Wilderness and invasives?

Generally speaking, I'd say I am a supporter of the idea that some places on the map ought to be left alone, as untouched by the human hands as possible. At least going forward. We all know that the areas that are designated WIlderness in the Whites have all been impacted heavily in the past by extensive logging.

I've been spending a fair bit of time at work this year doing outreach work in the community on invasive plants. We have a terrible time around here with several invasive plants. The one I have been doing the most work on is buckthorn. If you have even been in a mature forest, where the entire understory is buckthorn, it is a seriously depressing sight. Buckthorn isn't good for critters. It just gives them "intestinal distress" and they crap out the seeds not far from where they ate them. Ultimately it forms a monoculture below the mature trees. The plants on the forest floor die out, because they get starved for light as the trees grow. The rest of the native saplings can't compete, because they leaf out later, and drop leaves earlier, and produce less seeds. If you are managing your forest for timber, and you see that these invasive plants are present, you make darned sure you get them under control before you harvest in an area, or you'll end up with a sea of buckthorn.

What I am beginning to realize, is that the forests that are unmanaged are often the ones where the invasives take over. So, my question is in two parts:

1. I imagine that invasives aren't a pervasive issue in the Whites yet, even at lower elevations, but does anyone know if/where there are pockets of invasives?

2. If invasives get going in Wilderness areas, what sorts of techniques will the FS be able to use to combat them? Would a backpack sprayer with glyphosate be allowed in a WIlderness area? Would they have to resort to hand pulling?

This occurred to me recently when I got involved pulling buckthorn, barberry and honeysuckle by hand from a 3 acre parcel in the Upper Valley. So far, we have about 2 acres cleared of invasives, and it has taken about 300 person hours to accomplish!

How many acres are designated WIlderness in New England?

I guess the best bet would be to control the invasives before they become ensconced in the Wilderness areas.

Logically, (but when did that ever matter? ), if we are responsible for a mess in the wilderness, then we should clean it up, right?

NY is not the same situation, but I've never heard anyone say 'kill the invasive species, except in the wilderness areas.' ...

Jason, you could not be thanked enough for doing that work.

What I have seen in the Whites are invasives along reclaimed roads and roadsides. I have not seen huge stands of knotweed, Norwegian Maples, Bittersweet etc.

From what I have seen in the wilderness areas are healthy plant communities that needed little in the way of the backbreaking work that you are doing.

I know that there are some areas of special concern because they hold a certain species..the New England Cottontail for example. The conservations efforts as it ramps up will be to fight invasives, prescribed burns and the restoration of native vegitation and perhpas the removal of the eastern cottontail.

The ones that I've noticed most often, I've not seen away from the roads, period, in the Whites. These being, the Japanese Knotweed, Purple Loosestrife, Russian Olive, and Chinese Silvergrass.

I don't have the trained eye for all of them, so I may be missing the Buckthorn, Honeysuckle, and Barberries. They're all ugly, even the Loosestrife, which is pretty to those not in the know.

EDIT: 1,000 posts!! It's been a good 6+ years!!

TDawg said:

The ones that I've noticed most often, I've not seen in away from the roads, period, in the Whites. These being, the Japanese Knotweed, Purple Loosestrife, Russian Olive, and Chinese Silvergrass.

I don't have the trained eye for all of them, so I may be missing the Buckthorn, Honeysuckle, and Barberries. They're all ugly, even the Loosestrife, which is pretty to some not in the know.

EDIT: 1,000 posts!! It's been a good 6+ years!!

Click to expand...

I think this is a really good point. In the northeast, invasives so far have remained in urban areas which also tend to be at lower elevations. Areas like the White Mountains, Green Mountains, Adirondacks, and Northern Maine had cold enough climates that have kept most of the invasive species at bay. Suffice to say, as a result, there really hasn't been a need to combat invasive species in wilderness areas in the Northeast.

All that could change in the near future, however- there are 4 incredibly destructive invasive species that are at the doorstep of the Adirondacks as we speak. Sirex Woodwasp, Hemlock Wooly Adelgid, Emerald Ash Borer, and Asian Long Horned Beetle have all been found in New York in recent years. If (most foresters actually consider it a matter of "when," not "if") these make it into the Adirondacks then our pines, hemlocks, ashes, and maples will almost certainly be all but wiped out. These species, of course, make up a significant chunk of the Adirondack ecosystem, and the results of having all four invasives in the Adirondacks would be hugely catastrophic.

When it comes to dealing with invasives, there are several methods. In urban areas, yes, methods such as physical removal, herbicides, and insecticides are often employed and are typically fairly effective. In forest settings, however, these methods just simply aren't economically viable. The effort and cost necessary to treat every single susceptible tree (in the case of insects) or area (in the case of plants) in the forest is astronomical, and expecting this to happen is pretty unrealistic. A much more preferred method is some sort of natural control- generally, importing a natural predator of whatever invasive pest or plant needs to be dealt with, and letting that species loose in the forest. Of course, this method isn't without it's own drawbacks- a lot of careful research and planning is needed to ensure that the imported predator wont turn into an invasive species itself. Ideally, the imported predator will die out as soon as the invasive is eradicated, but again, we need to be really, really sure about this before we choose to release a new species.

wrt the WIlderness areas, I'm really thinking about the woody invasives like buckthorm honeysuckle, barberry, and bruning bush. In the Upper Valley, I generally see all of these up and down the CT River Valley at lower elevations, say under 1,000 feet, sometimes in dense concentrations. I do see them up to about 1800 feet, and farther away from the valley. Towns like Vershire, Corinth, Cornish, etc. are far from urban.

I wonder how many acres of the WMNF are below 1800 feet?
I don't think this is a pressing problem yet in the WMNF, but it will be someday, and probably sooner that we think. I really am curious what tools the FS will be able to use under WIlderness guidlines when the time comes.

As for the bugs, they worry me immensely.

If the Cards keep tying this damned game up, I could be here all night.

Jason Berard said:

I really am curious what tools the FS will be able to use under WIlderness guidlines when the time comes.

Click to expand...

The FS is going to be limited a lot more by economics than by wilderness guidelines, I think. Again, when you're talking on the scale of a large forest, mechanical control methods (such as physically removing the plants) typically aren't a viable option due to cost and effort, regardless of whether or not they would actually be allowed in wilderness. As with bugs, implementation of a biological control would probably be the best possible scenario in a wilderness area.

Most if not all, land managers of wilderness areas will have differing philosophies in managing their wilderness areas.

Consider the following guidelines from the “Forest Service Policy for Wilderness Management”.

In absolute wilderness there is no human influence preventing the area from retaining its purest natural form. It is unlikely, however, that this condition exists anywhere on earth. There are few places, if any, remaining where humans have neither set foot nor where human influences, through pollution, have not been felt. The Wilderness Act defines wilderness at some point below absolute wilderness.

The Act permits certain activities and contains prerogatives that also tend to lessen the opportunities to reach absolute wilderness. Mining is permitted on valid claims; access to valid occupancies and private land is provided for; and fire control, insect and disease control, grazing, and visitor use are permitted. Considered together, these modifications define legal wilderness. Manage wilderness toward attaining the highest level of purity in wilderness within legal constraints.

Each designated wilderness is affected by a variety of human influences that vary in intensity. In one area, human influence may be very limited; in another area, major disturbances occur. The number and intensity of these influences cause a gap between the attainable legislative wilderness and the conditions that exist on a wilderness ("X"). The goal of wilderness management is to identify these influences, define their causes, remedy them, and close the gap ("A") between the attainable level of purity and the level that exists on each wilderness ("X").

Click to expand...

Addressing insects and diseases only:

Objectives

1. To allow indigenous insect and plant diseases to play, as nearly as possible, their natural ecological role within wilderness.
2. To protect the scientific value of observing the effect of insects and diseases on ecosystems and identifying genetically resistant plant species.
3. To control insect and plant disease epidemics that threatens adjacent lands or resources.

Click to expand...

Control Measures

When control of insects or disease is necessary in National Forest wilderness, it shall be carried out by measures that have the least adverse impact on the wilderness resource and are compatible with wilderness management objectives.

Meet the requirements in FSM 2324.04, FSM 2151, FSM 3430, and FSM 1950 in carrying out insect and disease control projects in wilderness. Special care must be taken with the use of chemicals inside wilderness because of possible effects on the total biological complex. Consider other alternatives to chemical use in the environmental analysis.

Click to expand...

Consider other alternatives to chemical use in the environmental analysis.

Click to expand...

In the modern era of Forestry, this isn't just a wilderness guideline- it's a general forestry guideline as well. The idea of Integrated Pest Management supports the use of a wide variety of solutions in conjunction with each other to combat pests, including social, biological, cultural and management techniques in addition to (or instead of chemicals).

Plus, as I stated before, the use of chemicals on the scale of an entire forest is typically not economically feasible.

DSettahr said:

As with bugs, implementation of a biological control would probably be the best possible scenario in a wilderness area.

Click to expand...

Biological control sounds good in theory, but its track record is spotty. Sometimes the organisms introduced to control an invasive exotic become a bigger problem than the original invasive exotic.

See "the law of intended consequences"... (eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences)

Doug

DougPaul said:

Biological control sounds good in theory, but its track record is spotty.

Click to expand...

This is very true... which is why in one of my previous posts I emphasized that a lot of research and careful preparation needs to be done before it's attempted.

Craig said:

Most if not all, land managers of wilderness areas will have differing philosophies in managing their wilderness areas.

Click to expand...

For WMNF land management philosophies see their "Land and Resource Management Plan".

Consider the following from the management plan of the WMNF. It appears there is no specific written management plan for invasive species within Wilderness Areas of the WMNF.

Non-Native Invasive Species

1. Manual control must be the first choice of eradication
2. Chemical control methods, if deemed necessary, should be used through direct application. Broadcast application of herbicides or pesticides should only be used if direct application is not working.
3. Biological controls should only be used when the effectiveness of other control methods will not achieve site specific eradication objectives

Click to expand...

There's a section of the WMNF website dealing with invasives (NNIS.) There are pages showing invasive plants known in the forest, near the forest, and insects of special concern. There are maps showing treatment locations, and a list of locations with species present and treatment method to be used. The list shows proposed treatments for the 2011 season. A quick glance shows that most treatment locations are roadside.

WMNF Non-Native Invasive Species (NNIS)

Davehiker, thanks for the link! Lot's of good information in there. It looks like they are treating the invasives they do find using the standard chemical methods. I"ll look through and see if any of the sites are within Wilderness boundaries when I have a WNG map in from of me.

I can throw out the tidbit that glyphosate is not very effective if the area is wet. I have drainage through my property and it it has become invaded by phragmities. Glyphosate (Rodeo, the commercial version of RoundUp) has done almost nothing, even when professionally applied and permitted twice in 30 days (as recommended).

Tim