DOCSLIB.ORG

South San Francisco Bay Weed Management Plan 1St Edition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
South San Francisco Bay Weed Management Plan 1St Edition South San Francisco Bay Weed Management Plan 1st Edition Prepared by Meg Marriott, Rachel Tertes and Cheryl Strong U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555 For: Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge and South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project November 20, 2013 Literature Citation Should Read As Follows: Marriott, M., Tertes, R. and C. Strong. 2013. South San Francisco Bay Weed Management Plan. 1st Edition. Unpublished report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fremont, CA. 82pp. OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 4 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 5 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Site Description and History ..................................................................................................................... 6 Weed Management Areas ......................................................................................................................... 7 WEED MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ...................................................................................................... 12 Weed Management Program Goals ........................................................................................................ 12 Inventory and Monitoring ....................................................................................................................... 12 Outreach and Coordination ..................................................................................................................... 12 Priority Weed Species and Projects ........................................................................................................ 13 Additional High Priority Projects ........................................................................................................... 15 Methods of Treatment ............................................................................................................................. 16 Special Herbicide Safety & Environmental Considerations ................................................................... 17 TARGETED WEED CONTROL AND RE-VEGETATION PLANS ....................................................... 18 Pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium) – Highest Priority ............................................................................ 19 Algerian sea lavender (Limonium ramosissimum) – Highest Priority .................................................... 26 Yellow Starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) – Highest Priority ................................................................ 29 Stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens) – High Priority .................................................................................. 34 Purple Starthistle (Centaurea calcitrapa) – High Priority ...................................................................... 38 Alkali Russian thistle (Salsola soda) – High Priority ............................................................................. 40 Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana) and Jubata grass (Cortaderia jubata) – High Priority .................. 43 Giant reed (Arundo donax) and Common reed (Phragmites australis) – High Priority ......................... 46 Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) and Slenderflowered thistle (Carduus tenuiflorus) – High Priority .................................................................................................................................................... 48 French broom (Genista monspessulana) – High Priority ....................................................................... 50 Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum) – High Priority .......................................................................... 52 PLANT COMMUNITY RESTORATION PROGRAM ............................................................................ 56 WEED DATABASE ................................................................................................................................... 57 VOLUNTEER WEED MANAGEMENT PROJECTS .............................................................................. 58 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................................... 60 2 USEFUL REFERENCE WEBSITES ......................................................................................................... 65 Figure 1 South San Francisco Bay includes lands south of the San Mateo Bridge. Habitat types are noted within the Refuge Approved Acquisition Boundary. ...................................................................... 7 Figure 2: Weed management areas present in the South Bay. Newark, Mowry, Alviso, and West Bay include lands owned and/or managed by the Refuge. ............................................................................... 8 Table 1 Special Status Species within Project Area................................................................................ 66 Table 2. Prioritized List of Weed Species ............................................................................................... 68 Table 3 Early Detection Weed Species Watch List ................................................................................ 69 Table 4. Priority Weed Species for Management .................................................................................. 70 Table 5. Direct Seeding Species ............................................................................................................ 71 Table 6. Container Plantings .................................................................................................................. 72 Appendix 1 Best Management Practices for Weed Spread Prevention .................................................. 74 Appendix 2 Conservation Measures- Herbicide Safety & Environmental Considerations .................... 76 Appendix 3 Walking in the Marsh ......................................................................................................... 79 3 OVERVIEW On the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (hereafter, Refuge), similar to other natural lands, weeds reduce and degrade wildlife habitat and impede successful habitat restoration. In specific instances, weeds alter hydrology and ecosystem function and act as source populations that infest not only Refuge lands but adjacent properties. In addition, weeds alter landscapes, block views, and increase trail and fire break maintenance needs. On the Refuge, invasive weeds infest habitat types ranging from sub-tidal mudflats to uplands, and are of greatest concern in habitats where they may potentially harm threatened and endangered species, migratory bird species and their habitats. Habitats of concern include tidal marshes, marsh/upland transition zones, and vernal pool grasslands, as well as other habitat types. While this plan encompasses Refuge lands, the plan is easily adaptable for use by adjacent South Bay landowners such as California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) at Eden Landing Ecological Reserve and the privately managed lands of Cargill Salt, Inc. This South San Francisco Bay Weed Management Plan (hereafter WMP) is a structured outline for controlling the most invasive and problematic non-native weeds within the Project Area as part of an overall weed management and re-vegetation program. The WMP uses an adaptive management approach to prioritize, implement and evaluate weed treatment and re-vegetation actions and to modify management priorities and strategies as necessary over time. As part of the WMP, we identify goals for a weed management program and set objectives and priorities for the control or eradication of target weed species, according to their impacts on native species and communities, particularly impacts on threatened and endangered species. The WMP also prioritizes specific projects or circumstances within the Project Area that necessitate weed management and recommends control actions to be implemented in these various situations. Monitoring is a critical component of the WMP adaptive management process and the WMP works in conjunction with the draft Weed Inventory and Monitoring Plan prepared for the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (draft Weed I&M Plan, Marriott and Tertes 2013). The draft Weed I&M Plan provides a guide for detecting and mapping the distribution and abundance of established and new infestations, for recording the success of weed control in treatment areas, and for tracking growth of known infestations over time. 4 INTRODUCTION The Weed Management Plan has been developed for the prevention, detection, and control of priority invasive weed species affecting the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge trust resources and adjacent lands. It also provides guidelines for the re-vegetation of native plant species in weed treated areas as an essential component of weed management. This plan complies with, and is developed under, the authority of the National Invasive Species Management Plan (Executive Order 13112), and addresses priorities and recommendations for weed control and native plant restoration outlined in state and regional
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Phylogenetic Models Linking Speciation and Extinction to Chromosome and Mating System Evolution
    Phylogenetic Models Linking Speciation and Extinction to Chromosome and Mating System Evolution by William Allen Freyman A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology and the Designated Emphasis in Computational and Genomic Biology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Dr. Bruce G. Baldwin, Chair Dr. John P. Huelsenbeck Dr. Brent D. Mishler Dr. Kipling W. Will Fall 2017 Phylogenetic Models Linking Speciation and Extinction to Chromosome and Mating System Evolution Copyright 2017 by William Allen Freyman Abstract Phylogenetic Models Linking Speciation and Extinction to Chromosome and Mating System Evolution by William Allen Freyman Doctor of Philosophy in Integrative Biology and the Designated Emphasis in Computational and Genomic Biology University of California, Berkeley Dr. Bruce G. Baldwin, Chair Key evolutionary transitions have shaped the tree of life by driving the processes of spe- ciation and extinction. This dissertation aims to advance statistical and computational ap- proaches that model the timing and nature of these transitions over evolutionary trees. These methodological developments in phylogenetic comparative biology enable formal, model- based, statistical examinations of the macroevolutionary consequences of trait evolution. Chapter 1 presents computational tools for data mining the large-scale molecular sequence datasets needed for comparative phylogenetic analyses. I describe a novel metric, the miss- ing sequence decisiveness score (MSDS), which assesses the phylogenetic decisiveness of a matrix given the pattern of missing sequence data. In Chapter 2, I introduce a class of phylogenetic models of chromosome number evolution that accommodate both anagenetic and cladogenetic change.
    [Show full text]
  • BAYLANDS & CREEKS South San Francisco
    Oak_Mus_Baylands_SideA_6_7_05.pdf 6/14/2005 11:52:36 AM M12 M10 M27 M10A 121°00'00" M28 R1 For adjoining area see Creek & Watershed Map of Fremont & Vicinity 37°30' 37°30' 1 1- Dumbarton Pt. M11 - R1 M26 N Fremont e A in rr reek L ( o te C L y alien a o C L g a Agua Fria Creek in u d gu e n e A Green Point M a o N l w - a R2 ry 1 C L r e a M8 e g k u ) M7 n SF2 a R3 e F L Lin in D e M6 e in E L Creek A22 Toroges Slou M1 gh C ine Ravenswood L Slough M5 Open Space e ra Preserve lb A Cooley Landing L i A23 Coyote Creek Lagoon n M3 e M2 C M4 e B Palo Alto Lin d Baylands Nature Mu Preserve S East Palo Alto loug A21 h Calaveras Point A19 e B Station A20 Lin C see For adjoining area oy Island ote Sand Point e A Lucy Evans Lin Baylands Nature Creek Interpretive Center Newby Island A9 San Knapp F Map of Milpitas & North San Jose Creek & Watershed ra Hooks Island n Tract c A i l s Palo Alto v A17 q i ui s to Creek Baylands Nature A6 o A14 A15 Preserve h g G u u a o Milpitas l Long Point d a S A10 A18 l u d p Creek l A3N e e i f Creek & Watershed Map of Palo Alto & Vicinity Creek & Watershed Calera y A16 Berryessa a M M n A1 A13 a i h A11 l San Jose / Santa Clara s g la a u o Don Edwards San Francisco Bay rd Water Pollution Control Plant B l h S g Creek d u National Wildlife Refuge o ew lo lo Vi F S Environmental Education Center .
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Calgary Plant Lists Recommendations Based on Habitat Type and Desired Outcome to Inform Revegetation Work
    City of Calgary Plant Lists Recommendations based on habitat type and desired outcome to inform revegetation work 2019 Publication Information CITY OF CALGARY PLANT LISTS: Recommendations based on habitat type and desired outcome to inform revegetation work. INTENT: This document provides detailed information and recommendations to inform restoration plans as per the Habitat Restoration Project Framework (The City of Calgary Parks 2014) and provides necessary information and factors to consider during the plant selection phase of the project. PREPARED BY: The City of Calgary, Parks, Urban Conservation VERSION: 2019 Edition ADDITIONAL COPIES: To download an electronic copy: http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Parks/Pages/Construction/Park-development-guidelines.aspx INFORMATION: Corporate Call Centre: 3-1-1 (within Calgary) Copyright Copyright © The City of Calgary 2019 No part of this work may be reproduced by any means without written permission from The City of Calgary. Terms of Use City of Calgary Plant Lists must be used in conjunction with the document Habitat Restoration Project Framework (The City of Calgary Parks 2014), as referenced throughout, and is made available for use in The City of Calgary effective as of the date below. February 2020 The 2019 City of Calgary Plant Lists is presented as accurate and complete as of the date indicated above. Use of this document does not absolve any user from the obligation to exercise their professional judgment and to follow good practice. Nothing in this document is meant to relieve the user from complying with municipal, provincial and federal legislation. Should any user have questions as to the intent of any procedure found in this publication, the user is advised to seek clarification from the lead of Urban Conservation, Parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge 2020
    Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2020 -2021 Waterfowl Hunting Regulations These Regulations along with maps and directions are available at: http://www.fws.gov/refuge/Don_Edwards_San_Francisco_Bay/hunting.html General Information The Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (refuge) contains approximately 10,580 acres of tidal areas and salt ponds that are open to waterfowl hunting (Map 1). Season opening and closing dates are determined by the State of California. Check the California Waterfowl Regulations (https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Hunting) each season for these dates. Hunters must comply with all State and Federal regulations including regulations listed under 50 CFR 32.24, and the refuge-specific regulations described below. Permit Requirements Hunters 18 years of age or older will need to have: 1) a valid California hunting license; 2) a valid, signed Federal Duck Stamp; 3) a California Duck Validation; 4) a Harvest Information Program (HIP) Validation; and 5) identification that includes a photograph (e.g., driver’s license). Junior and Youth hunters need the following: Junior/Youth Hunter Summary 15 yrs old or 16-17 yrs old w/ Jr 18 yrs old w/ Jr under (Youth) license (Junior) license (Junior) Participate in post-season youth hunt? Yes Yes No Needs a California hunting license? Yes Yes Yes Needs a HIP Validation? Yes Yes Yes Needs a Federal Duck Stamp? No Yes Yes Needs a State Duck Stamp (validation)? No No No Needs an adult accompanying them on regular hunt days? Yes No No Needs an adult accompanying them for youth hunt days? Yes Yes Yes It is required that all hunters possess a Refuge Waterfowl Hunting Permit when hunting in the Alviso Ponds.
    [Show full text]
  • Goga Wrfr.Pdf
    The National Park Service Water Resources Division is responsible for providing water resources management policy and guidelines, planning, technical assistance, training, and operational support to units of the National Park System. Program areas include water rights, water resources planning, regulatory guidance and review, hydrology, water quality, watershed management, watershed studies, and aquatic ecology. Technical Reports The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social research through the Natural Resources Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of technical workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: National Park Service (970) 225-3500 Water Resources Division 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250 Fort Collins, CO 80525 National Park Service (303) 969-2130 Technical Information Center Denver Service Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Cover photos: Top: Golden Gate Bridge, Don Weeks Middle: Rodeo Lagoon, Joel Wagner Bottom: Crissy Field, Joel Wagner ii CONTENTS Contents, iii List of Figures, iv Executive Summary, 1 Introduction, 7 Water Resources Planning, 9 Location and Demography, 11 Description of Natural Resources, 12 Climate, 12 Physiography, 12 Geology, 13 Soils, 13
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment Iii: Baseline Status and Cumulative Effects for the San Francisco Bay Listed Species
    ATTACHMENT III: BASELINE STATUS AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY LISTED SPECIES 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1: ALAMEDAWHIPSNAKE ............................................................................................ 6 1.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ...................................................................................... 6 1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE........................................................................... 6 1.2.1 Factors affecting species within the action area ............................................... 6 1.2.1.1 Urban development .................................................................................... 7 1.2.1.2 Fire suppression ......................................................................................... 9 1.2.1.3 Predation .................................................................................................... 9 1.2.1.4 Grazing practices ..................................................................................... 10 1.2.1.5 Non-native species ................................................................................... 10 1.2.2 Baseline Status ................................................................................................ 11 1.3 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 13 2: BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY ....................................................................... 14 2.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment Ii
    ATTACHMENT II: STATUS AND LIFE HISTORY OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY LISTED SPECIES 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1: ALAMEDA WHIPSNAKE ........................................................................................... 5 1.1 Species Listing Status .............................................................................................. 5 1.2 Description ............................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Distribution .............................................................................................................. 5 1.4 USFWS Critical Habitat .......................................................................................... 6 1.5 Habitat .................................................................................................................... 11 1.6 Diet ......................................................................................................................... 11 1.7 Life History and Reproduction .............................................................................. 11 1.8 References .............................................................................................................. 12 2: BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY ....................................................................... 14 2.1 Species Listing Status ............................................................................................ 14 2.2 Description ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands
    ;>\ ....--'. PB89-169940 BIOLOGICAL REPORT 88(26.9) MAY 1988 NATIONAL LIST OF PLANT SPECIES THAT OCCUR IN WETLANDS: . NORTHWEST (REGION 9) " h d W"ldl"f S· In Cooperation with the National and FIS an I I e ervlce Regional Interagency Review Panels U.S. Department of the Interior REPR~EDBY u.s. DEPARTMENTOF COMMERCE NATIONAL TECHNICAL ItEORMATJON SERVICE SPRINGFIELD. VA 22161 S02n-'Ol RE?ORT DOCUMENTATION 11. REPORT NO. PAG, iBioloqical Report 88(26.9) 4. TItle arld SUbtitle National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetiands: Northwe~t (Region 9). 7. Autllor(s) Porter B. Reed, Jr. 9. Perfonnlnc O,..nl.etton H..... • nd _ .... National Ecology Research Center U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 11. <:omncttC) or Gr.ntCG) No. Creekside One Bldg., 2627 Redwing Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80526-2899 CGl 12. SIlO....,.;n. O,..nlUtlon H_ .rld Acid.... 13. TYIMI of Repott & Period e-Nd Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Research and Development 14. Washington, DC 20240 The National list of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands represents the combined efforts of many biologists over the last decade to define the wetland flora of the United States. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service initially developed the list in order to provide an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (FWS/OBS 79/31) to assist in the field identification of wetlands. Plant species that occur in wetlands, as used in the National List, are defined as species that have demonstrated an ability to achieve maturity and reproduce in an environment where all or portions of the soil within the root zone become, periodically or continuously, saturated or inundated during the growing season.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Report
    APPENDIX A Biological Resources Report Residence Inn and Event Center Biological Resources Report Project #3660-01 Prepared for: David J. Powers & Associates, Inc. 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 San José , CA 95126 Prepared by: H. T. Harvey & Associates December 2015 Rev. January 2016 983 University Avenue, Building D Los Gatos, CA 95032 Ph: 408.458.3200 F: 408.458.3210 Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................ i Section 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Project Description ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Section 2.0 Methods ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Section 3.0 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 General Project Area Description ........................................................................................................................ 7 3.2 Biotic Habitats ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Draft Rough
    Wesleyan University The Honors College Plant-pollinator interactions across California grassland and coastal scrub vegetation types on San Bruno Mountain, San Mateo County by Miles Gordon Brooks Class of 2020 A thesis submitted to the faculty of Wesleyan University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts with Departmental Honors from the College of the Environment Middletown, Connecticut April, 2020 1 2 Abstract Animal pollination of plants is a crucial ecosystem service for maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem function, worldwide. High pollinator abundance and diversity can likewise improve the reproductive success of the plant community. Plant-pollinator interaction networks have the potential to identify dominant, specialist, and generalist pollinator species within a system, and their host plant counterparts. Understanding these relationships is paramount for buffering natural systems from biodiversity loss in a world where pollinator abundance continues to decline rapidly. San Bruno Mountain (SBM) in San Mateo County, California, is one of the last natural, open spaces in the urban landscape in the northern San Francisco Peninsula. I conducted a series of timed meanders and vegetation surveys at eight sample sites within SBM (four grassland and four coastal scrub sites) to identify plant species prevalence and pollinator species visitation of flowering plants. I employed a multivariate approach for investigating plant and pollinator species richness, plant and pollinator community composition, and trophic-level interactions across the SBM landscape, and I evaluated differences in these relationships between grassland and coastal scrub habitats. A total of 59 pollinator species and 135 plant species were inventoried over the course of the study.
    [Show full text]