Ten-Year Management Plan for Enhancement of the Kachina Wetlands

Prepared for Coconino County and the Kachina Village Improvement District February, 2016

Christina D. Vojta, Ph.D. Landscape Conservation Initiative Northern Arizona University

Kachina Wetlands – Photo credit: Tyanna Burton ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This report was funded through the Coconino County Community Initiative Grant Program and the Landscape Conservation Initiative at Northern Arizona University. I thank Supervisor Matt Ryan and Dr. Thomas Sisk for their vision and encouragement and for making these funds available. I also thank Sam Mossman, District Manager for the Kachina Village Improvement District, for graciously listening to a litany of grandiose ideas for the wetlands, and for being so wonderfully supportive during the development of the management plan. Several people served as an ad hoc advisory group during the developmental stage of this plan, and I am grateful for their time, ideas and input. These include Sam Mossman, Lindsay Daley, Scott Anderson, Hannah Griscom, and Scott Harger. I also thank the following people who provided additional technical support for weed abatement and native plant restoration: Laura Moser, Allen Haden, Nigel Sparks, John Taylor, Chelsea Sayer, and Chris Yunker. I extend a warm thank you to several local, talented photographers who donated their photos for this management plan. These photographers are Tyanna Burton, David Blanchard, Brian Healey, Gary Botello, Troy Wood, and John Taylor. I am deeply grateful to the individuals who carefully reviewed the plan and offered excellent suggestions for improving it: Laura Moser, Scott Anderson, Hannah Griscom, Chelsea Sayer, Chris Yunker, and William Gaud. Dr. William Gaud also deserves special recognition for initiating the first round of wetland enhancement for Kachina Wetlands. He left a priceless legacy, and we hope to carry on his work through implementation of this current plan.

Suggested citation: Vojta, Christina D. 2016. Ten year management plan for enhancement of the Kachina Wetlands. Kachina Village Improvement District, Coconino County, Arizona. Unpublished report. 16 pp.

KACHINA VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 3150 JADITO TRAIL FLAGSTAFF, AZ 86005 TEL (928) 525-1775 FAX (928) 525-2529

March 23, 2016

To whom it may concern:

The Kachina Village Improvement District (KVID) is pleased to endorse the Ten-year Management Plan for Enhancement of the Kachina Wetlands, prepared for Coconino County and the Kachina Village Improvement District by Christina Vojta of the Landscape Conservation Initiative at Northern Arizona University. While the primary purpose of the retention ponds is for evaporation of treated wastewater, KVID has long recognized that the area also has high value for wildlife habitat, public education, and recreational activities where these activities are compatible with the property’s primary purpose. We have demonstrated our commitment to maintaining water levels in Ponds 1 and 2 for waterfowl under a Memorandum of Understanding with the Arizona Game and Fish Department, and we plan to maintain that commitment into the future.

Although KVID does not have a mandate to enhance the property beyond its primary purpose or the fiscal capabilities to engage in enhancement activities, we are supportive of the three goals stated in the ten-year management plan and the general strategy for achieving these goals. To the extent that our fiscal capabilities allow, we will strive to provide matching funds for projects that directly support the needs of property management, especially with regards to weed abatement.

We reserve the right to approve or decline all enhancement activities on a case-by-case basis, to ensure that these activities do not conflict with the primary purpose of the area as evaporation ponds for treated wastewater. That said, we are delighted with the interest shown by local citizens and organizations to enhance the value of Kachina Wetlands for wildlife habitat, public education, and recreational activities, and we look forward to working with citizens and organizations to achieve the goals stated in the 10-year plan.

Regards,

Sam Mossman Kachina Village Improvement District 3150 Jadito Trail Flagstaff, AZ 86005 [email protected] (928) 525-1775

Vision Statement

While the primary purpose of the Kachina Wetlands is for evaporation of treated wastewater, the area is also a showpiece of native plant diversity that includes permanent wetlands and highly diverse uplands of native shrubs and grasses, with opportunities for public education and recreation, including wildlife viewing blinds and native plant demonstration gardens planted by local community groups and youth.

INTRODUCTION Background

The Kachina Wetlands were constructed in 1988 to dispose of treated effluent from Kachina Village, a community of 2,622 (U.S. Census Bureau 2010) located approximately six miles south of Flagstaff, Arizona. The area consists of eight ponds on 70 acres of private land that is managed by the Kachina Village Improvement District (KVID)(Figure 1). Although the primary purpose of the ponds is for storage and evaporation of treated wastewater, KVID voluntarily manages the land for other compatible uses such as wildlife habitat and recreation. The area receives frequent, low visitation from the public, primarily walking and bird watching.

The Kachina Wetlands is in close proximity to Pumphouse Wash Natural Area, 125 acres consisting of Pumphouse Meadow, Pumphouse Wash, and Harrenburg Wash that is managed by Coconino County. Kachina Wetlands adds value to this suite of wetlands by providing larger ponds and more shorebird habitat than is found in the Natural Area. Together, all four wetlands enhance biodiversity by providing a mosaic of wetland conditions within a three-mile radius area that benefit more species than any of the wetlands can provide alone.

Adjacent to the Kachina Wetlands is the Forest Highlands Golf Community, a gated community of approximately 800 homes and two golf courses on 1,100 acres. Forest Highlands has an agreement to purchase treated wastewater from KVID, but no purchases have been made since 2010.

In 1993-1994, Dr. William Gaud, Department of Biological Sciences at Northern Arizona University, spearheaded the development of wetland habitat through a Heritage Grant from the Arizona Game and Fish Department and a grant of equal size from Ducks Unlimited. The project consisted of transplanting aquatic plants from local wetlands to the edges of Ponds 1 and 2 and planting native shrubs on all pond islands. Today, the fruits of this labor can clearly be seen by the lush growth of cattails (Typha latifolia) and other wetland plants that are used by numerous species of waterfowl and that add to the enjoyment of many visitors who come to the wetlands to watch birds, stroll with their dogs, or go for a run. Pond depths are managed through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Arizona Game and Fish Commission. In the years following this enhancement work, ponds other than Ponds 1 and 2 have not contained water, primarily due to a decrease in effluent in the 1990s when KVID encouraged Kachina Village residents to initiate water conservation practices. Over time, the dry pond bottoms have become vegetated with native, non-native, and invasive grasses and forbs, including three species of noxious weeds.

Although the primary purpose of the wetlands is for the storage and evaporation of treated wastewater, the inherent beauty of the site captivates all who come to visit. The open area created for wastewater treatment serendipitously offers a stunning view of the San Francisco Peaks, made even more charming by the musical calls of red-winged and yellow-headed blackbirds (Agelaius phoenicus and Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus) and frequent overflights of resident ospreys (Pandion haliaetus). It is a place well-deserving of our efforts to enhance its value, not only for wastewater treatment, but for wildlife and aesthetic purposes.

Figure 1. The Kachina Wetlands managed by Kachina Village Improvement District, showing numbers assigned to each of the eight ponds (Pond 9 was not completed).

Purpose: To enhance the value of Kachina Wetlands for wildlife and the public while retaining its primary function as evaporation ponds for treated wastewater. The three main goals are:

• Reduce and control invasive weeds: To the extent possible, reduce and control the future spread of highly invasive weeds that pose a significant threat to native plants and animals and that disrupt the environmental function of the ponds and wetlands. • Enhance wildlife values: Within the constraints of current and projected effluent, provide a diversity of conditions for wildlife habitat, including ponds, mudflats, wet meadows, native shrub and grasslands, nest boxes, and snags. Replace non-native vegetation with native vegetation appropriate to the site. • Promote aesthetic quality and educational opportunities: Invite community groups to offer aesthetic and educational programs, including bird watching, star-viewing, plant identification, and other activities that are compatible with the primary use of the land. Provide interpretive signs and materials to enhance educational opportunities.

This management plan offers strategies for meeting each of the three goals over a ten-year period, beginning with the state and county fiscal year of July 1, 2016. The plan will be used to invite action and collaboration from local communities and to request grants from agencies and organizations that provide funds for weed abatement, wildlife habitat improvement, and natural resource education.

Concurrently, KVID is developing a Master Plan with a projected completion date of 2017. The plan will address all aspects of KVID infrastructure, including fresh water procurement, treatment, and delivery and waste water management. The Master Plan will include a water flow analysis to predict future needs for fresh water as well as future storage needs for treated effluent. As a result of this analysis, KVID may choose to retire one or more of the evaporation ponds if there is no foreseeable need to retain them as evaporation ponds. If the final Master Plan recommends that specific ponds be retired, the Kachina Wetlands Enhancement Plan will be modified to include strategies for converting these areas into native grasslands with small rainwater catchments for wildlife.

GOAL 1: REDUCE AND CONTROL INVASIVE WEEDS Background

Prior to pond construction, the Kachina Wetlands area was vegetated with ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) with an understory of native grasses, most likely Arizona fescue (Festuca arizonica), mountain muhly (Muhlenbergia montana), blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis), muttongrass (Poa fendleriana), prairie junegrass (Koelaria macrantha) and other grasses and forbs of the ponderosa pine/Arizona fescue plant community (USDA Forest Service 1997). Non-native plant species became established shortly after evaporation ponds were excavated in the 1980s, as a result of disturbed soil and removal of native species. At the present time, approximately 53 acres of the Kachina Wetlands property is dominated by non-native and invasive species, and three species are on the Arizona state list of noxious weeds: diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa), Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica), and Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium).

Non-native (or alien) species are any species living outside of their native distributional range, whether or not they result in economic or environmental damage. An invasive species is an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm to human health (Invasive Weeds Executive Order 13112, February 3, 1999). A noxious weed is any plant designated by a Federal, State, or county government as injurious to public health, agriculture, recreation, wildlife, or property (Sheley et al. 1999). Within a local area such as the Kachina Wetlands, it is possible that invasive species that are not classified as noxious may be as injurious to the environment as ones that are designated as noxious. It is therefore important to evaluate the potential impacts of all invasive weeds, whether or not they are on the noxious species list. This plan focuses primarily on diffuse knapweed because of its prevalence in Kachina Wetlands and well-documented environmental harm, but this focus could shift to include other species after the initial inventory and analysis.

Diffuse knapweed was first collected in the Flagstaff area in 1979, and it may not have reached Diffuse knapweed Kachina before the 1990s. The pattern of knapweed Photo Credit: Montana Weed Control Association establishment indicates that it first became established on the primary dirt road that connects the central ponds, most likely introduced from vehicle wheels. It is now the dominant vegetation on the main access road and on the shoulders of all berms. It is also the dominant species in Pond 7a.

Scotch thistle is less prevalent than diffuse knapweed and primarily occurs on the southeast quadrant of the property in all locations, including roadways, berm tops, berm shoulders, and pond bottoms. Dalmatian toadflax is scattered throughout the property and is not a dominant species in any location.

Efforts to remove or control invasive weeds date back to the late 1990s. The Northern Arizona Audubon Society spearheaded several volunteer weed-pulling weekends that were primarily targeted at diffuse knapweed. The San Francisco Peaks Weed Management Area has engaged in weed abatement activities on the property from 2009 through 2014 (Table 1), with funding from Arizona State Forestry 2009-2011, and funding from USDA APHIS and Coconino County in 2012-2014. A lesson learned from these concerted efforts is that knapweed is in Kachina Wetlands to stay unless we use a combination of weed abatement measures that are applied consistently over many years, and unless we begin to plant native species in concert with weed abatement measures.

Table 1. Weed abatement activities at the Kachina Wetlands by the San Francisco Peaks Weed Management Area, 2009-present.

DATE ACTIVITY TARGET SPECIES APPROX. ACREAGE July 2009 Weed pulling by YCC for 1 week Diffuse knapweed 40 Aug 2009 Biocontrol, release of 250 beetles1 Diffuse knapweed 10 July 2010 Weed pulling by YCC for 1 week Diffuse knapweed 40 June 2011 Biocontrol, release of 105 beetles1 Diffuse knapweed 5 July 2011 Biocontrol, release of 210 beetles1 Diffuse knapweed 10 Aug 2011 Biocontrol, release of 105 beetles2 Diffuse knapweed 5 June 2012 Weed pulling by YCC for 1 week Diffuse knapweed 40 June 2012 Weed pulling by YCC for 1 day Scotch thistle 2 July 2012 Biocontrol, release of 210 beetles1 Diffuse knapweed 10 Aug 2012 Biocontrol, release of 105 beetles2 Diffuse knapweed 5 July 2014 Biocontrol, release of 210 beetles1 Diffuse knapweed 10 1 Lesser knapweed flower weevil (Larinus minutus) and blunt knapweed flower weevil (L. obtusus) 2 Knapweed root weevil, (Cyphocleonus achates)

Ecological Principles and Strategies for Weed Abatement

The task of reducing the current density of invasive weeds across all uplands of Kachina Wetlands will require substantial funding and a persistent, multi-year effort based on best management practices for all invasive species and specific management informed by the ecology and phenology of individual weed species.

Best management practices that apply to nearly all invasive species weeds associated with western grasslands are as follows: • Begin by conducting an inventory of invasive species in the area of interest and set priorities for weed abatement. • Use an integrated strategy that includes mechanical, biological, chemical, and cultural treatments. • Focus eradication efforts on satellite or peripheral occurrences and work toward the main infestation, if identified. • Develop a strategy that can be carried out for several years, to deplete the seed bank. • Revegetate with native species to discourage reinvasion of the same (or worse) weed species. • Monitor progress and alter weed abatement strategies as needed.

Specific strategies listed below are based primarily on the ecology and phenology of diffuse knapweed because of its dominance in the area. Different strategies may be needed for controlling other invasive species, and these will be developed after an initial inventory and mapping of all weeds on the property, and after weed abatement priorities have been established.

Diffuse knapweed is a biennial or short-lived perennial that originated in the eastern Mediterranean region (Roché and Roché 1999). Individual plants persist as tap-rooted rosettes for the first year

(sometimes two), and then create flowering stalks 1-3 ft. in height the second year (Roché and Roché 1999). Once established these plants can persist for 3-7 years in the Flagstaff environment.

Each diffuse knapweed plant produces thousands of seeds, and ecologists surmise that seeds can remain viable in the soil for around a decade, based on studies from spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), in which low numbers of viable seeds still persisted in the soil eight years after eradication (Davis et al. 1993). Knapweed seeds generally do not germinate below a soil depth of two inches (Watson and Renney 1974). Seed heads do not open fully at maturity, but allow seeds to be dispersed when mature plants break off and tumble in the wind, allowing the heads to break open (Wilson and Randall 2005). Seeds and seed heads are easily lodged in vehicle tires and boot treads, enabling the species to become established along roadways and trails.

Knapweed control has a long, well-documented history, and several strategies have emerged, as well as several methods to avoid or use with caution. Used alone, no single method is effective in controlling knapweed, and an integrated approach is always needed.

• Hand-pulling is effective for small infestations, but becomes cost-prohibitive, less effective and more difficult to sustain as the area of infestation increases in size (Roché and Roché 1999). With large areas, hand-pulling is effective after herbicides and during the establishment of native species. • Mowing can reduce seed production, but also stimulates growth of new, low-flowering stalks that produce viable seeds in the same growing season as the mowing event. Unless tires are carefully cleaned, mowing can be an effective way to spread seeds. Mowing can be somewhat effective if herbicides are applied to mowed plants after new growth is evident. • Several herbicides are effective in controlling knapweed, especially aminopyralid, aminocyclopyrachlor + chlorsulfuron, picloram, clopyralid, and 2,4-D (USDA FS 2014, Roché and Roché 1999). Results are best during the rosette to bolting phase, depending on the herbicide mode of action. Spot-spraying is an effective tool in areas of low density and while native species are being established. Before initiating an herbicide treatment, removing growth from past years will increase efficiency and effectiveness of control. • Pre-emergence herbicides are effective at inhibiting plant growth during seed germination, but the effect on diffuse knapweed is not well documented. Coconino County controls germination of knapweed and other weeds with prodiamine and pendimethalin aquacap. These chemicals also affect germination of desired plants, so it is best to use them where knapweed is dominant and the native species seedbank is extremely low to absent. Reseeding must be delayed by 3-6 months because the chemicals persist in the soil, but grass plugs and shrubs can be planted. These herbicides do not affect plants that are already established. • Biological control, in the form of seedhead feeders and root borers, will reduce but not eliminate knapweed, and can be an effective tool in an integrated control plan (Wilson and Randall 2005). Of the twelve insects know to control knapweeds in the western U.S. (Roché and Roché 1999), three species have been released in Kachina Wetlands: lesser knapweed flower weevil (Larinus minutus) blunt knapweed flower weevil (L. obtusus), and knapweed root weevil (Cyphocleonus achates) (Table 1). We must assess the status of these populations before considering further biocontrol. • Prescribed burning in the spring, followed by clopyralid, has effectively controlled another species in the same genus, yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis) (DiTomaso et al. 2006). Burning has been used to stimulate seed germination before herbicide treatment (DiTomaso & Healy 2007), for the purpose of accelerating the depletion of the seed bank. Although diffuse

knapweed is closely related to yellow starthistle, there are no published studies to indicate whether the effects of fire would be similar. • Revegetation with native species is the best defense for reducing the probability of future reinvasions (Roché and Roché 1999), but this approach also requires diligent hand-pulling and/or herbicide spot-spraying until the knapweed seed bank is diminished and native species are established. This method was effectively used on the NAU campus, west of the Forestry Building, where a site dominated by diffuse knapweed was converted to native grasses and forbs after a period of eight years.

Timeline for Weed Abatement in Kachina Wetlands

With funding, our goal is to significantly reduce and contain invasive species over a period of 10 years, and replace these species with native grass, forb, and shrub species. We will measure our degree of success by creating a weed map for the Kachina Wetlands at the beginning and end of the 10-year period (2016-2026) and comparing distribution and density of weeds at each time period. At the end of 10 years, we hope to be on a trajectory where the distribution and density of invasive weeds is clearly diminishing while native species are flourishing.

This timeline is contingent on available funding and each year is assumed to begin on July 1, the beginning of the annual funding cycle for KVID.

Year 1: • Develop a map of weed distribution and density of all invasive weeds for the entire extent of the Kachina Wetlands. • Identify which invasive weeds will have highest priority for abatement or eradication. • Identify satellite and peripheral occurrences, along with the main roadway within the property, for priority treatment. • For adaptive management purposes, establish ten 100-meter transects, each consisting of 10, 1- meter quadrats for monitoring different approaches to weed abatement and native plant establishment. • Through Terra BIRDS, engage youth in initiating a small native plant demonstration garden. • With assistance from APHIS, assess the status of all insect populations that have been released for biocontrol and determine whether more releases are warranted. • In July, apply aminopyrladid, beginning with priority areas and moving to areas of lower priority depending on available funding. • In August and September, return to sprayed areas and remove any remaining live plants through hand-grubbing and spot-spraying. • In late August and early September, experimentally test effectiveness of one or more pre- emergence herbicides to inhibit germination and rosette formation. • In May, test the use of a spring prescribed burn (if feasible) as part of the integrated control program, to reduce standing dead material so that herbicides that are applied the following fiscal year (July of Year 2) will be more effective • In June, collect first year monitoring data from the 10 transects. • Use the 3-panel display at the entrance to the wetlands to inform the public of intended actions and to suggest how members of the public can get involved.

Year 2: • Seed and plant native grasses in sprayed areas after summer rains have begun. • In late July, re-apply herbicide mix to same peripheral occurrences as Year 1 and follow with hand pulling. • Based on assessment of insect populations done in Year 1, release more insects for biocontrol if warranted. • If pre-emergence herbicides have proven successful, establish a program of applying pre-and post-emergence on the main roadway to reduce spread of noxious weeds to areas outside of Kachina Wetlands • Conduct a second spring burning if that method was successful in Year 1.

Year 3: • Seed and plant native grass and forb species in sprayed priority areas after summer rains have begun. Add shrubs to areas of low density weed populations. • Expand use of successful methods to other peripheral occurrences. • Engage local community groups in the development of native plant demonstration gardens that are maintained by each group. • In June, conduct third-year monitoring of transects. Quantify and report results, and adjust weed abatement and planting strategies accordingly.

Years 4 through 10: • Nurture all areas that have been revegetated and continue to spot-spray with an herbicide mix or hand pull weeds as needed. • Continue to identify and treat infested areas, moving from peripheral populations toward heavily infested areas. • Continue to monitor insect populations used for biocontrol and modify this aspect of the program as needed. • Continue to treat all roadways with most effective methods, to reduce spread of invasive weeds to areas outside of Kachina Wetlands

Year 10: • Develop a 2026 map of invasive weed distribution and density for Kachina Wetlands • Assess changes in weed distribution and density over ten years, and summarize findings in a report and peer-reviewed publication. • Identify actions to continue into the future.

Native grassland with blue grama Photo credit: Troy Wood

GOAL 2: ENHANCE WILDLIFE VALUES Background

A survey for wildlife species has not been undertaken for the Kachina Wetlands, but citizen sightings indicate the presence of several mammals, including Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elatus), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), coyote (Canis latrans), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), and desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). From 2000 – 2015, 204 species of birds have been recorded for the Kachina Wetlands, based on the eBird database, managed by Cornell Lab of Ornithology and populated by birdwatching enthusiasts (http://ebird.org/ebird/hotspot/L264663?yr=all&m=&rank=hc). Of these, 65 species are wetland associated species that would not be present without the ponds, and of these, 25-35 species utilize the ponds during the breeding season.

Waterfowl were attracted to the site after the evaporation ponds were constructed in 1988, and waterbird diversity increased after the wetlands enhancement work of 1993-1994. The wetland work, accomplished through grants from Ducks Unlimited and the Arizona Game and Fish Department’s Heritage Fund consisted in 1) establishing wetland plants within the ponds; 2) establishing shrubs on pond islands; and (3) creating a nature walk around Pond 4, with an interpretive brochure at the entrance to the Bufflehead and canvasbacks in Pond 1 wetlands (Gaud 1996). Photo credit: Gary Botello Arizona State Land Department donated shrubs for planting on islands. The planted species included narrow leaf willow (Salix exigua), golden current (Ribes aureum) and honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata). Wetland plants were established by transplanting species from local wetlands. The transplanted species included bulrush (Scirpus spp.), spike rush (Eleocharis palustris), and cattail (Typha latifolia). Also transplanted to a lesser degree were reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and manna grass (Glyceria sp.). Although cattail is considered a native wetland species, it can aggressively compete with other native wetland species and become dominant (Soda and Solberg 1993). Reed canary grass and manna grass are both non-native species and can become invasive weeds in wetlands.

In 1993, as an outcome of the wetland work accomplished through grants from the Arizona Game and Fish Department Heritage Fund and Ducks Unlimited, KVID entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Arizona Game and Fish Commission to “develop and manage the area…for nesting, feeding and resting areas for waterfowl and shorebirds” under a set of mutually agreed terms and conditions. The management plan that was developed under the MOU, and the two subsequent amendments (2008 and 2009), specify that Pond 1 (Fig. 1) shall be maintained at a minimum average depth of 30 inches year round, and that Pond 2 should be maintained for maximum surface area rather than depth, to meet the needs of shorebirds. These conditions have been met over the life

of the MOU, which expires December 31, 2016. Arizona Game and Fish Department and KVID will renew the MOU when it expires.

The Northern Arizona Audubon Society installed nest boxes on the island of Pond 1 for waterfowl, and nest boxes in the cluster of ponderosa pines near Pond 2 for secondary cavity-nesting birds. Most of these were established during the 1990s and might need maintenance or replacement.

Regarding the effects of weeds on wildlife, non-native forbs such as spotted and diffuse knapweed have greater detrimental impacts than non-native grasses other than cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) (Kennedy et al. 2009, Litt and Pearson 2013). In Montana, initiation of nesting for chipping sparrows (Spizella passerina) was delayed in sites dominated by spotted knapweed compared to sites in native vegetation, possibly due to significant reduction in grasshoppers in knapweed sites (Ortega et al. 2006). However, for deer and elk, nutritional content of knapweed is similar to native forage (Wright and Kelsey 1997), and both elk and deer have grazed on spotted knapweed in preference to native grasslands in Idaho (Wright and Kelsey 1997). When non-native species become a monoculture, the diversity of wildlife and insect species is reduced, because important habitat requirements of many species are not met (Crooks 2002).

Actions for Enhancing Wildlife Habitat

Citizens have expressed interest in having more ponds and wetlands, but presently, there is insufficient treated wastewater to fill more ponds. KVID is currently in the process of creating a master plan to address infrastructure, as well as future storage needs for treated wastewater. If the master plan indicates that one or more of the existing ponds could be retired as evaporation ponds, we will consider options for reshaping the ponds to create small, rainwater catchments, and this management plan will be amended to add a list of actions and a timeline for completing them.

In the meantime, several opportunities exist for enhancing wildlife habitat in the uplands and the existing ponds. Feasible and meaningful actions include the following: • Ensure a desirable ratio of open water to nesting reeds by controlling cattails and other emergent vegetation as needed. • In upland areas and dry sites, plant native species with specific value for wildlife such as plants that provide: o Berries or high-energy seeds o Nectar for hummingbirds, butterflies, or other pollinators o Nesting substrates for shrub nesting birds Hiding cover for small mammals o Virginia Rail, Kachina Wetlands • Install perches for a variety of bird species, including Photo credit: Brian Healey raptors, bluebirds, and swallows • Check condition of existing nest boxes and repair or replace as needed. • Install a bat roost • Install bee boxes for solitary bee species

The Flagstaff area supports numerous species of grasses and shrubs that produce fruits or high-quality seeds. The selection of plants for establishment in Kachina Wetlands should be made through a collaboration between local groups with expertise in either wildlife habitat or in native plant establishment, to ensure that selected species are a good choice for wildlife and a pragmatic choice for the site conditions.

Kachina Wetlands currently contains one large-diameter snag (standing dead tree) at the junction of Ponds 2, 3, 4 and 7, as well as a cluster of mature ponderosa pines on the northwest side of Pond 2 that have several suitable perches used by raptors and passerines. The longevity of the lone snag is unknown, but is probably less than 10 years, and the rest of the area is devoid of snags or other perches. One approach for increasing perches is to identify 1-3 large diameter (> 20 inches) standing dead trees that are slated for removal because of potential hazard to buildings, roads, or trails, and move them to Kachina Wetlands where each could be erected in a concrete base, away from the main access road. Another option is to have a school group create one or more perches out of wood or alternative materials with aesthetic characteristics.

Bats need roost sites for raising young and diurnal resting, and several species in the Flagstaff area roost under exfoliating bark (Rabe et al. 1998, Solvesky and Chambers 2009). Artificial roosts can be created by purchasing synthetic bark that has been manufactured for attachment to standing dead trees. If bird perches are installed using standing dead trees as described above, the same snag could serve as a bat roost using existing or synthetic bark. Alternatively, several companies have designed bat roosts that can be installed on a post.

Bees are important pollinators for native plants. Mason bees (Megachie spp.) deposit their eggs one at a time in small holes and place a pollen ball and nectar with each egg before sealing each hole with mud (Wetherbee 2006). These bees use tree cavities and beetle burrows, but they will also use “bee boxes”, which are structures that contain pre-drilled holes for individual nests. Bee boxes can easily be constructed and hung by youth to teach them about the natural history of bees and their role in maintaining native plant species.

Timeline for Enhancing Wildlife Habitat

With funding, our goal is to make an observable difference in the quality and diversity of wildlife habitat in the Kachina Wetlands. At the end of 10 years, we hope to be on a trajectory where the acreage of native plants that provide specific wildlife value is increasing. We will measure our success by the number of acres dominated by native plant species, the number of enhancement actions accomplished, and the number of community groups that have contributed to Yellow-headed blackbird Photo credit: Gary Botello

11 wildlife habitat enhancement. In the following timeline, each year begins on July 1, the beginning of the annual funding cycle for KVID.

Year 1: • Convene local community groups with expertise and interest in wildlife habitat and native plants to discuss opportunities for enhancing wildlife habitat. • Identify specific actions that the community groups would like to accomplish. • Identify potential sources of funds to accomplish each task. • Add Appendix A to this management plan that describes the actions that will be accomplished, the community group(s) that will undergo the action, and a timeline for accomplishment.

Year 2: • Use the 3-panel display at the entrance to the wetlands to inform the public of intended actions and how members of the public can get involved. • Begin actions that can be initiated through volunteer efforts, without grant funds. • Build specific plans for any actions that require more details, such as selection of native plant species, or the design criteria for bird perches and bat roosts. • Use information gained from detailed plans to seek grant funds for accomplishing specific actions.

Year 3: • Based on completion of the KVID master plan, convene local community groups to identify new opportunities and funding sources for wildlife habitat enhancement. • If any ponds will be retired from use, add Appendix B to this management plan that describes actions for converting the ponds to new uses. • Seek grant funds for new enhancement actions. • Coordinate native plant establishment with actions described under Goal 1 for weed abatement. • Continue to work on actions identified in Year 1.

Years 4-10: • Continue with action items, especially those that require longer time periods for completion. • Assess survivorship of native plants and select different species as needed for subsequent plantings. • Document enhancement projects with photos.

Year 10: • Evaluate the degree of success in accomplishing action items set forth in Years 1 and 3. • Summarize findings in a report for the County Board of Supervisors, KVID, community groups, and the public. • Identify actions that could be accomplished in the next 10 years.

GOAL 3: PROMOTE AESTHETIC QUALITY AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES

One of the attractive features of the Kachina Wetlands is the scenery: a breath-taking vista of grasslands and wetlands, crowned by the San Francisco Peaks to the north. The area is also a hotspot for birders, due to the diversity and abundance of both wetland and grassland bird species. Numerous local residents come to the Kachina Wetlands to watch birds, take a stroll, go for a run, or walk their dogs.

Photo Credit: David Blanchard, with permission

Flagstaff is a Dark Sky Community (http://darksky.org/idsp/communities), so the expansive skyscape of Kachina Wetlands offers fantastic opportunities to observe celestial events and objects close to the horizon that cannot be seen in other locations. Moreover, the ponds at night provide stunning reflections of the moon and stars, and consequently, Kachina Wetlands is prized by photographers of the night sky. To the extent that public recreation does not interfere with the evaporation ponds and associated infrastructure, KVID allows for public use of the property.

The inspirational character of the Kachina Wetlands lends itself to educational opportunities to promote the importance of wetlands, native plant communities, and wildlife, as well as to educate the public about the impacts of noxious weeds. Several community organizations offer recreational or educational events in the Kachina Wetlands, and there are abundant opportunities for more activities that could be directly tied to the goals of weed abatement and wildlife habitat enhancement that are described in this management plan. Ideas that have been proposed include: • Establish a bird-watching platform at Pond 1. • Create demonstration gardens that feature specific categories of native plants, such as a penstemon garden, butterfly garden, or Northern Arizona grassland diversity garden. • Involve youth and community groups in both weed removal and native plant establishment. • Involve youth in building and installing nest boxes and monitoring their use. • Set up a webcam at either Pond 1 or Pond 2 to enable the public to learn about wildlife and pond activity from home. • Create a Friends of the Kachina Wetlands group to raise funds for weed abatement and wetlands enhancement.

• Use the 3-panel display case at the entrance to the Kachina Wetlands to provide information on weed abatement and wildlife habitat enhancement projects as well as community events that will be taking place on the property.

Any activity or action proposed for the Kachina Wetlands should not mar the inherent beauty of the site and should respect the qualities that are valued by other user groups. For example, a bird-watching platform should have a low profile and be located in a place where it does not disrupt the view of the San Francisco Peaks cherished by photographers. Likewise, trees that could attain large stature should not be planted between Ponds 1 and 2, because they could reduce water depth in Pond 1 and obstruct views for bird watchers. Most educational information should be enclosed in the 3-panel display at the entrance to Kachina Wetlands or on websites of community groups, unless there is a real need to place signs on location, such as for plant identification in demonstration gardens. Interpretive signs associated with demonstration gardens should be low and unobtrusive.

Timeline for Promoting Aesthetic Value and Educational Opportunities The sequence and timing of various recreational and educational opportunities will be contingent on the interests of community groups and the availability of funding. Nevertheless, a relative timeline can assist community groups in understanding the sequence of events that will lead to successful outcomes. The general sequence is as follows: • Initially, the Landscape Conservation Initiative (LCI) at NAU will provide overall coordination between groups to increase communication and reduce conflicts between proposed activities. If a Friends of Kachina Wetland group is eventually formed, the coordination role would pass to that group. • The LCI will distribute this management plan and ensure that interested community groups are aware of the vision and three goals described within it. • Community groups interested in weed abatement and/or native plant establishment will ensure that their proposed activities fit into the timeline shown in this management plan for weed abatement. For example, if a group is interested in establishing a demonstration garden, it will be necessary to ensure that the location is not the same as where experimental sites for weed abatement have been selected. • To the extent possible, community groups will need to raise funds for their proposed activities; however, the LCI will make concerted efforts to include the ideas of community groups in any LCI grant proposals aimed at meeting the three goals of this management plan. • After funds are raised, the funded activities will be announced in the three-panel display case at the entrance to Kachina Wetlands. • The LCI and KVID will assist the community groups with other forms of communications (websites, KVID newsletter) to increase public awareness of the funded activities.

SUMMARY

The primary purpose of the Kachina Wetlands is for storage and evaporation of treated wastewater, yet it provides intangible benefits to wildlife and humans that make it worthy of our time and efforts to battle the weeds, plant native species, enhance wildlife habitat, and make it a place where we can teach our community and children about the value of open space and native vegetation.

The task of ending the dominance of noxious weeds in Kachina Wetlands is daunting, and is more than any one individual can do alone. Working together, however, we can meet this challenge and we will find joy not only in achieving goals, but in participating in the process, as we learn from each other the many ways we can heal the land and contribute to a healthy Earth.

Wetlands restoration Photo credit: John Taylor

LITERATURE CITED

Crooks, J.A. 2002. Characterizing ecosystem-level consequences of biological invasions: the role of ecosystem engineers. Oikos 97:153-166. DiTomaso, D.T., G. B. Kyser, J. R. Miller, S. Garcia, and others. 2006. Integrating prescribed burning and clopyralid for the management of yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis). Weed Science 54:757- 767. Gaud, W.S. 1996. The development of wetland habitat for migrating and nesting waterfowl and other wildlife. Management Plan. Heritage Grant U92026. 12 pp. Kennedy, P.L., S.J. DeBano, A.M. Bartuszevige, and A.S. Lueders. 2009. Effects of native and non-native grassland plant communities on breeding passerine birds: implications for restoration of Northwest bunchgrass prairie. Restoration Ecology 17:515-525. Ortega, Y.K., K.S. McKelvey, and D.L. Six. 2006. Invasion of an exotic forb impacts reproductive success and site fidelity of a migratory songbird. Oecologia 149:340-351.

Roché, B. F. Jr. and C.T. Roché. 1999. Diffuse Knapweed. Pages 217-230 In Sheley, R.L. and J.K. Petroff, editors. Biology and management of noxious rangeland weeds. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. Rabe, M.J., Morrell, T.E., Green, H., deVos, Jr., J.C., & Miller, C.R. 1998. Characteristics of ponderosa pine snag roosts used by reproductive bats in northern Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management 62: 612-621. Sheley, R.,J. Petroff, M.. Borman, 1999. Introduction to Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds, Corvallis, OR. Solvesky, B.G. and C. L. Chambers, C.L. 2009. Roosts of Allen’s lappet-browed bat in northern Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management 73:677-682. USDA Forest Service. 1997. Plant associations of Arizona and New Mexico. Volume 1: Forests. USDA Forest Service Southwestern Region Habitat Typing Guides Edition 3. Albuquerque, NM. 291 pp. USDA Forest Service. 2014 Field Guide for Managing Diffuse, Meadow, Spotted and Squarrose Knapweeds in the Southwest. Southwest Region Technical Publication TP-R3-16-05, http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5410116.pdf, 12pp Watson, A.K. and A.J. Renney. 1974. The biology of Canadian weeds. 6. Centaurea diffusa and C. maculosa. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 54:687-701. Wetherbee, K. 2006. Bring on the bees. “Audubonathome” online publication January, 2006. http://archive.audubonmagazine.org/audubonathome/audubonathome0601.html Wilson, L.M. and C.B. Randall. 2005. Biology and biological control of knapweed. Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team FHTET-2001-07. http://www.invasive.org/weeds/knapweedbook.pdf. 93 pp. Wright, A.L., and R.G. Kelsey. 1997. Effects of spotted knapweed on a cervid winter-spring range in Idaho. Journal of Range Management 50: 487-496.