Advertisement

Biological Invasions

, Volume 18, Issue 8, pp 2247–2266 | Cite as

A review of 15 years of Spartina management in the San Francisco Estuary

  • Drew W. KerrEmail author
  • Ingrid B. Hogle
  • Brian S. Ort
  • Whitney J. Thornton
INVASIVE SPARTINA

Abstract

Regional, ecosystem-level conservation projects with significant vegetation management components require planning, coordination, and responsive management strategies to minimize negative impacts and maximize ecological benefits over time. The California State Coastal Conservancy’s Invasive Spartina Project (ISP) offers an example of a complex, ecosystem-scale weed eradication effort guided by regional conservation goals. We review the management framework developed by the ISP, describe decision thresholds used for site-specific management transitions over the project’s 15 years, and present strategies being used to address major challenges to project completion. These strategies include developing genetics and weed mapping approaches to aid with identification of hybrids between the introduced Spartina alterniflora and the native Spartina foliosa. The ISP also developed a tidal marsh restoration project to enhance habitat for an endangered bird, the California Ridgway’s rail (Rallus obsoletus obsoletus), that uses tall, dense forms of hybrid Spartina as high tide refugia and nesting substrate. By 2014, the ISP had installed over 300,000 native plants and recorded a greater than 96 % estuary-wide reduction in hybrid Spartina (from 323 ha to 12 net ha) despite treatment restrictions imposed at 11 sites since 2011 to protect the rail. Approximately 80 % of the remaining hybrid Spartina occurs in areas currently restricted from treatment, delaying project completion. The successes and setbacks of the ISP illustrate the complexities of achieving ecosystem-level conservation goals dependent on large-scale vegetation management.

Keywords

Hybridization Spartina San Francisco Estuary Management Invasive plants Restoration Mapping 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the outstanding commitment of the California State Coastal Conservancy to manage and fund this unprecedented, ongoing effort to eradicate invasive Spartina before it spreads outside the San Francisco Estuary. The Conservancy’s San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project has received funding from the following sources: California State Coastal Conservancy, State Wildlife Conservation Board, CALFED Bay Delta Program, USFWS, American Reinvestment and Recovery Act through National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, David and Lucile Packard Foundation, S. D. Bechtel Jr. Foundation, North American Wetlands Conservation Act, and National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program. We are grateful to our co-workers, partners, grantees and contractors, past and present, for their invaluable contributions to the ISP’s regional coordination, mapping, treatment and revegetation efforts. Jen McBroom made important contributions to this paper regarding Ridgway’s rail. Tobias Rohmer, Peggy Olofson, and Thom Sayles provided excellent editorial suggestions. Two anonymous reviewers provided suggestions to substantially improve the structure of the paper. We thank the organizers of the 4th International Conference on Invasive Spartina in Rennes, France (July 2014) and the editor for inviting submittal of manuscripts associated with the conference.

Funding

The San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project is funded by the California State Coastal Conservancy. Authors WJT and BSO are employees of Olofson Environmental, Inc., and authors DWK and IBH are independent contractors to Olofson Environmental, Inc., a private company that receives funding from the Conservancy. All four authors work on the ISP.

References

  1. Ainouche ML, Fortune PM, Salmon A, Parisod C, Grandbastien MA, Fukunaga K, Ricou M, Misset MT (2009) Hybridization, polyploidy and invasion: lessons from Spartina (Poaceae). Biol Invasions 11:1159–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allendorf FW, Leary RF, Spruell P, Wenburg JK (2001) The problems with hybrids: setting conservation guidelines. Trends Ecol Evol 16:613–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ayres DR, Strong DR (2010) Hybrid cordgrass (Spartina) and tidal marsh restoration in San Francisco Bay: If you build it, they will come. In: Ayres D, Kerr D, Ericson S, Olofson P (eds) Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Invasive Spartina, 2004 Nov 8–10, San Francisco, CA, USA. San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project of the California State Coastal Conservancy, OaklandGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayres DR, Strong DR, Baye P (2003) Spartina foliosa—a common species on the road to rarity? Madroño 50:209–213Google Scholar
  5. Ayres DR, Smith DL, Zaremba K, Klohr S, Strong DR (2004a) Spread of exotic cordgrasses and hybrids (Spartina sp.) in the tidal marshes of San Francisco Bay, California, USA. Biol Invasions 6:221–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ayres DR, Zaremba K, Strong DR (2004b) Extinction of a common native species by hybridization with an invasive congener. Weed Technol 18:1288–1291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnett DT, Stohlgren TJ, Jarnevich CS, Chong GW, Ericson JA, Davern TR, Simonson SE (2007) The art and science of weed mapping. Environ Monit Assess 132:235–252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Barroso J, Fernandez-Quintanilla C, Maxwell B, Rew L (2004) Simulating the effects of weed spatial pattern and resolution of mapping and spraying on economics of site-specific management. Weed Res 44:460–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baye P, Faber P, Grewell B (1999) Tidal marsh plants of the San Francisco Estuary. In: Olofson P (ed) Baylands ecosystem species and community profiles. The San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project. USEPA, San Francisco & SF Bay RWQCB, Oakland, pp 9–32Google Scholar
  10. Boyer KE, Thornton WJ (2012) Natural and restored tidal marsh communities. In: Palaima A (ed) Ecology, conservation, and restoration of tidal marshes: the San Francisco Estuary. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 233–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Callaway JC, Josselyn MN (1992) The introduction and spread of smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) in South San Francisco Bay. Estuaries 15:218–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Casazza ML, Overton CT, Bui T-VD, Hull JM, Albertson JD, Bloom VK, Bobzien S, McBroom J, Latta M, Olofson P, Rohmer TM, Schwarzbach S, Strong DR, Grijalva E, Wood JK, Skalos SM, Takekawa J (2016) Endangered species management and ecosystem restoration: finding the common ground. Ecology and Society 21:19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christensen S, Søgaard HT, Kudsk P, Nørremark M, Lund I, Nadimi ES, Jørgensen R (2009) Site-specific weed control technologies. Weed Res 49:233–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cohen AN, Carlton JT (1998) Accelerating invasion rate in a highly invaded estuary. Science 279:555–558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Daehler CC, Strong DR (1997) Hybridization between introduced smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora; Poaceae) and native California cordgrass (S. foliosa) in San Francisco Bay, California, USA. Am J Bot 84:607–611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dethier MN, Hacker SD (2005) Physical factors vs. biotic resistance in controlling the invasion of an estuarine marsh grass. Ecol Appl 15:1273–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DiTomaso JM (1997) Risk analysis of various weed control methods. In: Proceedings of the California Exotic Pest Plant Council Symposium, vol 3, pp 34–39Google Scholar
  18. DiTomaso JM, Kyser GB, Oneto SR, Wilson RG, Orloff SB, Anderson LW, Wright SD, Roncoroni JA, Miller TL, Prather TS, Ransom C, Beck KG, Duncan C, Wilson KA, Mann JJ (2013) Weed Control in Natural Areas in the Western United States. University of California Weed Research and Information CenterGoogle Scholar
  19. Elrod M, Wood J, Elliott N, Nur N (2013) Habitat Assessment Monitoring: Summarizing Tidal Marsh Vegetation Changes from 2005 to 2011. Point Blue Conservation Science, p 49Google Scholar
  20. Epanchin-Niell RS, Hastings A (2010) Controlling established invaders: integrating economics and spread dynamics to determine optimal management. Ecol Lett 13:528–541CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Feinstein LC (2012) Ecology and genetics of a hybrid invasive plant, Spartina alterniflora × foliosa, in San Francisco Bay salt marshes. PhD dissertation. University of California, Davis, Davis, CAGoogle Scholar
  22. Firn J, House AP, Buckley YM (2010) Alternative states models provide an effective framework for invasive species control and restoration of native communities. J Appl Ecol 47:96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gaskin JF, Schaal BA (2002) Hybrid Tamarix widespread in US invasion and undetected in native Asian range. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:11256–11259CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Gerhards R (2013) Site-specific weed control. In: Heege HJ (ed) Precision in crop farming. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 273–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goals Project (1999) Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals. A report of habitat recommendations prepared by the San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project. In: Olofson P (ed). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA/San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Board, Oakland, CAGoogle Scholar
  26. Goals Project (2015) The Baylands and Climate Change: What We Can Do. Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals Science Update 2015 prepared by the San Francisco Bay Area Wetlands Ecosystem Goals Project. In: Olofson P (ed). California State Coastal Conservancy, Oakland, CAGoogle Scholar
  27. Goodwin KM, Engel RE, Weaver DK (2010) Trained dogs outperform human surveyors in the detection of rare spotted knapweed (Centaurea stoebe). Invasive Plant Sci Manag 3:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hammond J (2016) San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project California Revegetation Program draft Year 4 (2014–2015) Installation Report and Year 5 (2015–2016) Revegetation Plan. Prepared for the California State Coastal Conservancy San Francisco Invasive Spartina Project, 1330 Broadway, 13th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612Google Scholar
  29. Hammond MER, Cooper A (2002) Spartina anglica eradication and inter-tidal recovery in Northern Ireland estuaries. In: Veitch C, Clout M (eds) Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species. Proceedings of the International Conference of Eradication of Island Invasives. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, pp 124–131Google Scholar
  30. Hobbs RJ, Humphries SE (1995) An integrated approach to the ecology and management of plant invasions. Conserv Biol 9:761–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holzer KA, Lawler SP (2015) Introduced reed canary grass attracts and supports a common native amphibian. J Wildl Manag 79:1081–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jones A, Perlmutter M (2012) Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS)—2009–2012 version. http://www.sfbayjv.org/sfbjv_wetland_news_documents/Ramsarcurrentinfosheet8-28-11v1-1.pdf
  33. Kerr DW (2011) Invasive Spartina Project Water Quality Monitoring Report for 2007–2010. Prepared for the State Coastal Conservancy San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project, 1330 Broadway, 13th Floor Oakland, CA 94612, p 51Google Scholar
  34. Kettenring KM, Adams CR (2011) Lessons learned from invasive plant control experiments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Appl Ecol 48:970–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Larkin DJ, Freyman MJ, Lishawa SC, Geddes P, Tuchman NC (2012) Mechanisms of dominance by the invasive hybrid cattail Typha × glauca. Biol Invasions 14:65–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Leson and Associates (2005) Use of Imazapyr Herbicide to Control Invasive Cordgrass (Spartina spp.) in the San Francisco Estuary: Water Quality, Biological Resources, and Human Health and Safety, prepared for the San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina ProjectGoogle Scholar
  37. Levin LA, Neira C, Grosholz ED (2006) Invasive cordgrass modifies wetland trophic function. Ecology 87:419–432CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Liu L, Wood J, Nur N, Salas L, Jongsomjit D (2012) California Clapper Rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus) Population monitoring: 2005–2011 Final Technical Report. PRBO Conservation Science, p 81Google Scholar
  39. López-Granados F (2011) Weed detection for site-specific weed management: mapping and real-time approaches. Weed Res 51:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Natural Heritage Trust and Tasmania Department of Primary Industries Water and Environment (2002) Strategy for the Management of Rice Grass (Spartina anglica) in Tasmania, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  41. Neira C, Grosholz ED, Levin LA, Blake R (2006) Mechanisms generating modification of benthos following tidal flat invasion by a Spartina hybrid. Ecol Appl 16:1391–1404CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Nichols FH, Cloern JE, Luoma SN, Peterson DH (1986) The modification of an estuary. Science 231:567CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Overton CT, Takekawa JY, Casazza ML, Bui T, Holyoak M, Strong DR (2015) Sea-level rise and refuge habitats for tidal marsh species: Can artificial islands save the California Ridgway’s rail? Ecol Eng 74:337–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Panetta FD (2009) Weed eradication: an economic perspective. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 2:360–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Patten K (2003) Persistence and non-target impact of imazapyr associated with smooth cordgrass control in an estuary. J Aquat Plant Manag 41:1–6Google Scholar
  46. Patten K, Milne D (2009). Recommendations to expedite Spartina eradication in Willapa Bay. Personal communication to the ISPGoogle Scholar
  47. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Qiu J (2013) China’s cordgrass plan is ‘overkill’. Nature News 499:392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Randall JM (1996) Weed control for the preservation of biological diversity. Weed Technol 10:370–383Google Scholar
  50. Regan TJ, McCarthy MA, Baxter PWJ, Dane Panetta F, Possingham HP (2006) Optimal eradication: when to stop looking for an invasive plant. Ecol Lett 9:759–766CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Reinhart KO, Callaway RM (2006) Soil biota and invasive plants. New Phytol 170:445–457CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Rejmánek M, Pitcairn M (2002) When is eradication of exotic pest plants a realistic goal? In: Veitch C, Clout M (eds) Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species. Proceedings of the International Conference of Eradication of Island Invasives, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, pp 249–253Google Scholar
  53. Rew L, Cousens R (2001) Spatial distribution of weeds in arable crops: are current sampling and analytical methods appropriate? Weed Res 41:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rew LJ, Pokorny ML (2006) Inventory and survey methods for nonindigenous plant species. Montana State University Extension, BozemanGoogle Scholar
  55. Rew LJ, Maxwell BD, Dougher FL, Aspinall R (2006) Searching for a needle in a haystack: evaluating survey methods for non-indigenous plant species. Biol Invasions 8:523–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rhymer JM, Simberloff D (1996) Extinction by hybridization and introgression. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 27:83–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rinella MJ, Maxwell BD, Fay PK, Weaver T, Sheley RL (2009) Control effort exacerbates invasive-species problem. Ecol Appl 19:155–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Rohmer T, Kerr D, Hogle I (2016) San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project 2014 ISP Monitoring and Treatment Report. Prepared for the California State Coastal Conservancy San Francisco Invasive Spartina Project, 1330 Broadway, 13th Floor, Oakland, CA, 94612Google Scholar
  59. Saltonstall K (2002) Cryptic invasion by a non-native genotype of the common reed, Phragmites australis, into North America. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:2445–2449CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Schlaepfer MA, Sax DF, Olden JD (2011) The potential conservation value of non-native species. Conserv Biol 25:428–437CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Shaw DR (2005) Remote sensing and site-specific weed management. Front Ecol Environ 3:526–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Simberloff D (2003) Eradication: preventing invasions at the outset. Weed Sci 51:247–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sloop CM, Ayres DR, Strong DR (2009) The rapid evolution of self-fertility in Spartina hybrids (Spartina alterniflora × foliosa) invading San Francisco Bay, CA. Biol Invasions 11:1131–1144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sloop CM, Ayres DR, Strong DR (2011) Spatial and temporal genetic structure in a hybrid cordgrass invasion. Heredity 106:547–556CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Sogge MK, Sferra SJ, Paxton EH (2008) Tamarix as habitat for birds: implications for riparian restoration in the southwestern United States. Restor Ecol 16:146–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. State Coastal Conservancy (2003) Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report, San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project: Spartina Control Program. Oakland, CAGoogle Scholar
  67. Stralberg D, Toniolo V, Page G, Stenzel L (2004) Potential impacts of Spartina spread on shorebird populations in South San Francisco Bay. In: Ayres D, Kerr D, Ericson S, Olofson P (eds) Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Invasive Spartina, 2004 Nov 8–10, San Francisco, CA, USA. San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project of the California State Coastal Conservancy, OaklandGoogle Scholar
  68. Strong D, Ayres D (2009) Spartina introductions and consequences in salt marshes. In: Silliman BR, Grosholz E, Bertness MD (eds) Human impacts on salt marshes: a global perspective. University of California Press Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  69. Thornton W (2016) How do transplant source, restoration site constraints, and herbivory influence native cordgrass restoration. Master’s Thesis, San Francisco State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  70. Thornton W, Gunner S, Ort B (2013) Is restoration of salt marshes enhanced by proximity to established native Spartina?. State of the Estuary, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  71. Van Wychen LR, Luschei EC, Bussan AJ, Maxwell BD (2002) Accuracy and cost effectiveness of GPS-assisted wild oat mapping in spring cereal crops. Weed Sci 50:120–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Vitousek PM (1990) Biological invasions and ecosystem processes: towards an integration of population biology and ecosystem studies. Oikos 57:7–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Williams P, Faber P (2001) Salt marsh restoration experience in San Francisco Bay. J Coastal Res 27:203–211Google Scholar
  74. Williams PB, Orr MK (2002) Physical evolution of restored breached levee salt marshes in the San Francisco Bay estuary. Restor Ecol 10:527–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wittenberg R, Cock MJ (2001) Invasive alien species: a toolkit of best prevention and management practices. CABI, WallingfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Xiao D, Zhang L, Zhu Z (2009) A study on seed characteristics and seed bank of Spartina alterniflora at saltmarshes in the Yangtze Estuary, China. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 83:105–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Xie Y, Sha Z, Yu M (2008) Remote sensing imagery in vegetation mapping: a review. J Plant Ecol 1:9–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zavaleta ES, Hobbs RJ, Mooney HA (2001) Viewing invasive species removal in a whole-ecosystem context. Trends Ecol Evol 16:454–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Drew W. Kerr
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ingrid B. Hogle
    • 1
  • Brian S. Ort
    • 1
    • 2
  • Whitney J. Thornton
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina ProjectOaklandUSA
  2. 2.Olofson Environmental, Inc.OaklandUSA

Personalised recommendations