ASSESSING RESTORATION SUCCESS FOR A WET MONTANE SIERRA NEVADA MEADOW ____________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Chico ____________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Biological Sciences ____________ by Rachel Schleiger Spring 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE List of Tables .................................................................................................................... v List of Figures ................................................................................................................... vii Abstract ............................................................................................................................. viii CHAPTER I. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 Extent of Damage and Motivation for Restoration ...................................... 1 Restoration Definition and Goals................................................................. 2 Trajectory Models ........................................................................................ 4 Study Objectives and Hypothesis ................................................................ 5 II. Methodology ......................................................................................................... 7 Study System ............................................................................................... 7 Field Sites..................................................................................................... 9 Vegetation Sampling .................................................................................... 12 Vegetation Mapping..................................................................................... 14 Vegetation Characterization......................................................................... 15 Soil Moisture ................................................................................................ 16 Data Analysis and Statistics ......................................................................... 18 III. Results ................................................................................................................... 22 Variation Between Watersheds and Between Sampling Years ................... 22 Vegetation and Soil Moisture ...................................................................... 23 Richness ....................................................................................................... 37 Invasive and Non-Native Species ................................................................ 47 Summation of Important Points ................................................................... 54 IV. Discussion ............................................................................................................. 57 Disturbance in Wet Montane Meadows ....................................................... 57 Comparison Issues with Less-Disturbed Sites ............................................. 58 Summary of Key Findings ........................................................................... 58 Restoration Assessment ............................................................................... 59 iii References ................................................................................................................... 64 Appendices A. Plant List ........................................................................................................ 74 B. USFWS Indicator Categories ........................................................................ 80 C. Patch Classification and Characteristics Across Sites for 2012 Field Season ........................................................................................... 82 D. Number of Patches at Each Site Dominated by Different Plant Types ...................................................................................................... 89 E. Areas (m2) of Plant Type (a) and Plant Wetland Affinities (b) by Soil Moisture Categories for each Site in 2012 Field Season ................ 91 F. Percentage of Site Area in Each Soil Moisture Category and Total Area of Non-vegetated (NV) Ground (m2) and the (Percent Area that Comprises each Moisture Category) for 2012........................................................................................................ 94 iv LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Site Locations within Watersheds (Separated by Different Hydrologic Unit Scales) with Unit Name, Resolution, and Area ................................. 11 2. Total Precipitation Averages (inches), using the Current Water Year System, between Watersheds for Both Sampling Years ........................... 22 3. Total Estimated Meadow Area (m2) and Number of Patches and (Vegetation Patch Types) Surveyed for 2012 ........................................... 24 4. Study Sites Classified by 2012 Patch Soil Moisture Categories.................... 25 5. Richness and (Percent Total Richness) for Native, Invasive, and Non-native Species as well as Total Species Richness and Family Richness Across Both Sampling Seasons ................................................. 38 6. Species Richness for Each Site Between Sampling Years (2011 and 2012) ......................................................................................... 39 7. Percent of Meadow Area in Each Soil Moisture Category and the Accompanying Species Richness in 2012 for Each Site ........................... 40 8. Species Richness and (Average Percent of Total Area) of Plant Types Across Sampling Years ............................................................................. 41 9. The Average Percentage of Total Area in Each Moisture Category Across Occupied by a Particular Plant Type in 2012 for Each Site .................................................................................................... 43 10. Species Richness and (Average Percent of Total Area) Categorized According to the USGS Wetland Classification Categories Across Sampling Years ............................................................................. 44 11. Average Percent of Total Area within Each Site’s 2012 Patch Moisture Categories Occupied by Plant Species Classified by the USGS Wetland Classification System .................................................................. 45 v TABLE PAGE 12. The Average Area of Non-vegetated Ground (m2) and (Average Percentage of Total Area) at Site Scale Between Years ........................... 47 13. Average Area (m2) and (Average Percent of Total Area) Occupied by Invasive, Non-native, and Native Species for Each Sampling Year at Each Site ....................................................................................... 49 14. The Number of Invasive and Non-native species by Plant Type and (Percent of Total Species Richness for Each Plant Type) at Each Site .................................................................................................... 50 15. Invasive and Non-native Species Counts and (Percent of Total Species Richness at Each Site in the USDA Wetland Classification Categories) Across Both Sampling Seasons ............................................. 51 16. Average Area (m2) and (Average Percent of Total Area (%)) Across Both Sampling Seasons Occupied by the Most Prevalent Invasive and Non-native Species for Each Meadow Organized by their Wetness Affinities ..................................................................................... 53 17. Table 17a-b. Relative Area for Each of the Moisture Categories in Each Site, Total Average Area (m2) and The (Average Percent of Total Area for Each Moisture Patch Occupied) by Invasive (a) and Non-native (b) Species Across the 2012 Sampling Season ...................... 55 vi LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Example Trajectory Model Illustrating Movement of Degraded State Through Time to Multiple Possible Endpoints Based on Level of Complexity and Function ...................................................................... 4 2. Restored meadow, Calaveras Big Trees State Park ........................................ 10 3. Position of all Field Sites in the San Joaquin River Regional Watershed, as well as its Smaller Bydrologic Units ..................................................... 12 4. Position of Dorrington (DR), Hazel Fisher (HF), and Big Trees (BT) Study Sites in the Upper Calaveras and Upper San Antonio Creek Watersheds ...................................................................................... 13 5. Position of El Capitan (EL) and Half Dome (HD) Study Sites in the Upper Merced as well as Tenaya Creek and Indian Canyon Creek- Merced River Watersheds ......................................................................... 14 6. Total Relative Area of Patches Classified by 2012 Soil Moisture Categories for Each Site ............................................................................ 26 7. Figures 7a-e: Average Soil Moisture Maps Across the Sampling Season, with Inset for June (Wettest Sampling Month) Moisture, for the Delineated Vegetation Patches Based on Field Sampling in June 2012 at Each Site: (a.) DR, (b.) HF, (c.) BT, (d.) EL, (e.) HD .................. 27 8. Figure 8a-e. Dominant Plant Type, or not, Across Both Sample Seasons at (a.) DR, (b.) HF, (c.) BT, (d.) EL, and (e.) HD ..................................... 32 9. Average Percent Non-vegetated Total Area Across Moisture Categories at Each Site for 2012 ................................................................................