|
|
|
|
The Global Invasive Species Team | |
|
||
|
|
|
|||||
|
Global Invasive Species Team listserve digest #088 Mon Jul 02 2001 - 17:36:12 PDT --CONTENTS-- 1. Update on saltcedar biocontrol (Western states, USA) 2. Monitoring Euphorbia cyparissias/Lespedeza cuneata (New York, USA) 3. Goats on teasel (Oregon, USA) 4. Nelumbo management (Pennsylvania, USA) 5. Dryland purple loosestrife? (Ohio, USA) 6. NFWF requesting proposals for 2002 (USA) 7. August NAWMA conference in Colorado Springs (USA) 8. Mid-Atlantic conference 14-15 August (Pennsylvania, USA) 9. Invasive species coordinator job (Eastern USA) 10. Invasive species literature review (USA) --------------------------------------- 1. Update on saltcedar biocontrol (Western states, USA) From: Barry Rice (bamrice(at)ucdavis.edu) The US Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service (USDA ARS) recently released a biocontrol agent for saltcedar (Tamarix sp.) in Texas and Colorado. The biocontrol agent, Chinese leaf beetle (Diorhabda elongata), is expected to be released soon (if not already) at additional sites in California, Wyoming, Utah, and Nevada. For more information, point your web browser to: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2001/010522.htm --Thanks to Mallory Dimmitt (mdimmitt(at)tnc.org) in Colorado for bringing this press release to my attention. --------------------------------------- 2. Monitoring Euphorbia cyparissias/Lespedeza cuneata (New York, USA) From: Marilyn Jordan (mjordan(at)tnc.org) I am responding to Christa's request for information about monitoring cypress spurge pre- and post-control, by writing up an overdue report to the Weeds Listserve (see below). A similar monitoring approach might work for other weeds, if the areas of infestation are discrete and mappable. You might want to be more quantitative (depending on your goals and intent to publish), and also include monitoring of the desired native plant species in the weed control areas. GPS mapping, if sufficiently accurate, could be used instead of surveyed reference markers, and might be preferable for large areas. --The document that Marilyn Jordan and Bill Jacobs wrote on monitoring Euphorbia cyparissias and Lespedeza cuneata is on the WIST web site at: http://tncinvasives.ucdavis.edu/esadocs/euphcypa.html --------------------------------------- 3. Goats on teasel (Oregon, USA) From: Vanelle Carrithers (vfcarrithers(at)dowagro.com) We have three Nubian dairy goats with free access to Himalaya blackberry (Rubus armeniacus aka R. discolor) vines. They ate the blackberry vines down and a dense monoculture of teasel (Dipsacus sp.) emerged in its place. Fortunately the goats ate that (they nibble at the bud whenever it bolts). Now the 3 acre pasture next to the barn is a beautiful grass and broadleaf (no noxious weeds) pasture. This year the goats started working on the teasel on the back 3 acres. The goats like to eat the leaves when the plant is in the rosette stage and the tips as it begins to bolt. It will definitely take at least 3 years to exhaust the seed bank. We noticed a remarkable change from a complete carpet of teasel to more grass after 3 years here. We have the advantage of being able to let the goats eat the plants whenever they desire. --------------------------------------- 4. Nelumbo management (Pennsylvania, USA) From: Chris Firestone (cfirestone(at)state.pa.us) We have a problem with Nelumbo lutea (American lotus) a native aquatic species. The problem is that it is spreading very quickly and clogging lanes that are used for boating. We would like to remove this only from the boat lanes for access to other parts of the lake. We have no intentions of totally removing this from the lake. A "cookie cutter" was tried last year but the lanes are closed again this year. Does any one have suggestions for a more permanent solution that would not require treatment yearly? --------------------------------------- 5. Dryland purple loosestrife? (Ohio, USA) From: Mark Frey (frey.81(at)osu.edu) I have just seen Lythrum salicaria well established in an oat field in north-central Ohio. This does not appear to be a wet site. Have other folks seen this? --------------------------------------- 6. NFWF requesting proposals for 2002 (USA) From: Barry Rice (bamrice(at)ucdavis.edu) The due date for NFWF (National Fish and Wildlife Foundation) grant proposals is 20 August (6 November, for Pulling Together Initiative grants). NFWF funds projects which: "...benefit multiple species, achieve a variety of resource management objectives, and/or lead to revised management practices that reduce the causes of habitat degradation. A special emphasis is placed on larger projects that demonstrate a landscape-level approach and produce lasting, broad-based results on the ground." Other key words on their web site are: innovation, partnership, and leverage. These grants average about $50,000, but assume that 1/2 the funds are raised by the grantee via matching funds. For more information, look to the web site at: http://www.nps.gov/plants/nfwf/02rfp.htm --------------------------------------- 7. August NAWMA conference in Colorado Springs (USA) From: John M. Randall (jarandall(at)ucdavis.edu) The North American Weed Management Association is holding its 9th annual conference and trade show, "Noxious Weed Management Successes" August 14-16 in Colorado Springs. The conference agenda, registration, and other information is available on their web site at http://www.nawma.org --------------------------------------- 8. Mid-Atlantic conference 14-15 August (Pennsylvania, USA) From: Betsy Lyman (blyman(at)tnc.org) This third Mid-Atlantic conference on invasive exotic plants brings together experts from the front lines of research, the green industry, policy, funding, education, and on-the-ground management who are working together to solve this problem. It will provide participants with an understanding of the nature and scope of the problem today and a view of how recent research may have applications in management and public information programs on landscape and regional scales. For more information on the meeting, look at the web site page at: http://tncinvasives.ucdavis.edu/meetings/paconf/home.html --------------------------------------- 9. Invasive species coordinator job (Eastern USA) From: Betsy Lyman (blyman(at)tnc.org) Suitable candidates are being sought for an Invasive Plant Coordinator who will be responsible for coordinating all activities of the Delaware River Invasive Plant Partnership (DRIPP). DRIPP is a public-private partnership covering a three-state region (PA, NJ and NY) formed to initiate a regional coordination and planning effort to promote invasive plant management in the Delaware River watershed. This position is responsible for developing and implementing community outreach and educational strategies that effectively communicates TNC's and DRIPP's conservation messages and promotes their conservation and community-involvement efforts. If you want to learn more about this position, go to: http://tncinvasives.ucdavis.edu/newsnotes.html --------------------------------------- 10. Invasive species literature review (USA) From: John Randall (jarandall(at)ucdavis.edu) Ellis, L.M., M.C. Molles, Jr., C.S. Crawford and F. Heinzelmann. 2000. Surface-active arthropod communities in native and exotic vegetation in the middle Rio Grande Valley, New Mexico. The Southwestern Naturalist 45(4): 456-471. The authors did NOT find significant overall differences in the taxonomic richness, abundance and trophic composition of the arthropod fauna of the soil surface and litter layer in two native cottonwood dominated sites versus that in two sites strongly dominated by saltcedar (Tamarix spp., aka tamarisk). They used pit traps to capture surface active insects, spiders and other arthropods for twelve 48-hour capture periods over three years in four study sites. All of the sites are located along a stretch of the Rio Grande no longer subject to natural flooding due to upstream impoundments. The cottonwood sites were distinguished by greater abundance of the introduced isopods Armadillium vulgare and Porcellio laevis but the abundance of other key taxa was generally about the same or higher at saltcedar sites. Diversity of spiders was actually higher at the saltcedar sites. There were more species of predators than detritivores or herbivores at all the sites but more individuals of detritivores due to the abundance of the isopods. Plant species richness was greater at the cottonwood sites but this did not translate into greater diversity of the arthropods on the soil surface and litter layer. The authors did not use statistics to analyze the significance of the differences between cottonwood and saltcedar dominated sites(or the lack thereof) in the data, but did use a similarity index to assess site similarities. |
||||||
