|
click
here for printable version
Site Assessment
Site Description
The wetland area being restored is a small seasonal pond, which
was formed by the subsidence of the landfill and the shallow water
table on the clay cap. The pond lies south of our prairie and shrub
plots, adjacent to 2001 shrub plots 1 and 2. Each group is responsible
for restoring a pie-shaped wedge equal to one seventh of this pond.
Our group is responsible for restoring a wedge on the east side
of this pond, the measurements of which are presented in the site
plan (see Wetland Plan).
Hydrology
In the center of the pond the water depth was measured to be 28
cm on March 5, 2001. Rain seems to be the only source of water for
the pond; therefore water levels should correlate to precipitation
levels in this area. Since precipitation has been lower than average
this year, the pond is probably smaller and shallower than it would
be during a wet year. As the Table 2 and
Figure 1 demonstrate, average Seattle
precipitation is highest in the winter and lowest in the summer
months. It is unknown how well the pond can retain water during
the summer months. It has been reported to dry up completely by
the end of the summer (Ewing 2001).
Soils
Like the rest of the Natural Area, the soils in this area consist
of layers of compacted clay, sand, and gravel soils. The impervious
clay layers prevent drainage of water from the pond in the winter
months.
Existing Vegetation
Before we started our restoration plantings the vegetation in the
pond consisted almost entirely of a single, low-growing rhizomatous
grass species. We believe that the species may be Agrostis tenuis,
but are uncertain about its identification. The grass extends all
the way to the middle of the pond, providing strong evidence that
the wetland dries out substantially during the summer. A small willow
plant, that appeared to have been trimmed low by a mower was also
found near the middle of the pond.
Restoration Goals and Rationale
The eventual goal of this project
is to establish a functional, self-sustaining native wetland community
on the site. We have begun working towards this lofty goal that
will take several years to achieve. In order to reach this larger
goal, we have developed a few specific goals to guide this year's
class project:
1) Increase native plant diversity.
2) Increase wildlife habitat
3) Test the effects of water depth on plant growth and survival.
We have chosen other seasonal wetlands
at the Union Bay Natural Area to serve as reference site for this
project. Native vegetation has been established in Shoveler's Pond
and other wetlands in the Natural Area both through natural recruitment
and restoration activities (Ewing 2001). These wetlands have elements
that resemble the Scirpus acutus, Cornus stolonifera-Salix spp.-Spiraea
douglassi, and Salix spp. community types described by Linda Kunze
(1994) in a DNR publication on wetland classification. The borders
of the wetlands are ringed with woody vegetation, such as cottonwoods,
willows, Oregon ashes, and red twig dogwoods. The deeper center
of Shoveler's Pond is vegetated with emergent herbaceous vegetation,
including bulrush and spikerush.
Increase native plant diversity
Our initial site assessment revealed only one native plant (a willow)
growing in the wetland. By planting native wetland species on the
site, we can accelerate the establishment of a native wetland community
on the site.
Increase wildlife habitat
Wetland plants provide food and homes for a variety of bird, insect,
mammal, and fish species. The willow, for example, has buds that
are eaten by grouse and grosbeak, cavities in snags that are nested
in by black-capped chickadees, and flowers that provide early spring
nectar for honey bees (DOE 1993).
Test effects of water depth
So little is known about the hydrologic nature and other characteristics
of our site, this year's goal is simply to run experiments on the
capability of the site to support specific wetland species rather
than to create a wetland habitat. Different plant species vary in
their tolerance of flooding and drought. In particular, we are looking
at the effect of depth on plant growth and survival. By assessing
the results of our experiment, future groups will be better informed
about how to go about successfully restoring the wetland site.
New Plantings and Experiments
We are testing the effect of depth
or water availability on three woody wetland species: black cottonwood
(Populus trichocarpa), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra),
and red twig dogwood (Cornus sericea). Two herbaceous species,
bulrush (Scirpus acutus) and spikerush (Eleocharis palustris),
are also being planted on the site to increase species diversity.
These plants were chosen based on availability, potential for success,
and wildlife and ecological value (DOE 1993). All species are suited
to wetlands with mineral soils (DOE 1993), although there is some
variation in depth requirements as is shown in Table
3.
We chose to use only woody species
in our experiment, because these species will be easier to find
and measure next year. The herbaceous species are dormant in the
winter, and it would be difficult for next year's group to assess
their survival. Black cottonwood, Pacific willow, and red twig dogwood
are easily rooted from cuttings (DOE 1993), thus 36 whips of each
woody species were cut from trees found within the Union Bay Natural
Area. Plants obtained from local sites adapt with greater success
(DOE 1993). Cuttings were at least 3/8 inches in diameter and were
over the minimum height requirement of 18 inches. The tips and side
branches were removed from the cuttings, as recommended in a plant
propagation textbook (Hartmann, et al. 1990). Where possible, longer
cuttings were obtained, as taller whips fair better through fluctuating
water availability (DOE 1993).
The plantings were laid out along
3 rows parallel to the shore of the wetland. We planted four clusters
of woody cuttings along each row (see Wetland
Plan). Each cluster included nine cuttings with three cuttings
of each of the three species (photo). Since
we had a few leftover cuttings, 1 dogwood, 2 willows, and 5 cottonwoods
were planted in a cluster at the center of the wetland. The remaining
herbaceous species have been planted between the clusters in the
deeper parts of the pond, not as part of the experiment, but simply
to introduce the species to the wetland.
The depth of each cluster was measured
on March 11, 200l. The depths measured from north to south along
each row were:
Center: 21.0 cm
Row 1 (deep): 15.0, 14.5, 16.0, 14.7
Row 2 (medium): 8.7, 4.3, 8.3, 8.8
Row 3 (shallow): Saturated at surface throughout.
Due to the uneven surface of sediments
in the wetland, the depths across each row vary slightly. This will
be important in next year's assessments. These measurements will
change over the seasons as the water level fluctuates.
Management Prescriptions
As was previously mentioned, the purpose
of this experiment is not to establish a working wetland ecosystem,
but to test the effect of water availability on specific species.
Next year's assessment should measure survival and increment growth
of the three species planted on our site. To assist with the interpretation
of the survival data, we recommend using a Chi square Test of homogeneity
to test the null hypothesis.
HO: There is no difference in survival
between species planted at different water depths.
HA: Survival is different between species planted at different
water depths.
Increment growth should be tested
for each depth by using a Kolmogorov-Smirnoff Test.
HO: increment growth is uniform across
water depths
HA: increment growth is not uniform across water depths
Comparisons of increment growth between
species should be compared using
a univariate anova with depth as a treatment.
HO: there is no difference in increment
growth between species grown at different water depths.
HA: increment growth between species is not equal across all water
depths.
If clear results can be determined,
next year's group should either run tests on other species or begin
to create a wetland habitat that mimics those found in nature. In
order to have enough replicates in our treatments, our group has
planted the cuttings very closely together. If many plants in each
cluster start to grow, they will need to be thinned. If the results
of this experiment are not clear, further tests on these species
should be attempted. Perhaps the effect of distance between plants
should be examined. It would also be beneficial to look at the water
levels over the summer, but as this class will not be in session
at that time, it is not guaranteed to happen.
|