Wisconsin's Biodiversity As a Management Issue
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Wisconsin’s Biodiversity as a Management Issue A REPORT TO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGERS MAY 1995 Wisconsin’s Biodiversity as a Management Issue A Report to Department of Natural Resources Managers May 1995 Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 7921 Madison, Wisconsin 53707 NATURAL RESOURCES BOARD Herbert F. Behnke, Chair Neal W. Schneider, Secretary James E. Shawano Janesville Tiefenthaler, Jr. Brookfield Trygve A. Solberg, Vice Chair Betty Jo Nelsen Minocqua Shorewood Stephen D. Willett Phillips Mary Jane Nelson Holmen OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY George E. Meyer, Secretary Ronald L. Semmann, Deputy Secretary Maryann Sumi, Executive Assistant This report was written for Department of Natural Resources managers to provide them with a context for their work. The Natural Resources Board met on April 27, 1995 to review the report. At this meeting, the Board accepted the Department’s recommendations, as follows: Print and distribute the report “Wisconsin’s Biodiversity as a Management Issue,” and use it to continue an open dialogue with the Department’s partners and customers; Adopt the four strategic recommendations in the revised report (as summarized on pages 7-8 and described on pages 37-39), and use them to guide policy development; and Further analyze the implications of the “possible actions” listed for the seven biological community types in the report. The Department will work with the Board to determine the most appropriate sequence for these analyses and to set priorities for using them to develop policy. In moving to approve the report, the Board also stated that its approval “is made with the under- standing that the Natural Resources Board does not endorse, recommend, or sanction the use of this report to judge whether or not a management or regulatory act is appropriate or inappropriate.” Wisconsin’s Biodiversity as a Management Issue A REPORT TO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGERS MAY 1995 PREPARED BY: James Addis, Ronald Eckstein, Anne Forbes (Leader 1994-95), DuWayne Gebken, Richard Henderson, John Kotar, Betty Les (Leader 1993-94), Paul Matthiae, Wendy McCown, Steven Miller, Bruce Moss, David Sample, Michael Staggs, and Kristin Visser ASSISTED BY: Cathy Bleser, Alan Crossley, June Dobberpuhl, Robert DuBois, Robert Dumke, Eric Epstein, Don Fago, Jonathan Gilbert, Beth Goodman, Mary Hamel, Robert Hay, David Heath, Ralph Hewett, Mark Heyde, Randy Hoffman, Fred Iausly, David Ives, Roy Jacobson, Martin Jennings, Laura Komai (staff assistant), John Lyons, Mark Martin, Thomas Meyer, Thomas Mickelson, William Moorman, Mike Mossman, Richard Narf, Kathy Patnode, Tom Pellett, Tom Ruzycki, Dennis Schenborn, Dave Siebert, William Smith, Jeffrey Smoller, William VanderZouwen, Dreux Watermolen, Wendy Weisensel, and Darrell Zastrow PREPARED FOR: Division of Resource Management James Addis (Administrator), Steven Miller (Deputy Administrator), Howard S. Druckenmiller, Robert Dumke, Carl Evert, Charles Higgs, Thomas Hauge, Lee Kernen, Charles Pils, and David Weizenicker EDITED AND PRODUCED BY: Jeanne Gomoll (graphics and layout), Signe Holtz, Rebecca Isenring, Michelle Jesko, Laura Komai, Betty Les (Leader), and Wendy McCown TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 Executive Summary 72 Southern Forest 116 Grassland Communities 2 Purpose of this Report Communities 116 Description 2 What is Biodiversity? 72 Description 117 Status 3 Ecological Issues 73 Status 122 Actions Causing Concern 4Wisconsin’s Biological 79 Actions Causing Concern 123 Socio-Economic Issues Communities 80 Socio-Economic Issues 123 Potential for Community 7 What This Report Proposes 80 Potential for Community Restoration 9 Some Continuing Policy Restoration 124 Possible Actions Questions 81 Possible Actions 128 Case Study: The Glacial Habitat 84 Case Study: The Baraboo Hills: Restoration Area: An Approach 10 Biodiversity: Issues and Partners Protecting and for Restoration of Grassland Managing in an Ecosystem Communities Implications Context 129 Literature Cited 10 Importance of Biodiversity 85 Literature Cited 12 Historical and Current 130 Wetland Communities Perspectives in Resource Management 88 Oak Savanna 130 Description 18 Ecological Issues Communities 132 Status 30 Addressing Biodiversity Through 88 Description 140 Actions Causing Concern Ecosystem Management 90 Status 142 Socio-Economic Issues 37 Recommendations 92 Actions Causing Concern 142 Potential for Community Restoration 92 Socio-Economic Issues 143 Possible Actions 40 Overview of Wisconsin’s 92 Potential for Community Biological Communities Restoration 145 Case Study: Restoring a Prairie Wetland Landscape in Southern 93 Possible Actions 40 Determinants of Biodiversity Wisconsin 95 Case Study: Kettle Moraine 147 Literature Cited 40 Impact of Glaciation Oak Opening: Natural 41 Impact of Other Natural Community Protection and Disturbance Restoration through Master 150 Aquatic Communities 41 Human-Induced Disturbance Planning 150 Description 43 The Situation Today 96 Literature Cited 162 Past Status 49 Literature Cited 98 Oak and Pine Barrens 164 Past and Present Actions Causing Concern 50 Northern Forest Communities 187 Present Status Communities 98 Description 192 Projected Status 50 Description 102 Status 194 Socio-Economic Issues 50 Status 108 Actions Causing Concern 195 Potential for Community Restoration 62 Actions Causing Concern 108 Socio-Economic Issues 198 Possible Actions 62 Socio-Economic Issues 108 Potential for Community Restoration 202 Case Study: Habitat Restoration 63 Potential for Community Following Dam Removal on the Restoration 109 Possible Actions Milwaukee River at West Bend 64 Possible Actions 111 Case Study: Habitat Conservation Planning: 203 Literature Cited 68 Case Study: Marathon County Species Protection through Forest: Using GIS to Manage Ecosystem Management Forest Interior Habitat 220 Glossary 112 Literature Cited 68 Literature Cited 113 Additional Reading 226 Appendix A: Common and Scientific Names of Organisms Cited 238 Appendix B: Acknowledgements EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides a historical perspective on natural resources manage- CHAPTER ment, reviews the range of public values 1 relating to biodiversity, and explores DNR’s role in managing natural resources to conserve biodiversity. It presents ecosystem management as the framework that will help us balance human needs and values Executive with the conservation of biological diver- sity, and it proposes approaches and tools to help the Department and its partners move more fully into ecosystem manage- Summary ment. The report also offers an overview of the state’s seven major biological communi- ties, describing each, documenting changes that have occurred since the early 1800s, outlining current issues, and suggesting PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT possible actions. his report presents a Department strategy for the conservation of WHAT IS BIODIVERSITY? biological diversity. It provides Department of Natural Resources Biodiversity is a shortened form of the (DNR) employees with an term “biological diversity.” Simply stated, it overview of the issues associated is the entire spectrum of life forms and the with biodiversity and provides a common many ecological processes that support point of reference for incorporating the them. Biodiversity occurs at four interact- conservation of biodiversity into our ing levels: genetic diversity, species diver- management framework. It will be used as sity, community diversity, and ecosystem a discussion piece for dialogue with the diversity. Genetic diversity is the spectrum public and will be useful for Natural of genetic material carried by all the Resources Board members as they include individuals of a particular species. Species attention to biodiversity in the develop- diversity is the variety of species in a ment of public policy. geographic area, including not only the Our goal is sustainable ecosystems. number of species but also their relative These ecosystems, whether highly modified abundance and spatial distribution. by humans or largely natural, exhibit A community is an assemblage of ecological characteristics that maintain different plant and animal species, living biological diversity across all land uses. To together in a particular area, at a particular reach this goal we must develop manage- time, in specific habitats. Communities ment solutions that blend people’s needs usually are named for their dominant plant with nature’s capacity to sustain those species (for example, pine barrens, sedge needs over the long term. These manage- meadows, and oak savannas). Communities ment solutions must be founded in the range in size from less than an acre to perspective that humans are part of, not thousands of acres. Communities are apart from, the global ecosystem. Like all always changing, though often they change species, we depend on a viable biosphere. too slowly for humans to notice in our brief But unlike other species, we have it in our lifetimes. power to destroy the ecosystems on which An ecosystem includes not only we depend. Today’s decisions will have far- biological communities but also the reaching impacts on the choices and quality myriad, continuing interactions of biologi- of life available to us in the future. cal communities with their abiotic (non- 2 WISCONSIN’S BIODIVERSITY AS A MANAGEMENT ISSUE living) environment, including moisture, nas, and barrens. Euro-American settlement temperature, sunlight, soil, and many other brought many changes to this landscape, physical and chemical factors. Ecosystems, including suppression of fire, large-scale