principal pu m i l a h y d rological factors, and frequent fire is needed to retain their open struc t u r e. They are structurally homogeneous dense matrices Characteristic plants: Angelica atropurpurea, Caltha palustris, of either tussock-forming sedges, which are often on calcareo u s Cystopteris bulbifera, Fraxinus nigra, Solidago patula, Vio l a or ganic substrates and grade into fens, or shallowly flooded rhi - cu c u l l a t a zomatous sedge stands which grade into marshes. Characteristic animals: brook stickleback, mottled sculpin Dominant plants: Calamagrostis canadensis, Carex lacustris, Carex prairea, Carex sartwellii, Carex stricta • C a l c a re o u s . G roundwater is so highly calcareous that tufa (re c r ystallized calcium and magnesium carbonate deposits) Characteristic plants: Angelica atropurpurea, Aster puniceus, fo r ms. Many “neutral” seeps are slightly calcareous, but the Bromus ciliatus, Campanula aparinoides, Chelone glabra, distinction is drawn when tufa is present, forest cover Epilobium leptophyllum, Eupatorium maculatum, Lathyrus is absent, and peat deposits (usually) adjoin the seep. palustris, Lycopus uniflorus, Viola nephrophylla Ca l c a r eous seeps occur in close association with various fen communities. They are cyperoid dominated communities with Characteristic animals: Baltimore checkerspot, eyed brow n , high floristic overlap with graminoid fens and pannes. Some black dash skipper, dion skipper, American bittern, sandhill c a l c a reous seeps are known to have formed in tile blowout crane, sedge wren, swamp sparrow , pigmy shrew ar eas of partially drained fens.

Dominant Plants: Carex sterilis, Deschampsia caespitosa, Pa n n e Eleocharis rostellata, Rhynchospora capillacea, Silphium tere- Pannes are unique interdunal wetlands on calcareous moist sands bi n t h i n a c e u m of the lake plain within one mile of Lake Michigan. Rhizomatous sedges and sedge relatives dominate this open stru c t u red wet- Characteristic plants: Berula erecta, Cladium mariscoides, land, which has considerable floristic overlap with fens and cal- Juncus brachycephalus, Scleria verticillata, Tofieldia glutinosa, ca r eous seeps. Triglochin palustris

• Pa n n e . This community has considerable floristic overlap with Characteristic animals: Hine’s emerald, pickerel frog, mottled the graminoid fen and the calcareous seep. Competition is not sc u l p i n as intense as in fens, because the pane’s sod is not dense.

Dominant plants: Calamagrostis canadensis, Carex buxbau- mii, Carex sartwellii, Cladium mariscoides, Juncus balticus v a r. littoralis, Potentilla fruticosa, Rhynchospora capillacea, Scirpus americanus

15 7 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

• Ac i d . The acid seepage water flows through sand, usually at La k e s h o r e communities the edge of dune or beach ridges. Some muck deposits can accumulate. Ferns, grasses, and shrubs form a structurally mul- Lake-deposited sands form the substrate for this community. ti l a y e r ed community. Depending on the age of the deposit and the successional development, three natural communities are formed. These natural Dominant plants: Glyceria striata, Osmunda cinnamomea, communities are limited to the shoreline and near shore areas of Symplocarpus foetidus Lake Michigan.

Characteristic plants: Athyrium filix-femina, Dryopteris spinu- • B e a c h . Soil development is minimal because the sand is losa, Osmunda regalis, Physocarpus opulifolius recently deposited. Two basic subdivisions can be distinguished: the nearly bare zone of sand nearest the lake and Characteristic animals: brook stickleback the better-vegetated grassland farther away. Dominant plants: Ammophila breviligulata, Calamovilfa longifolia, Elymus canadensis Cl i f f communities Ver tical exposure of resistant bedrock as well as unconsolidated Characteristic plants: Cakile edentula, Corispermum hyssopi- materials are included in this community. Soils are generally folium, Euphorbia polygonifolia non-existent, and natural communities have been delimited on the basis of substrate. Aspect and degree of shading are also signif- Characteristic animals: Piping plover, sanderling icant, but have not been used to separate communities due to practical considerations. • F o re d u n e . This natural community is characterized by the beginnings of soil development. Fairly dense cover of low • E roding bluf f . This natural community is associated with s h rubs and grasses is present. There is some overlap with er oded high bluffs consisting of glacial till along the shore of dr y sand prairie. Lake Michigan. Because this community is maintained by continual lake erosion the plant community is not well developed. Dominant plants:

Dominant plants: Characteristic plants: Andropogon scoparius, Ar c t o s t a p h y l o s uva-ursi, Juniperus horizontalis Characteristic plants: Aster pilosus, Danthonia spicata, Fragaria virginiana, Potentilla simplex, Rudbeckia hirta, • High dune. This is a more well developed natural community Solidago nemoralis than the previous two located on tall steep slopes behind the fo re d u n e . Characteristic animals: Dominant plants: • Dolomite clif f. Aspect and substrate characteristics are important determinants of species composition and abundance. In Characteristic plants: Amelanchier arborea, Artemisia cau- general, the north and east-facing slopes support the most veg- data, Hamamelis virginiana, Quercus velutina, Sassafras etation. Another important factor is the degree of shading albidum, Smilacina stellata, Solidago caesia fr om the adjacent fores t .

Characteristic species: Cystopteris bulbifera, Physocarpus opulifolius, Aralia racemosa, Campanula rotundifolia, Pellaea gl a b e l l a

Characteristic animals: ciff swallow

15 8 Appendix 1. Chicago Wilderness Ter r estrial Community Classification System

Cultural communities Re f e re n c e s This division includes communities that were created by human Bowles, M.L. & J.L. McBride. 1996. Evaluation and classification disturbance. In terms of natural quality, they are Grade D or E. of savanna, woodland, and barrens natural areas in nort h e rn All Grade E communities are cultural communities, but not all Illinois. The Morton Arboretum, Lisle IL 60532. Grade D communities are cultural. If land is Grade D because the original natural community has been destroyed by human C u rtis, John T. 1959. The Vegetation of Wisconsin. The activities and the land has rec o v e r ed somewhat, then it is a cul- University of Wisconsin Press. Madison, WI. tural community. However, if the original natural community was not removed, or if secondary succession has prog r essed to White, J. & M.H. Madany. 1978. Classification of natural com- the stage where, for example, a recently clearcut forest is now munities in Illinois. Illinois Natural Areas Inventory Te c h n i c a l a Grade D forest, it is not a cultural community, because the orig- Re p o r t. Illinois Department of Conserva t i o n . inal community was not completely altered. The cultural communities are described briefly below. Leach, M.K. & Laurel Ross, eds. 1995. Midwest Oak Ecosystem R e c o v e ry Plan: A Call to Action. Midwest Oak Savanna and • Cro p l a n d . This includes row crops and forage crop s . Woodland Ecosystem Conference, Springfield, MO.

• Unassociated woody gr o w t h . Mixes of shrubs and tre e s B e c k e r, Carl (chair), B. Cottingham, F. Hart y, M. Morin, D. which owe their existence to recent human (i.e. post settle- Rogers, D. Thom and G. Tichacek. 1983. Classification of land ment) land use practices. Unassociated woody growth is so and water communities in Illinois (Draft). Illinois Department of named because its constituent species do not naturally occur Co n s e r vation Task Force on biological Inventories. to g e t h e r , either historically, or as associates in long term self- perpetuating communities. However, all of the native constituent species do occur in other natural community types. Most unassociated woody growth communities develop as woody plants colonize Eurasian meadows, abandoned farm fields, prairies, sedge meadows, or cut-over forest, woodland, and savanna. Other than a comparison with the original natural community which the unassociated woody grow t h ultimately replaced, there is no standard by which to assess unassociated woody growth. The diversity of herbaceous flora tends to be exceedingly low in the unassociated woody gr owth, as there are no processes occurring which prom o t e su r vival of such flora. Without a stabilizing herbaceous layer, the presence of the unassociated woody growth can promote soil erosion and degraded water quality.

• Gr a s s . Old fields dominated by Eurasian cool season grasses ar e and example of this type.

• Sh ru b . Thickets of buckthorn, gray dogwood, and introd u c e d honeysuckle are examples of this type.

• Tree. Dense stands of Norway maple, black locust, gre e n ash, and American elm are examples of this type.

• Tree plantations. Orc h a r ds, arboretums, and other tree plantations are in this artificial community.

• Developed land. Any sort of land that has been highly modified or has struc t u r es is placed in this class. It includes strip- mined land, roadways, buildings, and cemeteries.

15 9 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 2 Cr osswalk between Chicago W il d e r ness Communities and the National Standard for Community T yp e s

Chicago Wil d e r ness name The Nature Conservancy name G- r a n k

Dr y-mesic upland fores t ...... White oak-red oak dry-mesic fores t ...... G4 ? Mesic upland fores t ...... No r th-central maple-basswood fores t * ...... G4 ? Beech-maple glaciated fores t ...... G3 G 4 Wet-mesic upland fores t ...... No r th-central maple-basswood fores t * ...... G4 ? Wet-mesic floodplain fores t ...... Central green ash-em-hackberry fores t ...... G? Wet floodplain fores t ...... Silver maple-elm-(cottonwood) fores t ...... G4 ? No rt h e r n flatwood ...... No rt h e r n (Great Lakes) flatwood ...... G2 Sand flatwood ...... Pin oak-swamp white oak sand flatwood ...... G2 ? Dr y-mesic woodland ...... No rt h e r n dry-mesic oak woodland ...... G3 G 4 Mesic woodland ...... Red oak-sugar maple-elm fores t ...... G? Wet-mesic woodland ...... Swamp white oak woodland ...... G1 Dr y-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna ...... No r th-central bur oak openings* ...... G1 Mesic fine-textured-soil savanna ...... No r th-central bur oak openings* ...... G1 Wet-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna ...... Bur oak terrace woodland ...... G1 Dr y sand savanna ...... Black oak/lupine barren s * ...... G3 Dr y-mesic sand savanna ...... Black oak/lupine barren s * ...... G3 Lakeplain mesic oak woodland ...... G2 Mesic sand savanna Dr y-mesic fine-textured-soil shrub l a n d ...... Hazelnut barren s ...... G1 ? Wet-mesic fine-textured-soil srub l a n d ...... Dogwood-mixed willow shrub meadow ...... G3 G 4 Dr y-mesic sand shrub l a n d ...... Midwest dry-mesic sand prairie* ...... G3 Wet-mesic sand shrub l a n d ...... Ha r dhack shrub prairie ...... G1 Q Dr y fine-textured-soil prairie ...... Midwest dry-mesic prairie ...... G2 G 3 Mesic fine-textured-soil prairie ...... Central mesic tallgrass prairie ...... G2 Wet fine-textured-soil prairie ...... Central wet-mesic tallgrass prairie ...... G2 G 3 Central cordgrass wet prairie ...... G3 ? Dr y sand prairie ...... Midwest dry sand prairie ...... G2 G 3 Mesic sand prairie ...... Mesic sand tallgrass prairie ...... G2 Midwest dry-mesic sand prairie* ...... G3 Wet sand prairie ...... Lakeplain wet-mesic prairie ...... G2 Central wet-mesic sand tallgrass prairie ...... G2 G 3 Lakeplain wet prairie ...... G2 G 3 Central cordgrass wet sand prairie ...... G3 ? Dr y gravel prairie ...... Midwest dry gravel prairie ...... G2 Mesic gravel prairie ...... Midwest dry-mesic gravel prairie ...... G2 Dr y dolomite prairie ...... Midwest dry limestone-dolomite prairie ...... G2 Mesic dolomite prairie ...... Midwest dry-mesic Limestone-dolomite prairie ...... G2 ? Wet dolomite prairie ...... Midwest wet-mesic dolomite prairie ...... G2 ? Basin marsh ...... Bu l ru s h - c a t t a i l - b u r reed shallow marsh ...... G? St r eamside marsh ...... Midwest mixed emergent deep marsh ...... G5 River bulrush marsh ...... G? Graminoid bog ...... No rt h e r n poor fen ...... G3 G 4

16 0 Appendix 2. Crosswalk between Chicago Wilderness Communities and the National Standard for Community Typ e s

Low shrub bog ...... Leatherleaf bog ...... G5 Fo r ested bog ...... Central tamarack poor swamp ...... G4 ? Ca l c a r eous floating mat ...... Midwest calcareous floating mat ...... G? Graminoid fen ...... Cinquefoil-sedge prairie fen* ...... G3 G 4 Fo r ested fen ...... White cedar seepage swamp ...... G3 G 4 Sedge meadow ...... Lake sedge meadow ...... G4 G 5 Tussock sedge wet meadow ...... G4 ? Pa n n e ...... In t e r dunal wetland ...... G2 ? Neutral seep ...... Skunk cabbage seepage meadow ...... G4 ? Ca l c a r eous seep ...... Cinquefoil-sedge prairie fen* ...... G3 G 4 Sand seep ...... Midwest sand seep ...... G2 ? Er oding bluff ...... Small eroding cliffs ...... G? Dolomite cliff ...... Alkaline moist bluff- c l i f f ...... G5 Be a c h ...... Gr eat Lakes sea-rocket strand beach ...... G2 G 4 Fo re d u n e ...... Gr eat Lakes beachgrass dune* ...... G3 G 5 High dune ...... Gr eat Lakes beachgrass dune* ...... G3 G 5 Central water lily aquatic wetland ...... G4 G 5 Do g w o o d - w i l l o w - b l u e b e r ry swamp ...... G4 ? No rt h e r n buttonbush swamp ...... G4

16 1 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 3 Gl o s s a r y of Scientific and Common Names Used in T ex t

Acadian hairstrea k ...... Satyrium acadia Common ree d ...... Phragmites communis Al e w i f e ...... Alosa pseudoharengus Co t t o n w o o d ...... Populus deltoides American bittern ...... Botaurus lentiginosus Cr eek chub ...... Semotilus atromaculatus American burne t ...... Sanguisorba canadensis Cr own vetch ...... Coronilla varia American bur-r eed ...... Sparghanium americanum American burying beetle ...... Nicrophorus americanus Dart e r ...... Family Percidae American pondweed ...... Potomageton americana De e r ...... Odocoileus virginianus American red s t a r t ...... Setophaga ruticilla Dion skipper ...... Euphyes dion Amur maple ...... Acer ginnala Dog violet ...... Viola conspersa Ap h r odite fritillary ...... Speyeria aphrodite Do g w o o d ...... Cornus florida Appalachian eyed- brow n . . . . .Lethe appalachia or Dune thistle ...... Cirsium pitcheri Satyrodes appalachia Dusted skipper ...... Atryonopsis hianna As h ...... Fr a x i n u s sp . Dw a r f scouring rus h ...... Equisetum scirpoides Asiatic honeysuckle ...... A complex of Lo n i c e r a sp . Eas t e r n box turtl e ...... Terrapene carolina Bal t i m o r e checkerspot ...... Euphydryas phaeton Ea s t e r n chipmunk ...... Tamias striatus Ba s s w o o d ...... Tilia americana Ea s t e r n hognose snake ...... Heterodon platirhinos Beach pea ...... Lathyrus japonicus va r . gl a b e r Ea s t e r n kingbird ...... Tyrannus tyrannus Be l f r a g ’ s stinkbug ...... Chlorochroa belfragei Ea s t e r n newt ...... Notophthalmus viridescens Be l l ’ s vireo ...... Vireo bellii Ea s t e r n pipistrel l e ...... Pipisetrellus subflavus Be l l w o r t ...... Uvularia grandiflora Ea s t e r n racer ...... Coluber constrictor Black oak ...... Quercus velutina Ea s t e r n rat snake ...... Elaphe obsoleta Black oat grass ...... Stipa avenacea El m ...... Ul m u s sp . Black tern ...... Chlidonias niger Eurasian water milfoil ...... Myriophyllum spicatum Black walnut ...... Juglans nigra Eu r opean buckthorn ...... Rhamnus cathartica Bl a n d i n g ’ s turtl e ...... Emydoidea blandingii Eyed brow n ...... Lethe eurydice Bluebell dragonfly ...... Nannothemis bella Blue-spotted salamander ...... Ambystoma laterale False bugbane ...... Trautvetteria caroliniensis Bluntnose minnow ...... Pimephales notatus Fe r n moths ...... Callopistria cordata and Bo b o l i n k ...... Dolichonyx oryzivorus C. mollissima Bog birch ...... Berula pusilla Fe r nleaf pondweed ...... Potamogeton robbinsii Br oad winged skipper ...... Poanes viator (???= fern pondweed) Br own cree p e r ...... Certhia americana Few-seed sedge ...... Carex oligosperma Bu f falo berry ...... Sherperdia canadensis Forked aster ...... Aster furcatus Bu f falo clover ...... Trifolium reflexuum Fo u r -toed salamander ...... Hemidactylium scutatum Bu ff - b r easted sandpipers ...... Tryngites subruficollis Fo w l e r ’ s toad ...... Bufo fowleri Bu g s e e d ...... Coriospermum hysopifolium Fr osted elfin butterfl y ...... Incisalia irus Bulblet bladder fern ...... Cystopteris bulbifera Bu l l s n a k e ...... Pituophis catenifer Garlic mustard ...... Alliaria petiolata Bu l ru s h ...... Scirpus hattorianus Giant ree d ...... Phragmites communis Bush honeysuckle ...... Lo n i c e r a Globe mallow ...... Sphaeralcea angusta Byssus skipper ...... Problema byssus Glossy buckthorn ...... Rhamnus frangula Go b y ...... Neogobius melanostomus Cad d i s f l i e s ...... Or der Tri c h o p t e r a Gr a h a m ’ s crayfish snake ...... Regina grahamii Ca r p ...... Cyprinus carpio Gr a s s h o p p e r s ...... Or der Orth o p t e r a Ca t t a i l ...... Typha latifolia Grass-leaved arrow h e a d ...... Sagitaria graminea Ce r ulean warbler ...... Dendroica cerulea Gray fox ...... Urocyon cinereoargenteus Channel catfish ...... Ictalurus punctatus Gray squirrel ...... Sciurus carolinenis Ch a r a ...... Ch a r a sp . Gr eat copper ...... Lycaena xanthoides Cobweb skipper ...... Hesperia metea Gr eat grey copper ...... Lycaena xanthoides dion Common juniper ...... Juniperus communis Gr een frog ...... Rana clamitans Gre e n f r uit bur-re e d ...... S. chlorocarpum

16 2 Appendix 3. Glossary of Scientific and Common Names

Gro t e ’ s dart moth ...... Loxagrotis grotei Oak ...... Qu e r c u s sp . Gypsy moths ...... Lymantria dispar Ottoe skipper ...... Hesperia ottoe

Hai r y puccoon ...... Lithospermum caroliniense Pacific salmon ...... Ha i r y rock cress ...... Arabis hirsuta Painted turtl e ...... Chrysemys picta Ha l l ’ s bulrus h ...... Sc i r p u s sp . Pale false foxglove ...... Agalinis skinneriana Ha z e l ...... Corylus americana Pale vetchling ...... Lathyrus ochroleucus Henslow’ sparrow ...... Ammodramus henslowii Paw paw ...... Asimina triloba He p a t i c a ...... Hepatica americana Paw paw sphinx moth ...... Dolba hylaeus Hi l l ’ s thistle ...... Cirsium hilli Persius duskywing skipper . . . . .Erynnis persius persius Hobomok skipper ...... Poanes hobomok Phlox flower moth ...... Schinia indiana Horizontal juniper ...... Juniperus horizontalis Pi c k e r el frog ...... Rana palustris Ho r nyhead chub ...... Nocomis biguttatus Pi k e ...... Esox lucius (? n o rt h e r n pike) Pileated woodpecker ...... Dryocopus pileatus Imp a t i e n s ...... Im p a t i e n s sp . Pipevine swallowtail ...... Battus philenor Indian skipper ...... Hesperia sassacus Pi t c h e r ’ s thistle ...... Cirsium pitcheri Indiana bat ...... Myotis sodalis Plains leopard frog ...... Rana blairi Iro n w e e d ...... Vernonia fasciculata Prairie bush clover ...... Lespedeza leptostachya Iv o r y sedge ...... Carex eburnea Prairie white fringed orch i d . . . .Platanthera leucophaea Pro t h o n o t a r y warbler ...... Protonotaria citrea Jack pine ...... Pinus banksiana Pugnose shiner ...... Notropis anogenus Japanese hedge parsley ...... Torillus japonicus Purple loosestrife ...... Lythrum salicaria Purple cliff brake ...... Pellaea glabella Kalm St. John’s wort ...... Hypericum kalmianum Purple-fringed orch i d ...... Platanthera psycodes Ka r ner blue butterfl y ...... Lycaeides melissa samuelis Purplish copper ...... Lycaena helloides King rail ...... Rallus elegans Ki rt l a n d ’ s snake ...... Clonophis kirtlandii Queen of the prairie ...... Filipendula rubra Kn a p w e e d ...... Centaurea maculata Queen snake ...... Regina septemvittata

Lake perch ...... Rac c o o n ...... Procyon lotor La m p re y ...... Petromyzon marinus Rattlesnake master borer moth . .Papaipema eryngii La r gemouth bass ...... Micropterus salmoides Red oak ...... Quercus rubra Lark sparrow ...... Chondestes grammacus Red-headed woodpecker . . . . .Melanerpes erythrocephalus Le a f h o p p e r s ...... Family Cicadellidae Re d h o r s e ...... Mo x o s t o m a sp . Leafy prairie clover ...... Dalea foliosa Re d r oot ...... Ceanothus herbaceous Leafy spurge ...... Euphorbia eschula Re d - s h o u l d e r ed hawk ...... Buteo lineatus Little bluestem ...... Andropogon scoparius Red-veined prairie leafhopper . .Aflexia rubraneura Lo g g e r head shrike ...... Lanius ludovicianus Reed canary grass ...... Phalaris arundinacea Regal fritillary ...... Speyeria idalia Map l e ...... Ac e r sp . Rice grass ...... Oryzopsis asperifolia Ma r ram grass ...... Ammophila breviligulata River otter ...... Lutra canadensis Marsh valerian ...... Valeriana uliginosa Round-leaved sundew ...... Drosera rotundiflora Marsh wren ...... Citothorus palustris Royal fern borer ...... Papaipema speciosissima Ma s s a s a u g a ...... Sistrurus catenatus Ruddy turns t o n e s ...... Arenaria interpres Mouse colored lichen moth . . . .Pagara simplex Sago pondweed ...... Potamogeton pectinatus Nar row-leaf cattail ...... Typha augustfolia Sand cherry ...... Prunus pumila Nodding trillium ...... Trillium cernuum Sand cres s ...... Arabis lyrata No rt h e r n cranesbill ...... Ge r a n i u m ?? Sand reed grass ...... Calamovilfa longifolia No rt h e r n cricket frog ...... Acris crepitans Sandhill crane ...... Gr us canadensis No rt h e r n fern geometer ...... Petrophora subaquaeria Savanna blazing star ...... Liatris scariosa var. No rt h e r n harri e r ...... Circus cyaneus ni e u w l a n d i i No rt h e r n hog sucker ...... Hypentelium nigricans Sc r ub oak ...... ap p a r ently Quercus velutina?? No rt h e r n leopard frog ...... Rana pipiens Sc u l p i n ...... Family Cottidae No rt h e r n water snake ...... Nerodia sipedon Sea roc k e t ...... Cakile edentula No r way maple ...... Acer platanoides Semipalmated plovers ...... Charadrius semipalmatus

16 3 Appendix 3. Glossary of Scientific and Common Names

Sensitive fern borer ...... Papaipema inquaesita Walking fern ...... Camptosorus rhizophyllus Sh a d b u s h ...... Amelanchier arborea Water arum ...... Calla palustris Sh o r e St. John’s wort ...... Hypericum adpressum Water celery ...... Vallisneria americana Sh o rt - e a r ed owl ...... Asio flammeus Water parsnip ...... Sium suave Silver borde r ed fritillary ...... Boloria selene Water star weed ...... El o d e a ?? Si l v e r y blue ...... Glaucopsyche lygdamus Water stargr a s s ...... Heteranthera dubia Si l v e r y checkerspot ...... Chlosyne nycteis Wat e rc re s s ...... Nasturtium offi c i n a l e Slender rock brake ...... Cryptogramma stelleri Wes t e r n chorus frog ...... Pseudacris triseriata Smallmouth bass ...... Micropterus dolomieu Wes t e r n meadowlark ...... Sturnella neglecta Smooth green snake ...... Liochlorophis vernalis Wes t e r n ribbon snake ...... Thamnophis proximus Spotted salamander ...... Ambystoma maculatum Wh i p - p o o r- w i l l ...... Caprimulgus vociferus Spotted turtl e ...... Clemmys guttata White ash ...... Fraxinus americana Spring peeper ...... Pseudacris crucifer White footed mice ...... Peromyscus leucopus St o n e f l y ...... Family Perlidae White oak ...... Quercus alba St o n e ro l l e r ...... Ca m p o s t o m a sp . White pine ...... Pinus strobus Striped shiner ...... Luxilus chrsocephalus White stem pondweed ...... Potamogeton praelongus Su c k e r s ...... Family Castostomidae Wild plum ...... Prunus americana Sugar maple ...... Acer saccharum Willow flycatcher ...... Empidonax traillii Summer tanager ...... Pi r a n g a r u b r a Winged polygala ...... Polygala paucifolia Swamp metalmark ...... Calephelis muticum Wood frog ...... Rana sylvatica Sweet clover ...... Me l i l o t u s Woodland vole ...... Microtus pinetorum Sy c a m o r e ...... Platanus occidentalis Sy c a m o r e sallow moth ...... Lithophane signosa Yellow birch ...... Betula lutea Yellow breasted chat ...... Icteria virens Tar tarian honeysuckle ...... Lo n i c e r a sp . Yellow-billed cuckoo ...... Coccyzus americanus Tea s e l ...... Family Dipsaceae Yellow-headed blackbird ...... Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus Trailing arbutus ...... Epigaea repens Tul i p t re e ...... Liriodendron tulipifera Zebra mussels ...... Dreissena polymorpha Two-spotted skipper ...... Euphyes bimacula Zebra swallow-tail butterfl y . . . .Eurytides marcellus

Upland sandpiper ...... Bartramia longicauda

Veiny pea ...... Lathyrus venosus

16 4 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 4 Pre l i m i n a r y Results of Community Workshop Assessments

Quantity ranking Condition ranking Ver y high risk Poor (of cessation of contributing ecosystem values due to number of (rapidly losing biodiversity or little of good quality remaining) acres remaining, percent remaining vs. pre-European settlement fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie extent, number of occurrences, number of sufficiently large sand prairie occurrences, amount under protection) gravel prairie fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie dolomite prairie sand prairie dr y-mesic woodland gravel prairie mesic woodland dolomite prairie wet-mesic woodland st r eamside marsh dr y-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna fo r ested fen mesic fine-textured-soil savanna graminoid fen wet-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna ca l c a r eous seep st r eamside marsh sand seep fo r ested fen wet-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna graminoid fen mesic sand savanna ca l c a r eous seep sand seep High risk mesic upland fores t wet-mesic upland fores t wet-mesic upland fores t mesic fine-textured-soil savanna dr y sand savanna Fair ca l c a r eous floating mat (quite a bit of biodiversity remaining but declining or moderate sedge meadow amount remaining) pa n n e wet-mesic floodplain fores t neutral seep wet floodplain fores t no rt h e r n flatwood no rt h e r n flatwood sand flatwood sand flatwood dr y sand savanna Moderate risk basin marsh dr y-mesic upland fores t bo g mesic upland fores t ca l c a r eous floating mat dr y-mesic woodland sedge meadow mesic woodland neutral seep wet-mesic woodland dr y-mesic upland fores t wet-mesic floodplain fores t wet floodplain fores t Good basin marsh (much biodiversity survives and fairly stable, but not all of bo g high quality) dr y-mesic fine-textured-soil savanna dr y-mesic sand savanna dr y-mesic sand savanna mesic sand savanna pa n n e

16 5 Appendix 4. Preliminary Results of Community Workshop As s e s s m e n t s

Biological importa n c e Distribution assessment (based on species richness, numbers of E/T species, habitat Good/best examples in Chicago W il d e r ness Region significance, levels of species conservatism, special habitat (significantly contributing to global conservation) features, and ecological functions) fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie sand prairie (dune and swale) High importa n c e dolomite prairie fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil prairie gravel prairie ?? sand prairie wo o d l a n d gravel prairie fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil savanna dolomite prairie sand savanna (lake plain) fl a t w o o d basin marsh wo o d l a n d ca l c a r eous floating mat fi n e - t e x t u r ed-soil savanna graminoid fen sand savanna pa n n e ma r s h fe n Wide spread sedge meadow (good examples in the region but also good examples pa n n e el s e w h e r e ) ca l c a r eous seep upland fores t Medium impor ta n c e floodplain fores t upland fores t fl a t w o o d ? ? ? floodplain fores t st r eamside marsh bo g sedge meadow ca l c a r eous seep Low impor ta n c e sand seep Edge of range neutral seep (better opportunity to conserve elsewhere) bo g fo r ested fen sand seep neutral seep

16 6 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

16 7 Appendix 5. Chicago Wilderness Aquatic Classification

16 8 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 6 Priority Groups of Endangered and Threatened Plant Species in Chicago W il d e rn e s s

List based on Illinois and Indiana Natural Heritage Database. Wisconsin to be incorporated. Where species are listed as endan- ge r ed or threatened in both states but only one state is noted in this list, it means the species does not occur in the CW region of the other state or was not judged to be a priority in the CW region by the state rep r esentatives who compiled the list. Ongoing rev i s i o n is essential to this process and this document.

Priority group 1 Globally rare species (based on TNC ranking); includes federal listed and former candidate species (C1/C2). Agalinis auriculata (IN) Agalinis skinneriana (IL, IN) Aster furcatus (IL, IN) Cirsium hillii (IL, IN) Cirsium pitcheri (IL, IN) Dalea foliosa (I L ) Hymenoxys acaulis glabra (I L ) Hypericum adpressum (IL, IN) Lespedeza leptosachya (I L ) Lycopodiella subappressa (I N ) Platanthera leucophaea (IL, IN) Rhus aromatica arenaria (I N ) Scirpus hallii (I N ) Scirpus purshianus (I N ) Solidago simplex gillmanii (I N ) Talinum rugospermum (I N ) Tomanthera auriculata (I L )

Priority group 2 Gr eat Lakes endemic species or those whose critical range is within Chicago W il d e r ness Region. Arenaria patula (IL) (dolomte prairie; quasi-endemic, disjunct from glades further south) Cirsium pitcheri (IL; IN–rec o v e r y plan in prog re s s ) Dalea foliosa (IL) (dolomte prairie; quasi-endemic, disjunct from glades further south) Hypericum kalmianum (IL; not listed in IN but occurs there) Isoetes butleri (IL) (dolomte prairie; quasi-endemic, disjunct from glades further south) Lathyrus maritimus glaber (IN) (L. japonicus glaber IL) quasi-endemic in Great Lakes reg i o n – re c o v e r y plan in prog r ess in IL Salix syrticola (IL) (Salix cordata IN ) Sphaeralacea angusta (Malvastrum hispidum) (IL) ???

Priority group 3 Species that are disturbance dependent (early successional) or that do not fall within a well-defined community type. Corydalis sempervirens (I N ) Fuirena pumila (I N ) Geranium bicknellii (IL, IN) Juncus pelocarpus (I N ) Lathyrus maritimus glaber (IN) (Lathyrus japonicus glaber–re c o v e r y plan in IL) Lechea intermedia (also taxonomic questions) (IL) Myosotis laxa (I N ) Oenothera perennis (IL, IN) Plantago cordata (IL–may be extirpated in reg i o n ) Polygala incarnata (I L ) Polygonum careyi (I N ) Ranunculus cymbalaria (I N )

16 9 Appendix 6. Priority Groups of Endangered and Threatened Plant Species in Chicago Wil d e r n e s s

Scirpus hallii (I N ) Sisyrinchium montanum (IL, IN) Strophostyles leiosperma (I N ) Tomanthera auriculata (IL) Agalinis auriculata (I N ) Trifolium reflexum (IL)

Priority group 4 Species that have fewer than 50% of their EOs in protected sites in state indicated: either Level 1 (Nature Pr es e r ves) or Level 2 (other public lands). Agalinis skinneriana (I N ) Amelanchier sanguinea (I L ) Ammophila breviligulata (I L ) Androsache occidentalis (I N ) Arabis glabra (I N ) Bidens beckii (I L ) Buchnera americana (I N ) Carex crawei (I N ) Carex richardsonii (I N ) Cimicifuga racemosa (IL) Eleocharis geniculata (I N ) Eleocharis microcarpa (I N ) Fimbristylis puberula (I N ) Hudsonia tomentosa (I N ) Hypericum pyramidatum (I N ) Juncus articulatus (p r otected, but only known from 1 site) IN Linum striatum (I N ) Ludwigia sphaerocarpa (I N ) Lycopodiella verticillatum (I N ) Orobanche fasciculata (I N ) Panicum verrucosum (I N ) Potamogeton richardsonii (I N ) Psilocarya scirpoidees (I N ) Ranunculus cymbalaria (IL) Rynchospora globularis recognita (I N ) Sanguisorba canadensis (I L ) Selaginella rupestris (I N ) Shepherdia canadensis (I L ) Sisyrinchium atlanticum (I L ) Sparganium americanum (I L ) Sparganium chlorocarpum (I L ) Sphaerlacea angusta (I L ) Spiranthes lucida (I L ) Spiranthes magnicamporum (I N ) Symphoricarpos albus albus (I L ) Talinum rugospermum (I N ) Valerianella chenopodifolia (I L )

Priority group 5 Species with particular taxonomic or r ep r oductive problems and/or needing life history r es e a r ch; species whose survival or rep r oductive success is seriously compromised by external factors such as herbivory, hydr ol o g y , canopy closure, poaching, etc. Most species in Priority Group 1 can also be added to this Gr ou p . Ammophila breviligulata (s t i f f competition with Elymus arenarius–I L ) Asclepias lanuginosa (re p r oductive prob l e m – I L ) A. ovalifolia (re p r oductive prob l e m – I L )

17 0 Appendix 6. Priority Groups of Endangered and Threatened Plant Species in Chicago Wil d e r n e s s

Aster furcatus (re p r oductive prob l e m – I L ) Botrychium matricariaefolium (h y d r omesophytic woods–disturbed hydrol o g y – I N ) B. simplex fe r n taxonomic res e a r ch–IL, IN) Carex debilis rudgei (lakeplain swamps/hydromesophytic forest–disturbed hydrology–IN) C. folliculata (mesophytic swamps–disturbed hydrol o g y – I N ) C. leptonervia (h y d r omesophytic forest–disturbed hydrol o g y – I N ) Chrysosplenium americanum (h y d r omesophytic forest–disturbed hydrology–IN) Cirsium hillii (re p r oductive questions–IL, IN) Cypripedium parviflorum (purple loosestrife invasion/brow s e / p o a c h i n g – I L ) C. reginae (deer browse threat to rep r oductive success–IL) Filipendula rubra (re p r oductive problem; non-seed prod u c i n g – I L ) Hymenoxys acaulis glabra (re p r oductive prob l e m s – I L ) Lathyrus ochroleucus (re p r oductive problems: nonflowering/seeding populations–IL, IN) Lathyrus venosus (f i r e suppression/closed canopy–IN) Lycopodium tristachyium (closed canopy–N) Malaxis unifolia (I N ) Orobanche fasciculata (parasitic–IL, IN) Phlox bifida stellaria (f i r e suppression/closed canopy–IN) Platanthera ciliaris (IL, IN) P. psycodes (deer browse threat to rep r oductive success–IL) Rubus setosus (taxonomic questions–IL, IN) Scirpus hattorianus (habitat comprom i s e – I L ) Shepherdia canadensis (IL, IN) Trillium cernuum macranthus (deer browse/canopy closure–IL, IN)

Priority group 6 Species that may be adequately protected or stable but are restricted to rare communities within CW in state indicated. Note: Communities used here are still to be cross-walked with the CW community classification system. Arenaria patula (dolomite prairies–IL) Bidens beckii (aquatic; glacial lakes–IL) Cakile edentula (l a k e s h o r es, beaches–IL) Calla palustris (bogs–IL, IN) Cardamine pratensis va r . pa l u s t r i s (fens, calcareous floating mats–IL) Carex atherodes (wet meadows/shallow marshes–IN) C. bebbii (calcarious fens and prairies–IN) C. brunescens (bogs–IL, IN) C. canescens disjuncta (b o g s – I L ) C. chordorrhiza (b o g s – I L ) C. conoidea (calceous prairies/dolomite prairies–IN) C. cryptolepis (f e n s – I N ) C. disperma (b o g s – I L ) C. garberi (pannes- IL, IN) C. intumescens (f l a t w o o d s – I L ) C. limosa (sphagnum bogs–IN) C. oligosperma (b o g s – I L ) C. trisperma (b o g s – I L ) C. tuckermanii (f l a t w o o d s – I L ) Castilleja sessiliflora (l a k e s h o r e sand prairie–IL) Ceanothus herbaceous (sand savannas–IN, IL) Chaerophyllum procumbens shortii (mesophytic wooded bluffs – I N ) Chamaedaphne calyculata (b o g s – I L ) Cornus canadensis (bogs–IL, IN) edge of range Cypripedium acaule (b o g s – I L ) Drosera rotundifolia (b o g s – I L ) Eleocharis melanocarpa (moist sandy prairies–IN) E. olivacea (p a n n e s – I L )

17 1 Appendix 6. Priority Groups of Endangered and Threatened Plant Species in Chicago Wil d e r n e s s

E. pauciflora (p a n n e s / s e e p s – I L ) E. rostellata (c a l c a r eous seeps and springs–IL) Epilobium angustifolium (b o g s – I N ) Eriocaulon septangulare (lake border with calcareous soils–IN) Eriophorum virginicum (b o g s – I L ) Gentiana puberulenta (black soil prairies–IN) Isoetes butleri (dolomite prairies–disjunct from glades further south–IL) Juncus scirpoides (wet sandy soils/wet prairies- IN) Juniperus horizontalis (l a k e s h o r e, fored u n e s – I L ) Lathyrus ochroleucus (d r y oak woods/savannas–IN) L. venosus (d r y prairies/savannas–IN) Larix laricina (b o g s – I L ) Liatris scariosa va r . ni e u w l a n d i i (s a v a n n a s – I L ) Platanthera ciliaris (b o g s – I I N ) P. hyperborea (pannes, fens–IN) P. psycodes (f l a t w o o d s – I L ) Potamogeton gramineus (aquatic/glacial lakes–IL) P. praelongus (aquatic/glacial lakes–IL) P. pulcher (aquatic/shallow acid waters–IL, IN) P. robbinsii (aquatic/glacial lakes–IL, IN) P. strictifolius (a q u a t i c / c a l c a r eous lakes and ponds) Potentilla anserina (p a n n e s / c a l c a r eous flat marshes–IN) Rhynchospora alba (p a n n e s / c a l c a r eous seeps and springs/bogs–IL) Ribes hirtellum (b o g s – I L ) Salix serissima (b o g s – I L ) Scirpus cespitosus (c a l c a r eous springs and seeps–IL) Scirpus smithii (bog or sandy pond shores–IL, IN) Scirpus hallii (sand ponds–IN) Scleria reticularis (sandy soil/marshes–IN) Sphaerlacea angusta (Malvastrum hispidum) (dolomite prairies–IL) Sparganium androcladum (clean water lakes–IN) Thuja occidentalis (b o g s / f o r ested springy fens/eroded bluffs – I L ) Tofielda glutinosa (p a n n e s / s e e p s – I L ) Triglochin palustris (seeps/springs/marl flats–IL, IN) Utricularia cornuta (c a l c a r eous seeps/pannes–IL, IN) U. geminiscapa (b o g s – I N ) U. intermedia (c a l c a r eous seeps/pannes–IL) U. minor (c a l c a r eous seeps/pannes–IL, IN) U. subulata (p a n n e s – I N ) Vaccinium macrocarpon (b o g s – I L ) V. oxycoccos (bogs–IL) Valerianella chenopodifolia (limestone bluffs and riparian areas–IL, IN)

17 2 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 7 Tools for Communication and Education Ef f o rt s

Tools for educators De s c r i p t i o n Pu r p o s e / a u d i e n c e Biodiversity Kit Pr oblem-based program with sample To engage K-8th graders in searches for scenarios for exploring local biodiversity. viable solutions to biodiversity threa t s . Includes 148-page Educator’s Guide.

Chicago Tri b u n e Educational Servi c e s Sixteen-page newspaper supplement To help students understand biodiversity supplement, “Chicagoland Ecosystem” for educational use with activities for and its local implications. grades 4-9.

Chicago Wil d e r ness Atlas Education Integrated educational tool that includes For educators and students to learn Pa c k a g e Chicago Wilderness: An Atlas of about the natural communities of the Bi o d i v e r s i t y , “Natural Wonders” poster Chicago reg i o n . with educational activities and Tri b u n e Educational Services supplement.

Tools for individuals, agencies De s c r i p t i o n Pu r p o s e / a u d i e n c e and orga n i z a t i o n s Chicago Wilderness: An Atlas of Fu l l - c o l o r , 64-page book describing the For the general public, educators, media, Bi o d i v e r s i t y natural communities of the reg i o n . elected officials, corporate and community leaders.

Chicago WILDERNESS Magazine Qu a r terly magazine celebrating the rich To convey the messages of local bio- natural heritage of the reg i o n . diversity protection in a popular forma t ; for all general audiences.

Chicago Wil d e r ness “Porta b l e Fifteen-minute video called “This is To give organizations the means for both Re s o u rc e s ” Chicago Wil d e r ness”; colorful and in t e r nal and external communication in f o r mative tabletop display; slide show about Chicago Wil d e rn e s s . pre s e n t a t i o n .

Chicagoland Environmental Network Public point-of-contact for volunteer To provide means for public to become (C E N ) op p o r tunities and events, managed by in f o r med about and involved in local Br ookfield Zoo. co n s e r vation activities.

Chicago Wil d e r ness Web Site at Co m p r ehensive res o u r ce for news and To increase public awareness and ww w. c h i w i l d . o r g issues related to biodiversity prot e c t i o n , pr ovide forum for scientists, educators managed by Chicago Academy of and land managers to share informa t i o n . Sc i e n c e s .

17 3 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 8 Chicago Wil d e r ness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Achievements (As of June 1999. For an up-to-date listing of members, visit www.c h i c a g o w i l d n e rn e s s . o rg . )

Federal agencies Mi s s i o n Significant regional achievements U.S. Army Corps of Maintains seven harbors, operates the Chicago Lock, designs and constructs flood control and Engineers, Chicago District sh o r eline protection projects, regulates discharge into waters of the U.S., including wetlands, does work for other agencies, and assists in emergencies. Key local projects include the Chicago Sh o r eline Protection Project, Chicagoland Underflow Project res e r voirs, Upper Des Plaines Flood Damage Reduction Project and Waukegan Harbor Feasibility Study.

U.S. Department of Energy , Re s e a r ch and development 15 0 0 - a c r e site surrounded by forest pres e r ve. Vegetation communi- Ar gonne National in the basic sciences, ties of the site have been mapped using field surveys, remote sens- La b o r a t o r y en e rg y , and environ m e n t a l ing, and a Geographic Information System. Initiated the res t o r a t i o n management. of its oak woodland and prairie communities removing invasive non-native species and enhancing rep r oduction of native species. In addition, establishment of a 6-acre native tallgrass prairie has begun on a former building site. Argonne staff has been involved in prairie restoration and res e a r ch programs in the Chicago area and a number of colleges and universities have participated in ecological res e a r ch on the Argonne site.

U.S. Dept. of Energy , Fermi Re s e a r ch exploring the Fe rm i l a b ’ s National Environmental Research Park program makes National Accelerator fundamental nature of land available for externally funded environmental res e a r ch proj e c t s . La b o r a t o r y matter and energy To date, over 40 projects have been proposed, and several are cu r rently underwa y .

En v i r onmental Prot e c t i o n Pr otecting human health and pres e r ving our natural res o u r ces; preventing and abating pollution; Ag e n c y , Region 5 education; setting and enforcing environmental standards, assisting states and local govts.

U.S. EPA Great Lakes Oversees implementation of Eff o r ts include monitoring and rep o r ting on conditions in the basin National Program Offi c e the U.S./Canada Grea t ecosystem, and also funding demonstration projects (e.g., habitat Lakes Water Quality Agree - pr otection, res t o r a t i o n ) ment to “res t o r e and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the Grea t Lakes Basin ecosystem.”

Urban Resource s Pa r tnership of seven federal Works with communities and non-profit community focused proj e c t s Pa rt n e r s h i p agencies to provide techni- with “on the ground” natural res o u r ces and educational opportu n i - cal assistance or funding ties for under served communities. Has sponsored projects such as for projects in urban area s . community gardens and ecosystem res t o r a t i o n .

USDA Forest Servi c e Caring for the land and Th r ough unique partnerships with state and local natural res o u rc e se r ving the people. agencies, works in North e a s t e r n Illinois to manage forests, prairies, and related natural res o u r ces for long term community and ecological sustainability and improved quality of life of all citizens. The Chicagoland area is home to three USDA Forest Servi c e of fices—the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie in Wilmington and the joint North Central Research Station/North e a s t e r n Area Sate and Private Fores t r y offices in Evanston.

USDA Natural Resource s To provide assistance for A natural res o u r ces agency that provides science-based informa t i o n , Co n s e r vation Servi c e co n s e r vation on private pr oducts, and services, and works with other groups and agencies la n d s . on watershed planning, flood protection and wildlife habitat, etc.

USDI Fish and Wil d l i f e Pr otect and enhance fish Works with partners to res t o r e wetlands and trust res o u r ces; man- Se rv i c e and wildlife res o u r ces for ages land in the national wildlife refuge system. In the Chicago area the American people. has been involved about 100 wetland restoration or enhancement, or res e a r ch projects.

17 4 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

USDI National Park Co n s e r ves natural and cul- The Chicago Rivers Demonstration Project, an NPS collaborative Se r vice, Rivers Trails and tural res o u r ces of the Park eff o r t led by Friends of the Chicago River, was initiated in 1992 to Co n s e r vation Assistance System for enjoyment, edu- enhance the natural and rec r eational res o u r ces of the Chicago and Pro g r a m cation and inspiration of Calumet Rivers. this and future generations.

USDI National Park Pre s e r ves more than Mo r e than 15 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline are managed. Se r vice, Indiana Dunes 10,000 acres of shorel i n e , Includes more than 1440 species of vascular plants as well as criti- National Lakeshore wetlands, oak woodlands, cal habitat for 2 federally listed species. savanna and bog.

State agencies Mi s s i o n Significant regional achievements Illinois Department of Co n s e r ves, pres e r ves and Develops rec r eational facilities; protects natural areas; manages Natural Resource s enhances Illinois’ natural game and fish populations; protects endangered plant and animal res o u r ces; provides outdoor species. Partn e r ed with US Forest Service to res t o r e Midewin rec r eation for public. National Tallgrass Prairie. Developed C-2000 Ecosystem Program to fund watershed restoration projects. IDNR was instrumental in Redwing Slough, a wetland protection and stewardship project in Lake County, and the Urban Fishing Program, which gives young- sters an alternative to gangs and drug s .

Illinois Natural History Conducts res e a r ch on natural res o u r ces to assure maintenance of State’s biodiversity. Through its S u rv e y res e a r ch and education programs, the Survey fosters responsible management and appreciation of the state’s biological res o u r ces. The Surve y ’ s collections of plant and animal specimens are among the largest and oldest in North America and are used by res e a r chers from all over the world.

Illinois Nature Pres e rv e s Works to protect high- Works with private and public landowners through voluntary effo rt s . Co m m i s s i o n quality natural areas and Statewide, 278 sites totaling approximately 35,000 acres have habitats of endangered been dedicated as Illinois Nature Pres e r ves, including 102 sites and threatened species. totaling 15,140.28 acres in north e a s t e r n Illinois’ six counties.

Indiana Department of Pr otect, enhance, pres e rv e , Manages numerous prop e r ties, including museums and wildlife Natural Resource s and wisely use natural, ar eas. In May 1995, the Indiana Natural Resources Commission cultural, and rec re a t i o n a l adopted a Resolution to formally recognize the importance of the res o u rc e s Lake Michigan coastal region to the state and to rededicate the pr ofessional staff of the Commission and the DNR in service to the reg i o n .

Local agencies Mi s s i o n Significant regional achievements Chicago Park District To enhance the quality of Thousands of children and families participate in a wide range of life throughout Chicago by natural res o u r ce-focused programs and ongoing restoration and becoming the leading pro- management of lagoons, wetlands, prairies, and other ecosystems vider of rec r eational and located throughout Chicago parks. le i s u r e opportunities; providing safe, inviting and beautifully maintained parks and facilities; and cr eating a customer-f o c u s e d and responsive park system.

City of Chicago, Co n s e r ve natural res o u rc e s ; Operates the North Park Village Nature Center, a 61-acre pres e rv e De p a r tment of Environ m e n t education; prevent pollution and environmental education facility on Chicago’s northwest side that offers natural res o u r ces based community service and outrea c h pr ograms in Chicago schools and hundreds of other programs an n u a l l y .

Cr ystal Lake Park District Pr ovide safe programs, parks, facilities and services and to pres e r ve and protect open land and water areas. District’s Nature Center reconnects people with nature via educational prog r a m m i n g and exhibits.

17 5 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

Downers Grove Park Yea r- r ound rec r eation pro- Re s t o r es and maintains 160 total acres at the Belmont Prairie State Di s t r i c t grams; parks, open space, Na t u r e Pres e r ve and Lyman Woods, participates in the Du P a g e and natural area s . County River Sweep, and offers interpretive prog r a m s .

Fo r est Pres e r ve District of Pr otect, and res t o r e areas with scientific, ecological, rec r eational, and historic values; creates Cook County an interconnected system of forest pres e r ves that will be a national model of urban/open-space pre s e rv a t i o n .

Fo r est Pres e r ve District of To acquire open land and Has acquired nearly 23,000 acres (10% of land in the County). DuPage County manage it to protect and Completed extensive natural cover and habitat inventory for all enhance its natural values pro p e r ties. Maintains rec o r ds on GIS database. Pursues an aggres - for public rec r eation, edu- sive Natural Areas Management Program on 9,000 acres of quality cation and pleasure. natural area s .

Fo r est Pres e r ve District of Pr otect, and res t o r e area s Maintains about 7,500 acres of open space at the western fringe of Kane County with scientific, ecological, the Chicago Wil d e r ness. Maintains 12 Pres e r ves protected under the rec r eational, and historic Na t u r e Pres e r ve Ordinance of 1983, and many other areas of va l u e s . pre s e r vation and res t o r a t i o n .

Fo r est Pres e r ve District of Pr otect, and res t o r e area s The Old Plank Road Trail, a 10-foot wide asphalt trail designed for Will County with scientific, ecological, non-motorized rec r eational use, currently runs from Park Forest to rec r eational, and historic New Lenox. The trail is being extended to Park Road, in Joliet values. Township, which should be completed by November 1999; the total trail length will then be 19 miles. The trail is scheduled to be completed to downtown Joliet in 2001 and will measure 22 miles.

Geneva Park District Pr ovide rec r eational pro- Of fers programs and classes for adults and youth at Peck Farm Park, grams, and open space. a nature interpretive site; holds environmental education field trips for schools, and community grou p s .

Kane-DuPage Soil and Pr ovide natural res o u rc e SWCD programs include an annual conservation plant sale, fish Water Conservation District in f o r mation and assist with sales for pond stocking, a well-water testing program and various natural res o u r ce concerns . education programs for youth and adult audiences.

Lake County Fores t To pres e r ve a dynamic and Own 21,000 acres of land with a goal of 26,000 acres, or 40 acres Pre s e rv e s unique system of natural per 1,000 residents, by the year 2005. Earned voter approval of and cultural res o u r ces, $85 million for land acquisition, habitat restoration, trails and other and to develop innovative im p r ovements this decade. Used by 75 percent of Lake County’s educational, rec re a t i o n a l population, with over 2.5 million visitors per year. Protecting 85 to 90 and cultural opportu n i t i e s pe r cent of lands for nature pres e r vation and restoration. Increa s e d of regional value, while natural res o u r ce management by 300 percent since 1993, with ex e r cising environ m e n t a l 12,000 acres now managed. Created 7,000-acer Des Plaines River and fiscal res p o n s i b i l i t y . Gr eenway protecting 88 percent of riverbank in Lake County and connecting many large Forest Pres e r ves including dedicated Illinois Na t u r e Pres e rv e s .

Lake County Stormw a t e r The combination of explosive growth and wet topography has heightened the need for stormw a t e r Management Commission management. The Commission, composed of six municipal members and six County Board members, is responsible for implementing the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan, which was adopted in 1990 and a county wide watershed development ordinance adopted in 1992.

Long Grove Park District Pre s e r ve natural areas, Holds over 400 acres of open space, including an Illinois Nature and open space. Pre s e r ve; Owns Woodland Nature Center devoted to nature education for both adults and children, and is working to enhance the habitat of one population of the prairie white fringed orchid. Acts as a de p o s i t o r y agency for easement grants.

Mc H e n r y County Pre s e r ve and res t o r e Biodiversity activities are centered around: 1) the permanent prot e c - Co n s e r vation District natural areas and open tion of existing natural areas through purchases or easements, 2) spaces for education, restoration of ecosystems, to pre- E u r opean settlement conditions, rec r eation, and environ - and 3) the provision of environmental education through workshops, mental benefits school field trips, interpretive walks and a variety of other prog r a m s .

17 6 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

Me t r opolitan Wat e r Pr otecting Lake Michigan Pr ovides sewage treatment with seven water reclamation plants, and Reclamation District of and area waterwa y s . pr events pollution of rivers and the lake with the “Deep Tun n e l . ” Gr eater Chicago Operates five urban waterfalls and the Centennial Fountain.

No r th Cook County Soil The mission of the North Ag r eement with the Army Corp to review Soil Erosion and Sediment and Water Conserva t i o n Cook County Soil and Co n t r ol plans on construction sites requiring Army Corp permits; host Di s t r i c t Water Conservation District an environmental competition for high school students called the is to provide for the En v i r othon; watershed planning facilitation; and soil erosion and Co n s e r vation of the natural sediment control workshops for municipalities. res o u r ces of the District.

No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Co m p r ehensive, long range Facilitates intergo v e r nmental cooperation. Provides regional guidance Planning Commission planning agency for the for stormwater management, water quality, stream, lake, and wetland six–county region. pr otection, and conservation development. Develops forecasts for population, households and employment. Develops regional plans or water res o u r ces, open space and greenways, e.g., co-authored the North e a s t e r n Illinois Regional Greenways Plan. Develops the Regional Growth Strategy and co-develops regional plans for tr a n s p o rt a t i o n .

Oa k b r ook Ter race Meeting rec r eation needs. Ac q u i r e, develop and maintain res o u r ces to facilitate rec re a t i o n a l Park District experiences and open space.

Sc h a u m b u r g Park District Education about natural his- Manages over 225 acres of passive-use areas that encompass a to r y and the rel a t i o n s h i p s wide range of habitat types and hundreds of native plant and animal of people to the land. species. A living history farm presents a glimpse of local land use during the late 1800s.

St. Charles Park District Pr ovides diverse prog r a m s , The Park District is actively managing and restoring six natural area s parks; pres e r ves and pro- encompassing approximately 500 acres. Two of the natural areas are tects open spaces, natural dedicated Illinois State Nature Pres e r ves. Nature education is offe re d are a s . in a variety of venues to all ages.

Private not-for -p r ofit org. Advocates for conser va t i o n /sustainable development Mi s s i o n Significant regional achievements Center for Neighborho o d Pr omoting public policies, Campaign for a Sustainable Chicago, vision of a city in which envi- Tec h n o l o g y which support sustainable, ronmental restoration fueled equitable economic rev i t a l i z a t i o n . just and vital urban Defines its work in terms of interrelated strategies: information and co m m u n i t i e s . communications, assets and opportunities, and collaborative learni n g and action.

Chicago Audubon Society The Chicago Audubon Society is an environmental organization with a particular interest in birds and their habitats. As a chapter of the National Audubon Society, its objective is protection of the en v i r onment through education, stewardship, conservation and community interaction. The ideologi- cal and hands-on support of its members is the Society’s major res o u rc e .

Citizens for Conserva t i o n Saving Living Space for Helped pres e r ve more than 2,000 acres in the Barrington area and Living Things through owns more than 270 acres; some as open space others being re- pr otection, restoration st o r ed to fen, bog, sedge meadow, prairie, marsh and savanna. Flint and stewardship of land, Cr eek Savanna and Grigsby Prairie are current restoration proj e c t s . co n s e r vation of natural res o u r ces and education.

The Conservation Fund Emphasizes the integration Th r ough real estate transactions, demonstration projects, education, of economic and environ - and community based activities, designs long-term measures to con- mental goals. se r ve land and water res o u r ces. Current projects include working with the Liberty Prairie Reserve to expand open space and prov i d e habitat in Lake County; works with communities and the private sector to implement development techniques that minimize impacts on environ m e n t .

DuPage Audubon Society —— — —— —

17 7 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

En v i r onmental Law and Develop and advocate Won landmark federal court ruling requiring fuller accounting of Policy Center of the policies that pres e r ve the relationship between proposed new toll roads and continued subur- Mi d w e s t en v i r onment and foster ban sprawl;successfully protected Savannah Depot, Illinois large s t economic growth. unfragmented sand prairie, from development; induced state reg u l a - tors to tighten pollution limits for Illinois waterwa y s .

Fo r t Dearborn Chapter, Pr otect native flora and fauna of Illinois and the habitats that support them through pollution control , Illinois Audubon Society the conservation of energy and all natural res o u r ces, a sound ecological relationship between human populations and their environments, and education. Studies all aspects of bird life, including identification and conservation, and hosts workshops that explore other aspects of biodiversity.

Illinois Audubon Society Pre s e r ves habitat, especially for threatened and endangered species, and conducts educational pr ograms; prevent pollution, curb urban sprawl and safeguard environmental reg u l a t i o n s .

National Audubon Society Pr otect habitat critical to our health and health of planet. Works with Chicago-area Audubon chapters and Chicago Wil d e r ness members to conserve and res t o r e nature. Focuses on wildlife, habitat and public education.

No r thwest Indiana Forum Stimulate private-sector Works for a sustainable northwest Indiana, using partn e r ed environ - Foundation, Inc. economic growth. mental, natural res o u r ce and restoration effo r ts such as the Quality of Life Council, the Indiana Harbor and Ship Canal-Grand Calumet River Area of Concern activities and the Indiana Dunes Environ - mental Learning Center.

Prairie Woods Audubon To conserve the environ - Su p p o r ts two instructors who currently reach more than 5,000 grade So c i e t y ment, wildlife and natural school children through environmental education program, including habitats, education, and studies on the ecology of prairies, ponds, wetlands, winter survival of fellowship. animals and a study on owls. Holds monthly meetings and field trips.

Si e r ra Club, Illinois Chapter Ex p l o r e, enjoy and prot e c t Works on pollution and conservation issues such as pres e r ving large wild places of the Earth . tracts of open space, strengthening water quality standards, red u c - in g / p r oper disposal of solid waste, and promoting alternative trans- po r tation; land use planning

Th o r n Creek Audubon Pr omote the enjoyment and appreciation of birds, to educate adults and children concerning our So c i e t y natural environment, to pres e r ve, protect and res t o r e wildlife habitat, and to create awareness of local environmental issues.

Private not-for -p r ofit org. Ed u c a t i o n a l / c o m m u n i c a t i o n /p ro f e s s i o n a l / re s e a rc h Mi s s i o n Significant regional achievements Br ookfield Zoo Cr eating sustainable and Awa r d-winning exhibitory of animals and ecosystems that encourage ha r monious rel a t i o n s h i p s co n s e r vation action and caring. Local and international res e a rc h with nature and education programs that support conservation effo r ts. Founder and home of Chicagoland Environmental Network, coalition of local en v i r onmental organizations that promotes conservation projects and volunteer opportu n i t i e s .

Calumet Environ m e n t a l En v i r onmental and Houses over 2,500 documents, air photos, and maps on the reg i o n Re s o u r ce Center economic “informa t i o n for organizations, agencies, and individuals. Helped form Lake clearing house” Calumet Ecosystem Partn e r s h i p .

Chicago Academy of Scientific literacy for all Education outreach programs (e.g., CAos Club; Ecological Citizen- Sc i e n c e s citizens. Conservation and ship (EcoCit)); science workshops for teachers; lectures; field trips, quality of life exhibits and weekend workshops and other programs for children and adults. en v i r onmental education Opening Peggy Notebaert Nature Museum in October 1999 focus- pro g r a m s . ing on ecology and natural history of the midwest from Great Lakes to prairies.

17 8 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

Chicago Botanic Garde n To stimulate and develop Living museum with 23 gardens, 385 acres total, 75 acres of lakes, an appreciation and under- 15 acres of prairie, and 100 acres of woods. Over 8,000 taxa of standing of garde n i n g , plants and over 900,000 visitors each year. The Skokie River bo t a n y , and conserva t i o n restoration project is a permanent study site for streambank stabiliza- by developing garde n s , tion techniques. Mary Mix McDonald Woods, a flat woods and plant collections, and open oak woodland, is a restoration management project. The education and res e a rc h Suzanne S. Dixon Prairie is a 15-acre display of 6 regional prairie pr ograms of excellence communities. Our res e a r ch program on endangered and rare plants while providing a continu- for the purposes of conservation and rei n t r oduction includes genetic ing aesthetic experience analysis, propagation, rep r oductive systems res e a r ch, monitoring, at the Chicago Botanic and seed banking. Ga rd e n .

Chicago Orni t h o l o g i c a l Pr omotes the rec re a t i o n a l , Publishes The Birder, a newsletter containing articles on area birds So c i e t y educational and scientific and birding and information on field trips for studying birds in their aspects of ornithology in natural habitats. Holds regular meetings with speakers (both prof e s - the area . sional and amateur Ornithologists from around the country) who make presentations to COS members on diverse topics related to bi r ding and orni t h o l o g y . Schedules classes on bird identification. Maintains an e-mail forum (IBET) for Illinois birders to share in f o rm a t i o n .

College of DuPage Of fers more than 100 nature and ecological classes each year including Prairie Ecology; 40 acres of the campus’ 279 acres has been designated as nature pres e r ves; 30 scientific papers have been published using data gathered from its pres e r ves; offers biweekly prairie tours to the public during su m m e r .

Co n s e r vation Research Re s e a r ch and education Works to identify factors that are significant in contributing to the bio- In s t i t u t e in the restoration and diversity and stability of woodlands, wetlands, and prairies—to help management of natural planners, government agencies, and land owners manage rem n a n t ec o s y s t e m s . and res t o r ed land effe c t i v e l y .

The Field Museum A res e a r ch and educational Regional inventory, monitoring, and res e a r ch programs that focus institution devoted to under- on species, communities, and landscape processes of conserva t i o n standing and pres e rv i n g co n c e r n. Education programs, public exhibits, and other outreach on natural and cultural the reg i o n ’ s biological diversity. di v e r s i t y .

Hammond Environmental Education about the effe c t Pr ovides hands-on environmental learning activities for children and Education Center ev e r y day choices on the adults. Holds lecture series, teacher training workshops, and a sum- en v i ro n m e n t . mer day camp. Displays showing recycling effo r ts from industry; federal and state agencies, and environmental organizations are available.

Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant Fosters the creation and stewardship of an enhanced and sustainable environment and economy College Prog r a m along southern Lake Michigan and in the Great Lakes region through res e a r ch, education and outreach. Currently has active res e a r ch and outreach programs in the areas of biological res o u rc e s , coastal business and environment, and water quality.

Indiana Dunes Pr omote apprec i a t i o n Establishment of residential environmental education facility in En v i r onmental Learni n g for and understanding of pa r tnership with Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, with school Ce n t e r natural res o u r ces at south pr ograms for 4th-6th grades and high school, plus teacher training end of Lake Michigan. and nonschool programs for all ages including adults, plus Environ - mental Education Consortium and other outreach activities.

Indiana University Teaches courses on ecological science and environmental problems; perfo r ms res e a r ch on metapop- No rt h w e s t ulation ecology, population ecology of amphibians and reptiles, prairie restoration and enhancement of species diversity in small prairie remnants; establishes native prairie habitats along the Little Calumet River; offers public slide presentations on Chicago Wil d e r ness natural area s .

Ir ons Oaks Environmental En v i r onmental education 37 - a c r e nature pres e r ve in the south suburbs of Chicago. The Land Le a r ning Center for local school districts. Management Plan provides for prairie restoration and removal of non-native vegetation from the oak fores t .

17 9 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

Jurica Nature Museum Small natural history museum located on the campus of Benedictine University. Includes specimens displayed in natural habitats. Offers field trips, a free discovery box loan program and winter workshops for elementary school teachers.

Lincoln Park Zoo Education, wildlife pres e r - The nation’s oldest zoo, receives more than three million visitors vation, and rec re a t i o n . an n u a l l y . Houses 1,000 mammals, reptiles and birds; conducts local and international conservation effo r ts, programs for students and teachers, and special events. Participates in nearly 40 Species Su r vival Plans (guidelines for captive breeding, monitoring) endan- ge r ed species (e.g., lowland gorillas, Siberian tigers, black rhi n o s ) .

Max McGraw Wil d l i f e Scientific, educational, Conducts res e a r ch and conservation education work to improv e Fo u n d a t i o n and charitable corporation wildlife and fisheries management and conservation techniques. for conservation of natural Pr ovides funds in support of res e a r ch, education, and related res o u rc e s . co n s e rv a t i o n .

Mo r ton Arboret u m Encourage planting and A 1,700-acre arboretum displays more than 3,600 kinds of plants co n s e r vation of trees and fr om the north temperate zone. Collections are combined with 700 other plants through plant ac r es of oak woodland, rec o n s t r ucted prairie, rare species habitat, collections, res e a r ch, and and wetlands. Actively involved in res e a r ch on rare plants and on ed u c a t i o n . the nature of presettlement vegetation.

John G. Shedd Aquarium Enjoyment and conserva - Funded and provided staff for an investigation into the decline of the tion of aquatic life throu g h Illinois cricket frog population, worked with the Illinois EPA to crea t e education, res e a r ch and an exhibit about non-point source pollution, and is also involved in public display. several Species Survival Plans and breeding prog r a m s .

Sustain, The Environ m e n t a l Works for sustainable environment through innovative communication strategies such as media In f o r mation Grou p su p p o r t, graphic design work, internet support, and consulting.

The Wetlands Initiative Restoring our nation’s wet- Educating landowners about the importance of wetlands and prop e r land res o u r ces to red u c e st e w a r dship of what they own; restoration of wetlands in Lake, Cook flooding, improve water and Will Counties, and res e a r ch into the struc t u r e of wet dolomite qu a l i t y , and expand wildlife prairie. Current projects include working with the Cook County habitat and conduct Fo r est Pres e r ve to create the plan for wetland restoration at Poplar res e a r ch and education. Cr eek, Skokie Lagoon, and Tinley Creek, and working with the US Fo r est Service to identify and res t o r e the wetlands of Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie.

Wild Ones Natural Pr omotes biodiversity and Rescues plants from natural areas being destroyed and helps pre- Landscapers, Ltd. en v i r onmentally sound land- se r ve gene pools by keeping these plants in gardens, or donating scaping practices. them to restoration organizations. Provides lectures, field trips, workshops, seeds, plants and personal help to its members and the general public.

Private not-for -p r ofit org. Local stewardship and land prot e c t i o n Mi s s i o n Significant regional achievements Bu t t e r field Creek Steering An intergo v e rn m e n t a l Developed a plan for the watershed—”A Vision for Butterfi e l d Co m m i t t e e watershed management Cr eek”; developed and adopted a comprehensive watershed or ganization comprising management ordinance. Currently pursuing a variety of open the south suburban munici- space pres e r vation, stream management, education, and habitat palities of Homewood, enhancement proj e c t s . Fl o s s m o o r , Olympia Fields, Richton Park, University Park, Glenwood and Chicago Heights.

Calumet Ecological Park Pre s e r ve natural lands; Establish an urban ecological park in Chicago’s Lake Calumet area As s o c i a t i o n highlight cultural res o u rc e s ; and northwest Indiana. revitalize economy in the ar ea.

18 0 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

Campton Historic Land trust, acquires and Founded in 1977 with the 163-acre donation of the Garfield Farm Agricultural Lands, Inc. pr otects land for open Museum, CHAL has protected an additional 118 acres, restoring space pres e r vation and 45 as wetlands, prairie, and woodlands. CHAL considers the ed u c a t i o n . historic, natural, agricultural and open-space aspects of prop e r ties for prot e c t i o n .

Canal Corridor Association Economic rev i t a l i z a t i o n Works with public/private partnerships, offers technical assistance in co n s e r vation of cultural and historic pres e r vation, land conservation and economic development. natural res o u r ces. In 1984, the Association secured the Congressional designation of National Heritage Corri d o r , recognizing the significance of the 450 sq.mile area from Chicago to LaSalle/Peru, Illinois.

The Conserva t i o n Pre s e r ve open natural The Foundation works in DuPage, Kane, Kendall and Will counties, Fo u n d a t i o n lands, improve rivers and boasts more than 1,400 members, and coordinates several pro- watersheds, conserva t i o n grams: Land Trust, DuPage River Coalition, Trails Project, Environ - ed u c a t i o n . mental Education Project, West Chicago Prairie Stewardship Grou p , and the Big Rock Creek Proj e c t .

Friends of the Chicago Foster the vitality of the Educational projects; rec r eational projects; and restoration proj e c t s . Ri v e r Chicago River for the Collaborated with private, government, and non-profit partners in the human, animal, and plant restoration of wetlands and stream corridors. Developing a water- communities within its shed management plan for the north branch of the Chicago River watershed. and guidelines for re-naturalizing the channelized portions of the Chicago River.

Friends of the Parks Im p r ove and prot e c t Saved over 70 acres of lakefront parkland from private develop- Ch i c a g o ’ s parks. ment; initiated an Adopt-A-Park/Adopt-A-Beach program, in which 65 businesses, schools, community groups and neighbors care for local parks; developed 149 local park advisory councils; mobilized thousands of volunteers to clean and green Chicago’s parks on Earth Da y , and the Great Lakes Beach Sweep.

Friends of Ryerson Woods Pr otect this rare ecosystem Sponsors environmental education programs and projects Help for present and future manage the needs and uses of the Edward L. Ryerson Conserva t i o n generations. Are a .

Ga r field Park Enhance and maintain A task force formed from rep r esentatives from various community, collections and facilities education, and environmental organizations to revitalize the (g r eenhouses?) throu g h Co n s e rv a t o r y after losses of aroid plants following a cold snap in community prog r a m s . 1994. Offers educational tours of the Conserva t o r y, a Summer Na t u r e Camp, an After School Program, and a Community Ga r dening and Greening Prog r a m .

Lake Forest Open Lands Co n s e r vation and res t o r a - Has pres e r ved and manages over 700 acres of prairie, savanna, As s o c i a t i o n tion of open space within woodlands and wetlands in the Lake Forest area. Recently expanded Lake Forest and vicinity. its scope of environmental education by opening the Lockhart Family Na t u r e Center,educating over 3,000 students and general public an n u a l l y .

Lake Michigan Federation Lake Michigan Federation Advocates for improving citizen access to aquatic habitat in cities, To res t o r e urban aquatic such as wetlands, nearshore bird stopovers, and fish spawning habitat, promote better gr ounds; works for improved water quality; and coordinates land and water use thousands of volunteers for cleaning Lake Michigan beaches as practices, and cut toxics pa r t of Coastal Cleanup day every September. that threaten children ' s health around Lake Michigan.

Li b e r ty Prairie Conserva n c y Pre s e r ve open space, inte- Private owners have protected more than 650 acres of land throu g h grate public land acquisi- co n s e r vation easements. Protected wildlife corridors; enhanced tion, private conserva t i o n , water quality; pres e r ved farmland; trails for hiking, biking, and low density development. horse-back riding; tranquil views to people driving through the Re s e r ve.

18 1 Appendix 8. Chicago Wilderness Member Organizations: Their Mission and Significant Regional Ac h i e v e m e n t s

Openlands Proj e c t Pr otect and enhance public Helped pres e r ve more than 41,000 acres of native habitat and other open space in north e a s t e r n public spaces, including the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie. Il l i n o i s . Helped establish the Illinois Prairie Path and the I&M Canal National Heritage Corri d o r . Its 21st Century Open Space Plan is a compreh e n - sive approach to “green infrastruc t u r e” for the reg i o n .

Save the Dunes To protect and res t o r e the Uses education, res e a r ch, conservation, and legal safeguards to Co n s e r vation Fund Indiana Dunes reg i o n . achieve goals. Produced the Grand Calumet River Lagoons Wat e - rshed Plan, established a bird-banding station, and conducts reg u l a r water quality monitoring.

Save the Prairie Society Ac q u i r e, pres e r ve and Incorporated in 1975 to save the 80 acre Wolf Road Prairie from res t o r e natural areas and development. Restoring 5 acres of savanna, prairie and stream corri - wildlife habitat; conserva - dor buffer to the pres e r ve. Provides field trips, nature programs and tion education educational materials. In 1993, launched the Natural Areas Rescue Fund (NARF), a land acquisition project to save imperiled “orphan” natural areas and endangered species in Illinois.

Shirley Heinze Pre s e r ve, protect, and Ac q u i r ed nearly 600 acres of wetland, prairie, dune, woodland, En v i r onmental Fund res t o r e natural lands in and dune-and-swale habitat in Northwest Indiana for pres e rv a t i o n , the Indiana Dunes reg i o n ; restoration, and management as nature pres e r ves. Sponsored more educate the public on envi- than 100 educational hikes and other programs for the general pub- ronmental issues; prom o t e lic, schools, and community groups. Published three books of local clean air and water. en v i r onmental interes t .

Glenview Prairie Educate the community about the uniqueness of the native prairie located on the site of the forme r Pre s e r vation Proj e c t Glenview Naval Air Station; advocate for the official designation of the prairie as a permanent pre s e r ve a public space of sufficient size to maintain the viability, quality, and diversity of the curren t prairie ecosystem.

The Grove National Historical education and A 124-acre facility offers historical, cultural and ecological pro- Historic Landmark rec re a t i o n . grams; res t o r e and pres e r ve the grounds, the Interpretive Center, and the historic struc t u re s .

The Nature Conserva n c y Pre s e r ving plants, animals Illinois Chapter has helped protect 82,000 acres of prairie, and natural communities by savanna, woodlands and wetlands. Over 22,000 members in the pr otecting land. Chicago region, and supports nearly 6,000 “citizen scientists” th r ough the Volunteer Stewardship Network.

The Trust for Public Land Ac q u i r e open lands for the pres e r vation of native plants, animals, biotic communities, and geologi- cal or geographical formations of scientific interes t .

18 2 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 9 Examples of Natural Landscaping Installation and Maintenance Cost

Economic benefits to using native landscape tr ea t m e n t s The following table rep r esents 1995 costs per acre for the three identified landscape trea t m e n t s .

Installation and seed costs Kentucky blue grass Bu f falo grass Prairie grasses and forbs

Se e d $5 0 0 $1 , 0 0 0 $1 , 2 0 0 Gr ound prep. and installation $2 , 0 0 0 $5 0 0 $5 0 0 Watering, mowing, weeding $2 , 0 0 0 $5 0 0 no weeding first year related to installation $4 , 5 0 0 $2 , 0 0 0 $1 , 7 0 0

Overseeding (seed and install)*** $9 0 0 $5 5 0 $5 0 0

Annual maintenance costs Mowing ($75/week) $2 , 4 0 0 $7 5 0 Wat e r i n g $2 , 0 0 0 Fe r tilizing ($90/application) $2 7 0 $9 0 ** * Weed control ($50/application) $1 0 0 $1 0 0 ** * Co r e Aeration $4 5 0 Pr escribed burn and/or mowing $4 0 0 * Weeding and hand-wicking $1 , 2 0 0 **

$5 , 2 2 0 $9 4 0 $1 , 6 0 0

* Includes permit application submittal; in most cases, the larger the site the lower the in c r emental cost of controlled burning, depending on the complexity of the fire plan. ** May or may not be necessary during the first 5 years of establishment. ** * May or may not be necessary during the first 3 years of establishment. The above figures rep r esent a “typical” seed installation. Installation and maintenance ch a r ges may vary based on ground preparation, seeding rate and desired appearance. Annual maintenance figures are based on a 32 week growing season.

Per acre costs compared over a 10 year period

Yea r Trea t m e n t Kentucky blue grass Bu f falo grass Prairie grasses and forbs 1 install. & maint. $9 , 7 2 0 $2 , 9 4 0 $1 , 7 0 0 * 2 maint. & overseed $6 , 1 2 0 $1 , 4 9 0 $1 , 9 0 0 3 maint. & overseed $6 , 1 2 0 $1 , 4 9 0 $1 , 9 0 0 4 maint. & overseed $6 , 1 2 0 $1 , 4 9 0 $1 , 9 0 0 5 ma i n t e n a n c e $5 , 2 2 0 $4 9 0 ** $1 , 4 0 0 6 ma i n t e n a n c e $5 , 2 2 0 $3 0 0 $2 0 0 ** * 7 ma i n t e n a n c e $5 , 2 2 0 $3 0 0 $2 0 0 8 ma i n t e n a n c e $5 , 2 2 0 $3 0 0 $2 0 0 9 ma i n t e n a n c e $5 , 2 2 0 $3 0 0 $2 0 0 10 ma i n t e n a n c e $5 , 2 2 0 $3 0 0 $2 0 0

$5 9 , 4 0 0 $9 , 4 0 0 $9 , 8 0 0 * No maintenance is req u i r ed for the first year of prairie grass establishment. ** After fourth year establishment of Buffalo grass, mowing frequency will decrease to 4 times per year or less depending on desired appearance. ** * Following full establishment of the prairie, generally after year 5, annual maintenance will be reduced to an annual burn.

Conservation Design Forum, Inc. • May 1996

18 3 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 10 Conflict Resolution and Inter go v e r nmental Cooperation. A Model for Growth Management.

In this example, suppose a suburban setting contains an arte r i a l values, views, and constituencies have had a chance to mean- roadway . The suburban area is now experiencing development ingfully influence the decisions. pre s s u r es and increased traffic on the arterial roa d w a y . The arte - rial corridor passes through several towns and through unincor- 1. Visioning through techniques such as visual pre f e re n c e porated areas between the towns. The corridor also includes su r veys, charrettes, and brainstormi n g st r eams, wetlands, and woodlands, each with valuable plant and 2. Establishment of initial goals and objectives animal species. The ro a d w a y, which has served the communities well for the past 20 years, now has regular instead of infre- 3. Inventories of existing conditions (natural re s o u rces as quent congestion. Regional growth forecasts indicate a possible well as land use, traffic and economic conditions, and doubling of population, households, and employment in the area . other community-development factors such as historic ar eas) and projections or forecasts of future conditions The proc e s s 4. Generation of a full range of alterna t i v e s 1. Establish an agreed-upon statement of purpose 5. Sc r eening of alternatives to narrow the number to a man- The initial step is to get the counties and towns in the corri d o r ageable size. This step also involves using the pre l i m- to agree that the process is desired, to agree generally on a in a r y evaluation. statement of purpose, and to find the res o u r ces necessary to accomplish their purposes. Elected officials should be involved 6. Detailed evaluation of the selected alternatives. The goals as decision-makers throughout the process to ensure account- and objectives established in step 2 are used here so that a b i l i t y. General-purpose governments (counties and munici- the alternative plans are evaluated in accordance with palities) initiate the planning process to establish a public the desired end state of the corri d o r . purpose and because many or most of the rec o m m e n d a t i o n s 7. Assessment of the impact of each alternative, including will fall on the local governments to implement. The statement co s t - e f fectiveness and implementation considerations of purpose usually includes general statements about the goals of the process (for example, traffic mitigation, environ m e n t a l 8. Selection of one alterna t i v e p rotection, and adherence to community visions) and an 9. Adoption of the plan and initiation of its implementation a g reement to cooperate to achieve a mutually beneficial fu t u r e. If the corridor includes rich biodiversity or has potential for biodiversity rec o v e r y, then the goal of pres e r ving or rec o v - De c i s i o n - m a k i n g ering biodiversity is included in the purpose statement. Depending on the specific issues in the area, the , counties The keys to the planning process are establishing a good vision and towns may also ask park districts and forest pre s e rv e and establishing clear goals and objectives for the process. These districts, and even schools, townships, and library districts, to not only help define a good set of alternatives but also prov i d e join the process. The governments, by formal interg o v e rn- the framework for a comprehensive evaluation. In our example of mental agreement, can form an entity such as a corri d o r- p l a n - a road corridor for a rapidly growing suburban area, planners ning council. At least six of these have already been might traditionally settle on expanded arterial capacity, adding to established in the Chicago Wil d e r ness area. The Illinois Local that care and consideration for avoiding negative impacts on Land Resource Management Planning Act enables the cre- wetlands or woodlands or other natural areas. The traditional ation of these entities. solution probably would also include minimizing impacts on al r eady developed neighborhoods or business districts. However, 2. Or ganize the str uc t u r e of the planning pr oc e s s this comprehensive approach re q u i res the consideration of a Once there is agreement to pursue the process, a stru c t u re wider set of alternatives and a greater attention to their impacts. should be established designating: • A full range of transportation alternatives should be looked at, • A steering committee (most likely elected offi c i a l s ) including introducing or increasing public transportation and • A technical committee (primarily the staffs of the govern- pr oviding for and promoting the use of bicycling and walking. ment members) If the corridor includes a train station, transit-oriented development can make it convenient for residents to use the rail sys- • An advisory committee (neighborhood groups, business tem instead of driving. in t e r ests, environmental interest groups, and several unaf- filiated but concerned citizens) • The planners should consider how to manage access to the road (both now and in the future) to allow the road to function according to its design, instead of letting multiple access 3. Establish and carry out the steps of the planning pr oc e s s points unnecessarily clog the roa d w a y . Ge n e r a l l y , the process includes the following steps. Each step involves review by each of the three committees, thus involving • Considerations of urban and suburban design and land-use the decision-makers, the technical staff, and the various inter- design should be included to make sure that new develop- est groups. The meetings of these committees should off e r ments overload neither the transportation facilities nor other op p o r tunities for input from the citizenry. This ensures that all public facilities such as water and sewer systems.

18 4 Appendix 10. Conflict Resolution and Intergovernmental Cooperation

• Pr oviding housing affo r dable to local workers helps shorte n redesigned to minimize impacts or in some cases to improve the work trips and travel times. situation. If the roadway is to be altered and it happens to be adjacent to a channelized stream, the new roadway design • Mixing land uses in new or current developments allows peo- might accomplish a dual purpose by acquiring enough land to ple to walk or bicycle where they might otherwise drive. allow restoration of that stream through re-meandering and the • Aesthetic considerations (historic pres e r vation, landscaping, planting of native vegetation. Opportunities for expanding wet- signage, and lighting standards) are also important so that lands should also be considered. The acquisition of additional new development fulfills the vision. rights of way for the roadway might also help accomplish this objective. The right of way could also be considered for a gree n - way corr i d o r, with planting of native vegetation, especially if Because our example corridor runs through areas with high-qual- that corridor is designated in the Regional Greenways Plan. In ity natural res o u r ces, the impact assessment should not only con- sh o r t, there are ways to accomplish multiple purposes within a sider mitigating potential negative impacts but should also c o rr i d o r-planning process. Rather than simply thinking of the consider possibilities that avoid the negative impacts altogether. pr ocess as a way to choose among cookbook solutions, we can The vision for the corridor should include enhancement the nat- see it as an inclusive process that can ultimately produce plans ural re s o u rces (and biodiversity), not simply the mitigation of and programs that meet multiple objectives. ha r m. Avoidance is usually the best initial policy, but it may not always be possible. If the roadway crosses streams or rivers or other natural areas, the crossing struc t u r es can be designed or

18 5 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Appendix 11 Recommendations and Action Statements

This appendix provides a chapter by chapter summary of the Chapter 5. many recommendations contained in this plan. For their full Ter restrial Communities: Status, Needs and Goals meaning, they should be read in the context within the text of the chapters. ✔ In c r ease number of acres under management on public lands • Allocate more funds to management activities Chapter 1. Executive Summary Chicago Wil d e r ness and its Biodiversity Recovery Plan • Apply generally accepted management techniques, as discussed in Chapter 9, including prescribed burn- 1. Manage more land to protect and res t o r e biodiversity ing, hydrological restoration, rei n t r oduction of native species, control of invasive species, and management 2. Pre s e r ve more land with existing or potential benefits for of deer and other problem wildlife. bi o d i v e r s i t y • Train more people in management techniques 3. Pr otect high-quality streams and lakes through watershed • Make more effective use of volunteers in management planning and mitigation of harmful activities to conserve ac t i v i t i e s aquatic biodiversity • Educate the public to build support for needed 4. Continue and expand res e a r ch and monitoring management practices

5. Apply both public and private res o u r ces more extensively ✔ In c r ease management and biodiversity planning and effectively to inform the reg i o n ’ s citizens of their nat- outside pres e rv e s ural heritage and what must be done to protect it • Develop and implement strategies to work with 6. Adopt local and regional development policies that ref l e c t la n d o w n e r s the need to res t o r e and maintain biodiversity • Work with state and local transportation agencies, utility companies, and railroads to manage communities in rights of way Chapter 3. The Biodiversity Challenge in an Expanding Region • Implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for water quality and water management in ongoing ✔ Su p p o r t the Regional Greenways Plan for north e a s t e r n de v e l o p m e n t Illinois and the Natural Areas Plan for southwestern Wisconsin. These plans identify actions to protect and • Integrate a biodiversity component into existing BMPs manage critical habitats for plants and animals and • Integrate a biodiversity component into watershed generally to improve ecosystems. They complement and pl a n n i n g su p p o r t the objectives of this Recovery Plan.

✔ Pa r ticipate in the discussions of the Campaign for Sensible ✔ In c r ease public understanding of land-management needs Gr owth and Metropolis 2020 as they relate to biodiversity co n s e rv a t i o n . • Identify all barriers to the effective use of fire

✔ Su p p o r t implementation of regional growth strategies by • In f o r m/educate the public about disturbance and the North e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission, the south- ap p r opriate management ea s t e r n Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, and the • Train/educate land managers about social barriers No r thwest Indiana Regional Planning Commission, insofar and appropriate approaches to sharing informa t i o n as these plans seek to reduce the reg i o n ’ s excessive rate of with the public land consumption, pres e r ve important open spaces, and pr omote improved water quality. ✔ Communicate information about the effects of ma n a g e m e n t • Compile information on techniques and effectiveness of management • Disseminate to land managers and res e a rc h e r s • Summarize and communicate to the public

18 6 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

✔ In c r ease the number of people qualified to manage land • Prioritize opportu n i t i e s • Develop a region-wide standardized burn-training • Develop protection strategies for priority area s pro g r a m • Look to protect remaining remnants of particularly • Implement the training prog r a m ra r e community types, including dolomite and gravel prairies, forested bogs, dolomite cliffs, and pannes. • Su p p o r t Illinois statewide standards for burn leaders • Publicize the training proc e s s ✔ Identify potential large complexes • Use tools—hydric soil maps, GIS, large grassland ✔ Implement adaptive management, linking goal setting, ar eas project—to identify potential sites implementation, monitoring, and res e a rc h • Develop criteria to prioritize sites for restoration and • Develop and implement a region-wide monitoring ac q u i s i t i o n pr ogram based on conservation design, as discussed in Chapter 9. • Chicago Wil d e r ness members should facilitate acquisition and management of sites that cross political borde r s . ✔ In c r ease the variety of management approaches to better simulate the effects of natural proc e s s e s ✔ Understand and mitigate urban threats to metapopulations • In c r ease the variety of burns through space, time, and gene flow and intensity • Re s e a r ch , develop, and implement strategies to • Manage for short- s t ru c t u r ed grasslands maintain genetic diversity • Ex p l o r e how haying and other mechanical techniques • Study gene flow in plants including the role of dis- can mimic loss of biomass consumption by grazers persers and pollinators • Translocate plants or seeds from high-quality areas ✔ Cr eate and manage large pres e rv e s to larger fair-quality sites • Ac q u i r e buffer zones around existing pres e rv e s • Im p r ove translocation techniques for amphibians and rep t i l e s • Pr otect and res t o r e natural communities adjacent to existing pres e r ves to connect and enlarge pres e rv e s • Develop strategies for genetic management in mammals • Continue res e a r ch to determine how large a site must • Study barriers to dispersal be to maintain target species • Plant oaks in space intervening between forest or • Di r ect Section 404 mitigation funds and land- woodland blocks acquisition funds to sites near existing pres e rv e s • Remove or mitigate barriers such as roads in key area s • Pr otect rec h a r ge areas for grou n d w a t e r -fed wetlands • Maintain gradients between community types and other wet communities

✔ Manage a portfolio of sites ✔ Cr eate and manage community mosaics • Communicate across the region about planned • Manage associated uplands with wetlands fluctuations in wetlands • Mange communities as part of a large system •Var y management from site to site • Manage whole watersheds to conserve ecosystem proc e s s e s ✔ In c r ease seed supply of local genotypes • Re s t o r e communities as part of mosaics • Land-managing agencies should create nurseries to in c r ease supply for seed ✔ Pr otect priority area s • In c r ease demand on nurseries and garden centers • Use existing inventories, such as INAI, the Regional to supply local genotypes Gr eenways Plan, and ADID, and conduct additional inventories, to identify priority areas for prot e c t i o n . • Assess acquisition opportu n i t i e s

18 7 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

✔ Mitigate the threat of salinization ✔ Reduce deterioration of water quality • Se a r ch for alternatives to road salt • Ri g o r ously enforce non-degradation standards . • Investigate the full impact of salt on plant communities • Develop and implement best management practices to control soil erosion, sedimentation, and storm • Look for ways (especially in the design of roa d water run o ff . drainage) to keep excessive salt and water out of we t l a n d s • Find alternatives to new and expanded effluent di s c h a r ges to high-quality streams. For example, route sewage flows to regional facilities and use ✔ Mitigate the threat from hardening of shorelines and land trea t m e n t . pr event further harde n i n g • Re-examine standards and practices for sewage tre a t m e n t . • Pr omote effluent polishing through constructed wetlands Chapter 6. for all discharges to moderate- and high-quality strea m s . Aquatic Communities; Status, Needs and Goals • Encourage pollution-control regulators to use biocriteria ✔ Reduce hydrological alteration for water quality standards . • Continue to identify watersheds with streams that • Gain community support for watershed management. have exceptional aquatic biological integrity to in f o r m planning effo r ts and set priorities. • Evaluate aquatic insects as indicators of water quality. • Limit development in some high-priority • Evaluate the need for improved water quality standards . su b w a t e r s h e d s . • Encourage volunteer monitoring. • Di r ect development into areas that limit hydrol o g i c a l al t e r a t i o n . ✔ Lake Recovery and Protection Actions • Pr omote cluster development. • Develop specific rec o v e r y plans for species and • Re q u i r e storm-water detention that effectively control s lakes of concern the full range of flood events. • Develop better mechanisms to control the invasion • Pr omote natural drainage as an alternative to of exotic species st o r m sewers. • Plan, protect, and manage lakes at the watershed level • Cr eate buffer strips and greenways along strea m s . • Develop a region-wide process to track and study • Ac q u i r e additional land for conserva t i o n . th r eats to lakes • Develop storm-water management plans. • Conduct res e a r ch to better understand habitat • En f o r ce eros i o n - c o n t r ol measures on new construc t i o n . req u i r ements of aquatic species • Cr eate or res t o r e streamside wetlands. • Investigate and mitigate the threat of salinization • Educate decision-makers about development patterns • Investigate and prep a r e for the possibility of and the effects of land uses on strea m s . rei n t r oduction of native species • St r engthen laws protecting species and their habitats

✔ Reduce deterioration of habitat quality • Integrate biodiversity concerns into laws, policies, and guidelines • Remove unnecessary dams. • Clarify ambiguous laws relating to lakes and their • Retain or res t o r e emergent and near-s h o r e vegetation. ma n a g e m e n t • Re-meander channelized strea m s . • In c r ease public understanding of lake biodiversity issues • Re s t o r e riffles, pools, sandbars, and other elements • In c r ease public involvement in lake management of in-stream habitat. and prot e c t i o n • Study the effects of riparian management.

• Su r vey how people use aquatic res o u r ces and study ✔ Lake Michigan Recovery and Protection Actions the economic impacts of uses such as fishing and rec r eational boating. • Identify information gaps concerning the Lake Michigan shoreline in the region with respect to • Use bioengineering solutions to control streambank su r viving habitat, and opportunities for habitat ero s i o n . restoration, so that practical goals can be developed.

18 8 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

• Identify key site-specific aquatic habitat res t o r a t i o n ✔ Cr eate a common Chicago Wil d e r ness database. op p o r tunities to support local and lake-wide To avoid duplication of res e a r ch and effo r t, managers bi o d i v e r s i t y . should have access to centralized information about the needs of rare species and management practices rel a t e d • Identify site-specific opportunities to provide shorel i n e to them for adaptation to their own sites. Linking with pr otection that also provides improved habitat. Natural Heritage Databases in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin is critical to this proc e s s .

✔ Chapter 7 Expand ex situ pr ograms for endangered and threa t e n e d Status of Endangered and Threatened Species: plant species so that adequate seed or plant material is available for appropriate rei n t r oduction as more sites Assessment and Recommendations ar e res t o re d . ✔ Ac q u i r e more public land to increase the size and number ✔ Develop rec o v e r y plans for both federal-listed species and of available habitats. Among the criteria to consider in state-listed species that have been identified as priorities. pu r chasing land should be the presence of endangered The Chicago Wil d e r ness Endangered and Threa t e n e d and threatened species; greater emphasis should be Species Task Force has identified approximately 150 placed on land acquisition as a means of protecting rare species as priorities for rec o v e r y in the region, assigned species. Priority should be given to creating complexes of to six categories (see Appendix 6). The plans should be communities, since many animal species depend on a realistic, suited to the CW region, and workable within variety of habitats. county and other regional struc t u r es and agencies. Re f e r ence should be made to rec o v e r y plans alrea d y ✔ Legal protection of plants, in contrast to that of animals, developed or in process for federally listed species is weak. Enact stronger legislation for the protection of rare as models to be adapted and simplified for state-listed native plants. species. ✔ En l a r ge and consolidate existing natural communities by cr eating buffers, or by restoration, to counteract the effe c t s of fragmentation, particularly the isolation of populations of Chapter 8 ra r e species. For some species, such as insects, it is more Pre s e r ving Land and Water Resources for Biodiversity im p o r tant to enlarge sites than to create new ones. Recommendations for private pr op e r ty owners ✔ In c r ease the levels of protection for unprotected or semi- ✔ Pro p e r ty owners who believe they own important habitats pr otected sites with known occurrences of endangered should have inventories of their land made by the staff and threatened species. For example, incorporate such of local, state, or federal agencies or by experienced sites into the Nature Pres e r ves system. citizens associated with local conservation orga n i z a t i o n s . ✔ Work with private landowners, either individual or ✔ Pro p e r ty owners who wish to commit to long-range corporate, to protect the endangered and threa t e n e d pr otection and enhancement of their habitats should first oc c u r rences on their prop e rt y . Use conservation easements assess the various methods of legal protection (listed in and other incentives to protect endangered and rare detail below). res o u r ces on private land. ✔ Pro p e r ty owners who do not wish to encumber or sell their ✔ In management plans for all sites with endangered and land, but recognize its habitat value, should pursue habitat- th r eatened species, include specific provisions to enhancement techniques, participate in larger landscape eliminate stresses and threats and to enhance rec o v e r y restoration effo r ts, inspire neighboring prop e r ty owners, of these species. and share information on uncommon species observed on their prop e rt y . ✔ To measure effects of management activities on rare species, design monitoring programs (for rep re s e n t a t i v e ✔ Pro p e r ty owners who have already established a strategy populations) to provide feedback to adapt management to protect and res t o r e their prop e r ty should assess potential activities and approa c h e s . impacts on their habitat from changes to land use on neighboring prop e r ties and, based on that assessment, ✔ Institute a region-wide monitoring program for rare pursue strategies with neighboring prop e r ty owners to species, implemented by trained volunteers as well as in s u r e protection and expansion of the habitat res o u rc e s . agency staff, to enhance and coordinate current effo r ts to measure population trends. Protocols should be ✔ Corporate prop e r ty owners should res t o r e native plant sp e c i e s - b a s e d . and animal communities on their lands or expand existing restorations wherever possible to expand, link, or enhance ✔ Rotate and diversify management treatments in order to nearby habitats. This can provide employee and commu- maintain a variety of habitats needed by many species. nity benefits and, in some cases, can achieve significant savings on land management.

18 9 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness should map and catalog the extent • Pre s e r vation of habitats and hydric soil systems of private prop e r ties in the region that could play an im p o r tant role in broader ecosystem restoration effo rt s . • Bu f fers for wetlands, streams, and drainage corri d o r s • Designation of lands with conservation easements or ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness should establish a process whereb y dedication to local government at the prel i m i n a r y private prop e r ty owners can become effective parti c i p a n t s planning stage. in broader effo r ts to res t o r e ecosystems. ✔ Use engineering standards and practices that incorporate me a s u r es to protect and res t o r e natural res o u r ces, that Recommended actions for Chicago W il d e r ness member emphasize infiltration over discharge of storm water, and or ganizations to facilitate transfer of private pr op e rt y that are flexible enough to respond to varying environ m e n - ✔ Educate the land-owning public about the options and tal situations. incentives available for transferring open space to public and not-for-p r ofit conservation agencies. ✔ In s u r e the municipal code allows and encourages the restoration of natural plant communities and habitats for ✔ As s u r e that all areas within the Chicago Wil d e r ness reg i o n native wildlife in residential and commercial landscaping. ar e served by one or more organizations that will take title to important habitats in order to manage them. ✔ Use native landscaping on municipal lands and res t o r e existing natural areas to create wildlife habitat, prot e c t ✔ Look for funding mechanisms so that lack of res o u rc e s water quality, and demonstrate these landscaping for ongoing ecological management is no longer an practices for residents and businesses. impediment to the donation of important habitat. ✔ Cr eatively design annexation and development agree - ments to protect and res t o r e natural res o u r ces to the high- Recommendations for local gover nm e n t s est possible degree, including immediate identification and ✔ Encourage local citizens to offer ideas for habitat pre s e rv a- pr otection of major res o u r ces and a process for identification and restoration in community visioning exerci s e s . tion and protection of other res o u r ces in later stages

✔ Identify lands with high habitat value and lands with ✔ Use TIF districts to acquire or res t o r e natural habitats good restoration potential and designate them as natural and community open space as part of redevelopment, res o u r ce pres e r ves in comprehensive, stretegic, and to provide habitat and implement hydrological best sp e c i a l - a r ea plans. Consider municipal ownership and management practices such as those recommended by management of these lands for open space and biodi- municipal consultants and by NIPC (1992). veristy values. ✔ Adopt intergo v e r nmental agreements between or among ✔ Designate stream corridors, swales, and hydric-soil net- neighboring communities to coordinate protection and works as open-space links in comprehensive plans and restoration of natural res o u r ces and of hydrol o g y . in strategic and special-area plans. ✔ Un d e r take municipal conference initiatives that focus on ✔ Develop five-year capital improvement programs for storm- the protection and restoration of natural res o u r ces, the water management and sewage treatment that minimize identification of local ecosystems, and the modification of in f r a s t ru c t u r e investment, replacement, and maintenance st o r m-water systems as described above in this section. by using best management practices. ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness organizations should develop a ✔ Develop general-purpose capital improvement prog r a m s training and technical assistance program for municipal that minimize infrastruc t u r e investment, replacement, and and county officials by which they would receive informa - maintenance using best management practices. tion on how to incorporate biodiversity in their plans, pr ograms, ordinances and reg u l a t i o n s . ✔ Adopt zoning ordinances that incorporate natural-res o u rc e overlay zoning districts and hydric-soil overlay districts, which supplement other zoning req u i r ements that apply to Chapter 9. specific areas. Adopt zoning ordinances that req u i r e devel- Ecological Management, Restoration and Monitoring opers to protect and res t o r e natural res o u r ces, to prov i d e bu f fers for wetlands and streams, to minimize impervi o u s su r faces, and to cluster home sites. Pr escribed Burni n g ✔ Land-management agencies should develop a compreh e n - ✔ Adopt subdivision regulations that req u i re : sive training program for crew members and burn leaders that emphasizes prescribed burning in Midwest ecosystems • In v e n t o r y of natural habitats, designation of hydric soils, and burning in metropolitan settings. and location of undergr ound tiles at the sketch-plan st a g e ✔ Land-management agencies should proc u r e suffi c i e n t equipment and workforce so that enough natural area s • Design of detention areas to achieve or approach zero can be burned within the appropriate time periods to di s c h a r ge for two-year storms achieve the goals of this plan.

19 0 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

Reestablishment of native species ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members should work with the Illinois ✔ Land management agencies that have not already done Na t u r e Pres e r ves Commission to monitor and participate in so should develop in-house nurseries to produce seeds the development of new legislation that affects pres c r i b e d and plants. A nursery can produce large quantities of bu r ning in Illinois. Similarly, members should work with seed at low cost and can also produce propagules state Environmental Protection Agencies as they develop ir respective of natural environmental conditions. ai r -quality regulations to facilitate prescribed burns . ✔ Expand seed and plant exchanges. Member orga n i z a t i o n s ✔ Land-management agencies, in conjunction with other can trade for seed or plants of the local or regional eco- Chicago Wil d e r ness members, should develop outrea c h type that are not available within their own land. This pr ograms to educate local officials, fire chiefs, pres e rv e cr eates a market for the seed and plants that are surplus neighbors, etc., about the use of fire in managing natural for one organization but useful to another that year. ec o s y s t e m s . ✔ Donate or exchange the use of facilities. Local conserva - ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members should cooperate to tion organizations and landowners can make use of each im p r ove knowledge about res e a r ch questions such as: ot h e r ’ s facilities or landholdings to build up the number of • What are the positive and negative effects of available propagules. The collaborative effo r ts create a pr escribed burning on endangered, threatened, regional economy of scale and assist individual orga n i z a - and watch species? tions whose res o u r ces are stretched thin. • What is the optimum timing and frequency of fire to ✔ Conduct propagation res e a r ch. The task of recovering over co n s e r ve designated ecological targe t s ? 1500 native plant species is a daunting one. Only about 350 of these species have been propagated commerci a l l y • What are the effects of various pres c r i b e d - b u rn i n g or for restoration. The personnel and facilities of significant regimes on native shrub s ? botanical res e a r ch organizations within Chicago Wil d e r - • What are the best uses of fire to control invasive ness provide great potential for res e a r ch into prop a g a t i n g sp e c i e s ? native plants for restoration and could act as a clearinghouse for such work. Such botanical facilities include the Chicago Botanical Garden and the Morton Arboret u m . St a f f from these facilities can and also do help in prep a r i n g Restoration and management of hydr ol o g y rec o v e r y plans for rare species. ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members and local agencies should cr eate a database of current hydrological data from ✔ Work with home gardeners. Volunteers have provided their restoration and mitigation projects and make it available ba c k y a r ds as nurseries for several plant species identified on the Interne t . for inclusion in restoration seeding. Gardeners rec e i v e seed or plants to grow in their backyards. The seed from ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members and local agencies should these plants is collected and used in restoration proj e c t s . st a n d a r dize the methods for collection of hydrol o g i c a l data, including the use of remote data-sensing equipment. Co n t r ol of invasive plant species ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members and local agencies should ✔ Continue to develop and share cost-effective protocols pr ovide training to land owners and land managers in for controlling targeted invasive species. techniques for identifying hydrological disturbances, locating and removing agricultural field tiles, and installing ✔ Monitor species locally and regionally to identify gr oundwater monitoring wells. and anticipate problems before they reach epidemic pro p o rt i o n s . ✔ Local agencies should identify large, artificially drained wetlands and prioritize them for res t o r a t i o n . ✔ Develop region-wide collaborative effo r ts to control invasive species on all public land not already managed ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members and local agencies should for biodiversity, including utility and transportation fu r ther develop education and outreach programs on ri g h t s - o f - w a y wetland ecosystems, making use of demonstration and restoration proj e c t s . ✔ Develop and promote native landscaping rec o m m e n d a - tions for residential and commercial prop e r ties that stron g l y ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members and local agencies should discourage the use of potentially invasive species in land- ad d r ess key res e a r ch questions, such as: scaping, working through nurseries and other outlets. • How do offsite factors affect hydrology at a site, and what are the implications for restoring the site’s hy d ro l o g y ? Management of problem wildlife ✔ Until effective alternative methods become available, deer • What are the best methods for restoring hydrol o g y , should be harvested regularly to limit numbers to levels that and when should they be implemented? su p p o r t a balance that sustains a full range of native plants and provides diverse habitat for birds and other animals.

19 1 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

✔ Disseminate any new information on alternative control Pr omoting management-related r es e a rc h methods to land managers. ✔ Compile a prioritized list of res e a r ch needs and support ta r geted res e a r ch projects with internal and externa l ✔ Disseminate models that predict responses of deer popula- gr a n t s . tions to management to managers and encourage their wi d e s p r ead use. Continue to improve existing models ✔ Set up a central source of information for students and based on additional field res e a r ch and the incorporation pr ofessors about priority res e a r ch needs. of stochastic functions and spatial components. ✔ Pr omote the Chicago Wil d e r ness region as a res e a r ch ✔ As deer populations are managed and reduced in size, station. This would help students to identify approp r i a t e th e r e will be an increased need for more accurate census sites and experts, as well as to receive permi t s . techniques. Additional res e a r ch should be carried out to develop more effective census techniques in general. ✔ Compile a thorough literature review of previous studies reg a r ding management of natural communities and ✔ State and federal agencies should provide support for co n s e r vation of biodiversity relevant to effo r ts in the collecting information from deer harvests that can prov i d e Chicago Wil d e r ness reg i o n . a basis for future decisions about deer management. This in f o r mation would include collection locations; gender; the nu m b e r , gender, and age of fetuses; and rep ro d u c t i v e Chapter 10 in f o rm a t i o n . Education and Communication ✔ Public agencies (and private landowners where rel e v a n t ) ✔ En s u r e that every student graduating from a school should cooperate more closely to manage deer across system in the Chicago Wil d e r ness region is “biodiversity- bo r ders of managed lands. li t e r a t e . ” • Develop a commonly held definition of “biodiversity ✔ Su p p o r t continued res e a r ch on limiting the spread of literacy”—what knowledge, skills, attitudes, and zebra mussels. Promising res e a r ch pursued by Chicago experience are essential to help people make informe d Wil d e r ness members shows that control of zebra mussels decisions and participate in biodiversity prot e c t i o n . in river systems would be most efficiently focused on particular upriver source sites rather than on the entire river. • In c r ease the visibility of biodiversity concepts and Illinois Natural History Survey (INHS) found that rem o v i n g issues in state education standards to encourage zebra mussels or constructing barriers to prevent down- teachers to integrate biodiversity content into other river pro g r a m s . dispersal of larvae would have a strong negative effect on down-river populations. Plans are underway to construct • Give school staff the incentive to devote prec i o u s a dispersal barrier to the round goby, another invasive in s t r uctional time to biodiversity topics by demonstrat- species, in the Chicago Ship and Sanitary Canal. ing to teachers how using biodiversity as a unifying theme could improve test scores . ✔ Pr ovide more public outreach and education calling for • Su p p o r t state plans that integrate environmental boat owners to take responsibility for cleaning boats and education into schools. In parti c u l a r , work to support boating equipment prior to transporting them from one the passage of the Environmental Education Literacy water body to another. of Illinois Master Plan.

✔ Pr omote res e a r ch on methods to control zebra mussels • Develop “best practices” for teacher training, such as and round goby. the package being produced for the Mighty Acorns youth stewardship education prog r a m . ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members should lead a public education effo r t explaining the problems caused by feral cats and advocating that people not feed stray cats, sup- ✔ Expand the scope of existing and future programs in po r t cat licensing laws, support humane removal of stray biodiversity education to include components for cats from neighborhoods and wildlife areas, and keep attitudes, skills, and participation in curricular design domestic cats indoors. • De t e r mine the effectiveness of existing biodiversity education programs for achieving “biodiversity li t e r a c y ,” and use successful programs as models. Management plans ✔ Chicago Wil d e r ness members should support regional • Foster professional development for organizations ecological perfo r mance standards, monitoring techniques inaugurating biodiversity education, and increase to measure attainment of the perfo r mance standards, and the number of pre- s e r vice and in-service opportu n i t i e s evaluation techniques (such as a regional rep o r t card) to for teachers to strengthen their qualifications to teach evaluate land restoration and management. bi o d i v e r s i t y .

19 2 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

✔ Make biodiversity in Chicago Wil d e r ness a component of • Devote more effo r t to rec r uiting citizen scientists from the degree programs of local colleges and universities mo r e diverse communities. Build effective tools to track the success of rec r uiting techniques, and use the • Su r vey existing course selections at local universities. ef fective techniques to expand the reach of volunteer- Identify courses that effectively and thoroughly rec r uitment prog r a m s . communicate key information about local biodiversity and work to increase their visibility. • Encourage the providers of non-formal education pr ograms to rec r uit and employ professional educators • Develop a degree program in restoration ecology at who reflect the diversity of the communities they serve . a local university with an accompanying field station.

✔ Me a s u r e local citizens’ understanding of biodiversity by ✔ Expand and improve the use of existing tools for biodiver- developing appropriate gauges for long-term effe c t i v e n e s s sity education, and create new tools as needed. of education prog r a m s • Pr omote practicum opportunities by linking universities • Cr eate appropriate gauges and gather baseline data with professional land managers in the reg i o n . on targeted communities. • Work toward the better distribution of existing tools by • Gather data at set intervals to measure long-term fo r ming a distribution center and investing in publicity ch a n g e . about the center. • Disseminate findings to agencies and orga n i z a t i o n s • Assess the effectiveness of tools for reaching their involved in biodiversity education. ta r get audiences. • Cr eate new tools for groups starting community-based, non-school projects in biodiversity education. For ✔ Gain a better understanding of the views of a broa d e r example, create a biodiversity program primer with segment of the Chicago-area population on biodiversity a list of potential partn e r s . issues such as ecological res t o r a t i o n • Pr oduce tools and materials in multiple languages. • Compile existing local market res e a r ch, including that ga t h e r ed through land-acquisition bond campaigns, to de t e r mine gaps in the understanding of public values ✔ In c r ease the number of communities being reached with and perce p t i o n s . non-school-based programs in biodiversity education • Commission professional market res e a r ch locally to • Foster neighborhood- and community-based prog r a m s better inform communications strategies and messages. aimed at improving the environment and biodiversity • Disseminate res e a r ch findings to decision-makers and locally to unify diffe r ent cultural groups for concerted co n s e r vation agencies and orga n i z a t i o n s . community action. • Identify specific leaders in cultural and ethnic communities who can inform educators and communicators ✔ In c r ease the public’s understanding of the role of manage- and serve as partners for collaborative prog r a m s . ment in natural area s . • Cr eate a diverse base of spokespeople, including • Craft a common lexicon that describes res t o r a t i o n pr ofessionals and volunteers, who can serve as eff o r ts, and create methods to evaluate and adapt the “ambassadors” for biodiversity to a wider variety messages to grow in effe c t i v e n e s s . of communities. • Foster the delivery of essential message points not only • Develop collaborations between Chicago Wil d e rn e s s th r ough conservation agencies and organizations, but member organizations and cultural, ethnic, and arts also through a broader range of institutions and chan- and humanities organizations to foster the exploration ne l s . of nature through cultural avenues. • Engage and educate those who interpret conserva t i o n • Im p r ove the infrastruc t u r e within conservation agencies issues for the public, including community leaders, and organizations to better support community-based media, and elected offi c i a l s . biodiversity proj e c t s .

• Develop links between school-based biodiversity ✔ pr ograms and community proj e c t s . Im p r ove communication with those immediately affe c t e d by management decisions. • Find new ways of providing urban populations with op p o r tunities to become aware of and explore the • En s u r e that restoration effo r ts, particularly in new reg i o n ’ s natural communities (for example, a ar eas, include plans for communications to local “biodiversity bus” to bring urban residents to outlying residents, and that res o u r ces are available for effi c i e n t natural area s ) . and appropriate communication effo rt s .

19 3 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

• Cr eate a communication guide that restoration agen- ✔ Im p r ove communication about biodiversity with key deci- cies can use to help develop these plans, including sion-makers such as elected officials and their staff, land res o u r ces that already exist and successful examples managers, and planners fr om other agencies. • Assess current tools and programs to inform key deci- • Conduct direct outreach to organizations in the local sion-makers for content, availability, and effe c t i v e n e s s communities, such as block clubs and religious grou p s , in increasing understanding of the importance of local that are interested in environmental work. bi o d i v e r s i t y . • Engage advocacy organizations that work on • S u rv e y, as necessary, to assess key decision-makers’ en v i r onmental issues (such as air and water quality knowledge, attitudes, and information needs. or sprawl) and educate them about biodiversity loss. • Develop vehicles to keep decision-makers reg u l a r l y • Seek opportunities to inform journalists and increa s e in f o r med, such as tours, literature, up-to-date scientific media coverage of restoration and land management. in f o r mation, and contacts for further informa t i o n . • Review current mechanisms for public involvement in land-management decisions and make improv e m e n t s , using models that are successful in other aren a s . Chapter 11 • Cr eate a struc t u r e for collaborating partners not only to Role of Key Players react quickly but also to anticipate issues that arise in Fo r est pres e r ve and conservation districts public forum s . ✔ In keeping with their central role as land managers, the fo r est pres e r ve and conservation districts should continue to play lead roles in identifying, evaluating, and acquiring ✔ Communicate documented benefits of local res t o r a t i o n un p r otected natural communities within their jurisdictions. eff o r ts, especially those of most value to humans. ✔ • Gather data on the results of restoration effo r ts, Federal and state agencies should support these effo rt s translating the data into easily understood benefits. with funding and technical res o u r ces. The most rec e n t example of such a partnership was the Chicago • Cr eate communications tools that connect res t o r a t i o n Wil d e r ness collaboration that produced the natural- results to core values: the beauty and wonder of ar eas inventory for McHenry County. na t u r e, our responsibility to future generations, and the desire for a healthy environ m e n t . ✔ Fo r est pres e r ves should use all tools available to add land to their holdings. It is also recommended that existing • Include illustrations of restoration results in prog r a m s , natural areas be protected from purchase requests by na t u r e walks, signs, and other communication co m m e r cial and other interests or conversion to intensive ve h i c l e s . rec r eational uses. • Develop innovative campaigns and programs that position habitat restoration in mainstream culture (such as museum exhibits, ad campaigns, and Sa n i t a r y districts retail prom o t i o n s ) . ✔ Since the concern for maintaining biodiversity is not one of the purposes for which sanitary districts were crea t e d , enabling legislation should be amended to specify the ✔ Im p r ove the credibility and public perception of the authority and obligation of districts to protect biodiversity. people involved in restoration effo rt s . ✔ In the case of private utility companies that provide • Seek trusted local spokespeople who rep r esent the wastewater collection and treatment services, and whose sound, scientific thinking behind restoration and/or franchises are regulated by the Illinois Commerce Comm- exemplify the role of the local volunteer. ission, a similar broadening of authorizing legislation • Pr ovide support for volunteers who interact with the would be approp r i a t e . public, and offer training in public speaking, ecological concepts, interpretation, etc. Illinois counties and municipalities • Emphasize the public service provided by volunteers ✔ Counties and municipalities should amend their compre- and the leverage of public funds through donated time. hensive plans, zoning ordinances, and other regulations to incorporate relevant recommendations contained in • En s u r e that decision-makers are aware of the value of this plan. co n s e r vation volunteers. ✔ When a state infrastruc t u r e investment such as a toll roa d or major airport is likely to trigger substantial res i d e n t i a l , co m m e r cial, or industrial development, affected governments (including state, county, municipal and other local jurisdictions) should enter into intergo v e r nmental agree - ments designed to prevent adverse environmental impacts

19 4 Appendix 11. Recommendations and Action Statements

including the loss of biodiversity. Such agreements were ✔ Develop a strategy for involving volunteers. Identify developed as part of the process for considering a pro- functions and tasks to be accomplished by volunteers. posed expressway in central Lake County, Illinois. ✔ Pr ovide opportunity for personal satisfaction in accom- ✔ Municipalities should play an active role in protection plishing tasks that are needed for restoration. People and management of biodiversity by managing their lands se r ve as volunteers because they find satisfaction in the to support native ecological communities and consider work. Successful volunteer programs build on this fact to acquisition of additional land for these purposes. accomplish the purposes of the orga n i z a t i o n . ✔ Remove barriers. Make it easy and inviting for volunteers to contribute time and energy . If req u i r ements and/or No r thwest Indiana municipalities qualifications are necessary, provide ways for volunteers ✔ In northwest Indiana, city departments should enter into to earn them through training or certification based on pa r tnerships aimed at protecting biodiversity with federal, tests of ability or knowledge. state, and county agencies and with private orga n i z a t i o n s ✔ that own and oversee land requiring pres e r vation and Pr ovide an organized context for volunteer activities. lo n g - t e r m maintenance. At a minimum, provide a stable set of ground rules to accommodate volunteer effo r ts and involve volunteer ✔ Indiana cities and their regional planning and develop- leaders in developing them. ment agencies should develop a process for taking ✔ Encourage volunteers to adopt or take “ownership” in v e n t o r y of natural areas and prioritizing areas for for specific functions or places. pre s e r vation and restoration in conjunction with economic-development initiatives. ✔ Identify a specific person within the host organization as the central contact for volunteers. ✔ Indiana cities and their partner agencies should develop ✔ Pr ovide recognition for volunteers reg u l a r l y . plans and allocate funds to pres e r ve land and to manage pre s e r ved land consistently. ✔ Pr ovide support for a volunteer newsletter and rel a t e d communications that offer education and information on volunteer opportu n i t i e s . State agencies ✔ ✔ The State of Illinois should continue its grants programs Pr ovide tools or other necessary res o u r ces where for open space with more funds for acquisition directed po s s i b l e . to north e a s t e r n Illinois. Open Lands Trust Act funds ✔ Pr ovide opportunities for face-to-face contact between should primarily protect lands with current or potential volunteer leaders and organization staff. biodiversity values. ✔ Pr ovide support with heavy equipment operated by staff if ✔ The state should continue to acquire high-quality natural needed and possible. ar eas through the NAAF. ✔ Develop long-term site plans for restoration and prot e c t i o n and annual work plans for activities to complete them. ✔ IDOT should incorporate biodiversity principles into Include volunteers in the planning process and identify all transportation infrastruc t u r e planning and all their role clearly. implementation decisions. ✔ Have experienced volunteer leaders, trained and certi f i e d ✔ Fu t u r e toll-road construction projects must assure full by the landowning agency, provide on-site supervision of compliance with EIS rec o m m e n d a t i o n s . most volunteer activities. ✔ Develop criteria for various functions and tasks and facilitate training to ensure expertise in them. In t e rg o v e r nmental or ga n i z a t i o n s ✔ The regional transportation planning process should ✔ Ce r tification is appropriate for some activities, including incorporate biodiversity principles into the transporta t i o n applying herbicide on public land and participating in planning and programming proc e s s . pr escribed burns. In such cases it is important to establish clear req u i r ements and the means of meeting them such as training or testing at convenient times and places. Federal administrative agencies ✔ ✔ Tra n s p o r tation designers and planners should carefully fol- Leadership among volunteers develops as people gain low the TEA-21 process, taking advantage of its prog r a m s experience and knowledge. Those willing to accept and related to biodiversity in the Chicago Wil d e r ness reg i o n . pr ovide leadership should be encouraged to do so and should be given added responsibility and rec o g n i t i o n . ✔ The Volunteer Stewardship Network (see below) should be St r engthening volunteer programs for protection and su p p o r ted and recognized as a valuable asset in develop- restoration of biodiversity ing leadership, expertise, and overall membership in ✔ Land-managing agencies should invite volunteers to be co n s e r vation prog r a m s . pa r tners both in planning and in implementing land ma n a g e m e n t .

19 5 Biodiversity Recovery Plan

Li t e r a t u r e Cited

Alverson, W. S., D. M. Wal l e r , and S. S. Solheim. 1988. Fores t s Bowles, M. L., and J. L. McBride. 1994. Presettlement barrens in too deer: Edge effects in north e r n Wisconsin. Co n s e r v a t i o n the glaciated prairie region of Illinois. Pages 65-85 in J. S. Bi o l o g y 2( 4 ) : 3 4 9 - 3 5 8 . Fralish, R. C. Anderson, J. E. Ebinger, and R. Szafoni, eds., Proceedings of the North American Conference on Savannas American Bird Conserva n c y . 1998. Domestic Cat Predation on and Barrens. Illinois State University, Norma l . Birds and other Wil d l i f e . ABC, Washington, DC. Bowles, M. L. and J. L. McBride. 1996. Evaluation and classifi- Anderson, M., P. Bourg e ron, M. T. Bry e r, R. Crawford, L. cation of savanna, woodland, and barrens natural areas in Engelking, D. Faber-Langendoen, M. Gallyoun, K. Goodin, D. no rt h e r n Illinois. The Morton Arboretum, Lisle, IL. H. Grossman, S. Landaal, K. Metzler, K. D. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, L. Sneddon, and A. S. Wea k l y . 1998. Inter- Bowles, M. L. and J. L. McBride. 1998. Vegetation composition, national classification of ecological communities: Ter res t r i a l st ru c t u r e, and chronological change in a decadent midwestern vegetation of the United States. Volume II. The national vege- N o rth American savanna remnant. Natural Areas Journal tation classification system: List of types. The Nature Conserv- 18 : 1 4 - 2 7 . an c y , Arlington, VA. Bowles, M. L., J. McBride, and T. Bell. 1998a. Landscape vege- Anderson, R.C. and M.L. Bowles. 1999. Deep-soil savannas tation pattern and struc t u r e rec o r ded by the DuPage County and barrens of the Midwestern United States. Pages 155- Public Land Survey (1821-1940). The Morton Arbore t u m , 170 in R.C. Anderson, J. S. Fralish, and J. M. Baskin, eds., Lisle, IL. Savannas, barrens, and rock outcrop plant communities of North Am e r i c a . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Bowles, M. L., J. McBride, T. Bell, and M. DeMauro. 1993. P re l i m i n a ry re p o rt on the re i n t roduction of hazel (C o r y l u s Anderson, R. C. 1991. Presettlement forests of Illinois. Pages 9-19 a m e r i c a n a) at Brightway Prairie and Raccoon Gro v e . in G. V. Burge r , J. E. Ebinger, and G. S. Wilhelm, eds., Pr o - Unpublished rep o r t by the Morton Arboretum, Lisle, IL. ceedings of the Oak Woods Management Workshop. Ea s t e r n Illinois University, Charleston. Bowles, M., J. McBride, C. Dunn, M. Jones, and T. Bell. 1998b. Twenty-year woody vegetation changes and gro u n d l a y e r Applied Ecological Services, Inc. 1995. Analysis of the Cond- species richness in nort h e a s t e rn Illinois upland forests. The ition, Management, and Restoration Needs for Natural Areas in Mo r ton Arboretum, Lisle, IL. DuPage County Forest Pres e r ve District Lands, DuPage County, B rooks, K. N. and et. al. 1997. Hydrology and the manage- IL. Applied Ecological Services, Brodhead, WI. ment of watersheds, 2nd Ed. Iowa State University Pre s s , Babcock, E. 1998. Recommendations for developing and imple- Ames, IA. menting a multiculturalism agenda for Chicago Wil d e rn e s s . Unpublished rep o r t for Chicago Wil d e r ness, Chicago. Center for Watershed Protection. 1998. Consensus agre e m e n t on model development principles to protect our streams, lakes, Ba r ro, S. C. and A. D. Bright. 1998. Public views on ecological and wetlands. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, restoration: A snapshot from the Chicago area. Re s t o r a t i o n Ma ry l a n d . and Management Notes 16 ( 1 ) : 5 9 - 6 5 . Center for Watershed Protection. 1998. Rapid watershed plan- Belden and Russonello Research and Communications. 1996. ning handbook: A comprehensive guide for managing urban- Human values and nature’ s future: Americans’ attitudes on bio- izing watersheds. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, logical diversity. Belden and Russonello Research and Ma ry l a n d . Communications, Washington, DC. Ch r i s t y , S. F., Jr. 1999. To pres e r ve and protect: The origins of Bennett, J., J. McElfish, A. Bale, and R. Fischman. 1995. In d i a n a ’ s the forest pres e r ves. Chicago Wil d e r n e s s Win t e r : 4 - 8 . biological diversity: Strategies and tools for conservation. En v i r onmental Law Institute, Washington, DC. Collins, S. L. and L. L. Wallace, eds. 1990. Fire in North Am e r - ican Tallgrass Prairies. University of Oklahoma Press, Norma n , The Biodiversity Project. 1998. Engaging the public on biodiver- OK . sity: A road map for education and communication strategies. The Biodiversity Project, Madison, WI. Co m m e r cial Club of Chicago. 1970. Plan of Chicago, by Daniel H. Burnham and Edward H. Bennett. Edited by Charles Bland, J. 1999. Personal communication. Moore. New introduction by Wilbert R. Hasbrouck. Da Capo Rpess, New York, NY. Bowles, M. 1990. A draft rec o v e r y plan for the eastern prairie fringed orchid. The Morton Arboretum, Lisle IL. Constanza, R., R. d’Agre, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O’Neill, J. Paruelo, R. Bowles, M. L., M. D. Hutchison, and J. L. McBride. 1994. G. Raskin, P. Suton, M. van den Belt. 1997. The value of the Landscape pattern and struc t u r e of oak savanna, woodland, wo r l d ’ s ecosystem services and natural capital. Na t u r e 38 7 : and barrens in north e a s t e r n Illinois at the time of European set- 25 3 - 2 5 9 . tlement. Pages 65-73 in J. S. Fralish, R. C. Anderson, J. E. E b i n g e r, and R. Szafoni, eds., Proceedings of the North Cr a w l e y , M. J. 1983. Herbivore: The dynamics of animal-plant American Conference on Savannas and Barrens. Illinois State in t e r a c t i o n s . University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. Un i v e r s i t y , Norma l .

14 4 Li t e r a t u r e Cited

Critical Trends Assessment Project. 1994. The changing Illinois Gr ossman, D. H., D. Faber-Langendoen, A. S. Wea k l y , M. Ander- e n v i ronment: Critical trends. A joint project of the Illinois son, P. Bourg e ron, R. Crawford, K. Goodin, S. Landaal, K. De p a r tment of Energy and Natural Resources and the Nature Me t z l e r , K. D. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, and L. Sneddon. of Illinois Foundation, Springfield, IL. 1998. International classification of ecological communities: Te rrestrial vegetation of the United States. Volume I. The Da i l y , G. C. 1997. Introduction: What are ecosystem servi c e s ? national vegetation classification system: Development, sta- Pages 1-10 in G. C. Daily, ed., N a t u r e ’s services: Societal tus, and applications. The Nature Conserva n c y , Arlington, VA. dependence on natural ecosystems. Island Press, Was h i n g t o n D. C . H a m m e r, D. A. 1992. Creating freshwater wetlands. L e w i s Publishers, Boca Raton, FL. DeCalesta, D. S. 1994. Effect of white-tailed deer on songbirds within managed forests in Pennsylvania. Journal of Wil d l i f e Hanson, P.C. 1981. The presettlement vegetation of the plain of Ma n a g e m e n t 58 : 7 1 1 - 7 1 8 . glacial Lake Chicago in Cook County, Illinois. Pages 159-164 in R. L. Stuckey, and K. J. Reese, eds., The prairie peninsula- D re h e r, D. and T. Price. 1997. Reducing the impact of urban In the shadow of transeau: Proceedings of the Sixth North ru n o f f: The advantages of alternative site design approaches. American Prairie Conference. Ohio Biological Survey Notes No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission, Chicago. No. 15., Columbus. E t t e r, D. and T. van Deelen. 1999. A model for managing the Henderson, R. A. and S. H. Statz. 1995. Bibliography of fire overabundant deer populations in the natural areas of e ffects and related literature applicable to ecosystems and Chicago Wil d e r ness. A project rep o r t to Chicago Wil d e rn e s s , species of Wisconsin. Technical Bulletin No. 187. Wis c o n s i n Ch i c a g o . De p a r tment of Natural Resources, Madison, WI. Et t e r , D. 1998. Population dynamics of deer from the forest pre- H u l b e rt, L. C. 1988. Causes of fire effects in tallgrass prairie. se r ves of DuPage County, IL. Forest Pres e r ve District of DuPage Ec o l o g y 69 ( 1 ) : 4 6 - 5 8 . Co u n t y , Glen Ellyn, IL. Illinois Department of Natural Resources. 1998. The upper Des F a b e r-Langendoen, D. and Midwest State Heritage Pro g r a m Plaines River basin: An inventory of the re g i o n ’s re s o u rc e s . Ecologists. 1996. Ter restrial vegetation of the midwest United Illinois DNR, Springfield, IL. States [draft]. The Nature Conserva n c y , Arlington, VA. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Biological strea m Falk, D., C. Millar, and M. Olwell. 1996. Restoring diversity: characterization (BSC): Biological assessment of Illinois strea m Strategies for reintroduction of endanagered plants. I s l a n d quality through 1993. A re p o rt by the Biological Stre a m s Pr ess, Covelo, CA. Characterization Work Group, Illinois Environmental Pro- Federal Geographic Data Committee. 1997. Vegetation Class- tection Agency. ification Standard, FGDC-STD-005. Federal Geographic Data Indiana Department of Natural Resources. 1999. A synthesis of Committee, Reston, VA. major topics in the Lake Michigan coastal area. Indiana DNR, Fo r est Pres e r ve District of Cook County. 1994. Land acquisition In d i a n a p o l i s . plan. CCFPD, River Forest, IL. Johnson, E. W. 1999. Chicago metropolis 2020: Preparing met- Fo re s t e r , D. 1999. 12 Natural wonders of the Chicago Wil d e r - ropolitan Chicago for the 21st century. Co m m e r cial Club of ness: Campaign evaluation. Unpublished rep o r t for Chicago Chicago, Chicago. Wil d e r ness, Chicago. Ka r r, J. R. 1981. Assessment of biotic integrity using fish commu- Galatowitsch, S. M. and A. G. van der Valk. 1994. R e s t o r i n g nities. Fi s h e r i e s 6( 6 ) : 2 1 - 2 7 . prairie wetlands: An ecological approach. Iowa State K a rr, J. R., K. D. Fausch, P. L. Angerm e i e r, P. R. Yant, and I. J. University Press, Ames, IA. S c h l o s s e r. 1986. Assessing biological integrity in ru n n i n g Gallup News Service, the Gallup Organization. 1999. U.S. pub- waters: A method and its rationale. Illinois Natural History lic worries about toxic waste, air and water pollution as key Su r vey Special Publication 5. e n v i ronmental threats. CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll con- Kosobud, R. 1998. Urban deconcentration and biodiversity val- ducted March 12-14, 1999. uation in the Chicago region: A study of some benefits and Ga r rison, V. 1994-1995. Ver mont Lake protection classification costs of natural area re c o v e ry. Project re p o rt to Chicago system. Proceedings of Five Regional Citizens Education Region Biodiversity Council, Chicago. Workshops on Lake Management. N o rth American Lake Kr i e g e r , D. J. 1999. Saving open spaces public support for farm- Management Society, Madison, WI. land protection. Center for Agriculture in the Enviro n m e n t , Gleason, H. A. 1913. The relation of forest distribution and DeKalb, IL. prairie fires in the middle west. Tor r e y a 13 : 1 7 3 - 1 8 1 . Ladd, D. 1991. Re-examination of the role of fire in Missouri Gleason, H. A. 1922. The vegetational history of the Middle oak woodlands. In G. V. Bru g e r, J. B. Ebinger, and G. S. West. Annals of the Association of American Geographers Wilhelm, eds., Proceedings of the Oak Woods Management 12 : 3 9 - 8 5 . Workshop. Ea s t e r n Illinois University, Charleston, IL. G o b s t e r, P., et al. 1998. People and the river: Perception and Lane, J., R., Wilke, R. Champeau, and Sivek. 1994. Enviro n- use of Chicago waterways for recreation. U.S.D.A. Fore s t mental education in Wisconsin: A teachers’ surv e y. T h e Se r vice, Evanston, IL. Journal of Environmental Education 25 ( 4 ) : 9 - 1 7 .

14 5 Li t e r a t u r e Cited

Le rn e r , S. and W. Poole. 1999. The economic benefits of parks N o rt h e a s t e rn Illinois Planning Commission. 2000. Pro t e c t i n g and open space: How land conservation helps communities n a t u re in your community: a guidebook for pre s e rving and grow smart and protect the bottom line. The Trust for Public enhancing biodiversity. NIPC, Chicago. Lands. San Francisco, CA. N o rt h w e s t e rn Indiana Regional Planning Commission. 1999. McClain, W. E. 1994. Occurrence of prairie and forest fires in Vision 2020–North w e s t e r n Indiana regional transporta t i o n Illinois and other Midwestern states, 1679-1854. E r i g e n i a plan. NIRPC, Portage, IN. 13 : 7 9 - 9 0 . Pa c k a r d, S. 1991. Rediscovering the tallgrass savanna. Pages Mc H e n r y County Conservation District. 1998. 1998 McHenry 55-67 in G. V. Burge r , J. E Ebinger, and G. S. Wilhelm, eds., County natural areas inventory. McHenry County Conserv- Proceedings of the Oak Woods Management Wo r k s h o p . ation District, Ringwood, IL. Ea s t e r n Illinois University, Charleston. M i e rzwa, K. 1998. Status of nort h e a s t e rn Illinois amphibians. Pa c k a r d, S. and C. Mutel, eds. 1997. The tallgrass restoration Pages 115-124 in M. Lannoo, ed., Status and Conservation of handbook for prairies, savannas, and woodlands. I s l a n d Midwestern Amphibians. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, Pr ess, Washington, DC. IA . PAH L ’s Inc. 1993. The environment of northwest Indiana. PAH L’ S , Mitsch, W. J. and J. G. Gosselink. 1993. We t l a n d s, 2nd Ed. Valparaiso, IN. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New Yor k . P a u l y, W.R. 1997. Conducting burns. Pages 223-243 in S. M o o n e y, H.A., J. Lubchenco, R. Dirzo, O.E. Sala. 1995. Pa c k a r d and C. Mutel, eds. The tallgrass restoration handbook Biodiveristy and ecosystem functioning: basic principles. for prairies, savannas, and woodlands. Island Pre s s , Pages. 273-325 in V.H. Heywood, ed. Global biodiversity Washington, DC. a s s e s s m e n t . UNEP and Cambridge University Press, Cam- br i d g e . Payne, N. F. 1992. Techniques for wildlife habitat management of wetlands. McGraw-Hill, New York. Moran, R. 1976. Presettlement vegetation of Lake County, Illinois. Pages 12-18 in D. Glenn-Lewin and R. Landers, eds., F i f t h Pimentel, D., C. Wilson, C. McCullum, R. Huang, P. Dwen, J. Midwest Prairie Conference. Iowa State University, Ames. Flack, Q. Tran, T. Saltman, and B. Cliff. 1997. Economic and en v i r onmental benefits of biodiversity. Bi o s c i e n c e 47 ( 1 1 ) : 7 4 7 - Myers, P. 1999. Livability at the ballot box: state and local ref e r - 75 7 . enda on parks, conservation, and smarter growth, Election D a y, 1998. The Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Quammen, D. 1996. Song of the dodo: Island biogeography in Me t r opolitan Policy, Washington, DC. an age of extinction. Sc r i b n e r . New York, NY No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission. 1992. Best manage- Ri c h a r d Day Research, Inc. 1998. An attitude and interest sur- ment practice guidebook for urban development. NIPC, vey of Lake County residents. Lake County Forest Pre s e rv e Ch i c a g o . District, Libertyville, IL. N o rt h e a s t e rn Illinois Planning Commission. 1998. Urban Robinson, S. K., F. R. Thompson III, T. M. Donovan, D. R. White- s t o rmwater best management practices for nort h e a s t e rn head, and J. Faaborg. 1995. Regional effects of forest frag- Illinois: A course notebook. NIPC, Chicago. mentation on the nesting success of migratory birds. Sc i e n c e 267:1987-1990. No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission. 1997a. Policy statement on the regional growth strategy. NIPC, Chicago. Sa y r e, L., D. Reckless, and J. Hardiman. 1997. Chicago Wil d e r - ness assessment of Chicago communities: Community-based No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission. 1997b. Population, e n v i ronmental education. Paper presented at the Chicago household and employment forecasts for north e a s t e r n Illinois Wil d e r ness Educators’ Conference on Biodiversity, Chicago. 1990 to 2020. NIPC, Chicago. Sebasto-Smith, N. J. and T. Small. 1997. Environmental education No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission. 1997c. Natural land- in Illinois and Wisconsin: A tale of two states. The Journal of scaping for public officals: A source book. NIPC, Chicago. Environmental Education 28 ( 4 ) : 2 6 - 2 6 . No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission. 1998. Restoring and Sh e l f o r d, V. E. 1978. The ecology of North America. University of managing stream greenways: A landowners handbook. Illinois Press, Urbana, IL. NIPC, Chicago. Shirley Heinze Environmental Fund. 1997. The Indiana Dunes No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission. 1996. Model flood- st o r y . Shirley Heinze Environmental Fund, Michigan City, IN. plain ordinance. NIPC, Chicago. Simon, T. P. and P.M. Stewart. 1999. Stru c t u re and function of N o rt h e a s t e rn Illinois Planning Commission. 1994. Model fish communities in the southern Lake Michigan basin with s t o rmwater drainage and detention ordinance: a guide for emphasis on restoration of native fish communities. Natural local officials. NIPC, Chicago. Ar eas Journal 19(2):142-154. No rt h e a s t e r n Illinois Planning Commission. 1988. Model strea m So u t h e a s t e r n Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission. 1997a. and wetland protection ordinance. NIPC, Chicago. A regional land use plan for southeastern Wisconsin: 2020. SWRPC, Waukesha, WI. N o rt h e a s t e rn Illinois Planning Commission. 1991. Model soil e rosion and sediment control ordinance: a guide for local of ficials. NIPC, Chicago.

14 6 Li t e r a t u r e Cited

So u t h e a s t e r n Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission. 1997b. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Bureau of the Census. A regional natural areas and critical species habitat prot e c t i o n 1998. 1996 National survey of fishing, hunting and wildlife– and management plan for southeastern Wisconsin. SWRPC, Associated rec r eation: Illinois. U.S. GPO, Washington, DC. Waukesha, WI. White, J. 1994. How the terms savanna, barrens and oak open- St e a r ns, F. W. 1974. Hazels. Pages 65-70 in J. D. Gill and W. M. ings were used in early Illinois. Pages 25-63 in J. S. Fralish, R. H e a l y, eds., Shrubs and vines for northeastern wildlife. C. Anderson, J. E. Ebinger, and R. Szafoni, eds., Pr o c e e d i n g s U.S.D.A. Forest Service Nort h e a s t e rn Experiment Station of the North American Conference on Savannas and Barrens. General Technical Report NE-9. Illinois State University, Norma l . Sullivan, T. A. 1997. Practical resaons why biodiversity is impor- White, J. 1978. Illinois natural areas inventory technical rep o rt . tant. Pages 102-111 in Tools for Teaching Biodiversity, Illinois Natural Areas Inventory, Urbana, IL. Proceedings from the Chicago Wilderness Educator’s Conference on Biodiversity. Chicago Region Biodiversity Wilhelm, G. 1991. Vascular vegetation of Lake County, Illinois Council, Chicago. with special re f e rence to its use in wetland mititgation. The Mo r ton Arboretum, Lisle, IL. Swink, F. and G. Wilhelm. 1994. Plants of the Chicago region, 4th Ed. Indiana Academy of Science, Indianapolis, IN. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1995a. Wis c o n s i n ’ s biodiversity as a management issue: A rep o r t to Tilghman, N. G. 1989. Impacts of white-tailed deer of fore s t De p a r tment of Natural Resources managers. Wisconsin DNR, regeneration in north w e s t e r n Pennsylvania. Journal of Wil d l i f e Madison, WI. Management 53 : 5 2 4 - 5 3 2 . Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1995b. Co m m o n Tilman, D. 1996. Biodiversity: population versus ecosystem sta- gr o u n d . Wisconsin, DNR, Madison, WI. bi l i t y . Ec o l o g y 77 : 3 5 0 - 3 6 3 . World Resources Institute, the World Conservation Union, and the Tilman, D. D. Wedin, and J. Knops. 1996. Productivity and sus- United Nations Environment Programme. 1992. Global bio- tainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. diversity strategy: Guidelines for action to save, study and Na t u r e . 379:718-720. use earth’s biotic wealth sustainably and equitably. Wo r l d Re s o u r ces Institute, Washington, DC. U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Serv i c e ’s Chicago Me t r o Urban and Community Assistance Office. 1997. Native Wright, H. A. and A. W. Bailey. 1982. Fire Ecology. John Wil e y , Plant Guide for Streams and Stormwater Facilities in North - New Yor k . ea s t e r n Illinois. Prep a r ed in cooperation with US EPA Region 5, US FWS Chicago Field Office, and US Army Corps of Engineers–Chicago District. Chicago. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Environ m e n t a l Education Advisory Council. 1996. Report assessing environ - mental education in the United States and the implementation of the National Environmental Education Act of 1990. U.S. GPO, Washington, DC.

14 7