[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]





             Purple Loosestrife -Co- ntrol.'survey                               and Public
              Education Project to Protect the Kakagon/Bad
                                   River Watershed., 1996






                                                   Prepared by
                                           The Natute Conservajqcy
                                                Rebecca Sapper
                                                September 1996












            SB
            615
            T86
            S27
            1996



            Financial assistance was pr.ovided by the Wisconsin 'Coastal Management Program,   @tate of'
            Wiscon@@ Department of Adrn iinistration, Division of Energy and Intergovernmental Relations, and
            the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, administe.red be the Offi6e of Ocearf and
            Coasta-I Resources Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.









                   PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE CONTROL, SURVEY, AND PUBLIC EDUCATION
                   PROJECT TO PROTECT THE KAKAGON/BAD RIVER WATERSHED, 1996



             INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM
                     Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) is an exotic perennial plant that was introduced to
             the United States from Europe in the 1800's and has spread throughout the eastern seaboard and
             the upper Midwest. Purple loosestrife adapted well to the climate and environment in the United
             States and reached Wisconsin by the 1940's (Stuckey 1980). It spreads rapidly along waterways,
             canals, and road and utility right-of-ways. An aggressive plant that out-competes native
             vegetation, it and can eventually dominate a wetland. As purple loosestrife invades a wetland it
             may reduce valuable wildlife food plants, degrade the quality of waterfowl nesting habitat
             (McKeon 1959), and create a loss of mud flats for foraging shore birds (Smith 1959). Lythrum
             salicaria and Lythrum virgalum were designated as nuisance weeds in 1987 when Wisconsin
             recognized the effects of purple loosestrife as detrimental to native wetland communitieï¿½.

                     Purple loosestrife poses a serious threat to Wisconsin's wetlands including the 6,400
             hectare (16,000 acre) Kakagon/Bad River Sloughs complex within the Bad River Reservation on
             the south shore of Lake Superior.(Fig. 1) The Kakagon/Bad River Sloughs are the largest,
             healthiest, fully functioning estuarine system remaining in the upper Great Lakes Basin (Meeker
             1992) and is recognized as a National Natural Areas Landmark. The Sloughs contain ten natural
             communities in a complex mosaic that supports crucial spawning grounds for Lake Superior
             fisheries, an abundance of wild rice beds, and provides critical nesting habitat for migratory
             waterfowl (Meeker 1992). In the Sloughs, purple loosestrife could transform diverse and healthy
             wetland communities into a monoculture devoid of many species.

                     In order to determine the current status and health of the Kakagon/Bad River Sloughs and
             to develop a long-term watershed protection plan, the Wisconsin Chapter of The Nature
             Conservancy and the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa have initiated a watershed
             conservation project. The main purposes of this project include: supporting additional research
             and inventory activities to better understand the Sloughs and the influence of the 3,692 square
             kilometer (1,420 square mile) watershed; assisting the Band in their efforts to protect the Sloughs;
             building relationships with other partners in the watershed; and designing and implementing
             strategies with partners to reduce threats for the long-term protection of this unique system.

                     The Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC) has recently completed
             and published a survey of purple loosestrife in the Sloughs and watershed. The survey found an
             estimated 3.7 million plants in nine locations or corridors within the watershed, covering 146.5
             hectares (366.25 acres) (Gilbert et al 1994). The survey found areas of heavy infestation inside
             the watershed that were upstream of the Sloughs. Purple loosestrife seeds float and travel rapidly
             along waterways. Areas that are infested upstream jeopardize the Sloughs and other downstream
             wetlands. It was determined that purple loosestrife represented a serious threat and additional
             attention was needed.



                                                                                                 lingo @mm mmmmm


                                                                                                            BI 11
                                                                                                                                   .... .......

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ......... . .


                                                                                                                                                                                    ............      I..m  I   m
                                                                                                                                          ..........                                                             .......
                                                                                                                                  :-APOSTLEISLANDS

                                                                                                                                                                                                               ..........
                                                                                                                                   :NAT!@N@L LAKESHORE                                                        ........

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              .. .........
                                                                                                                                            --jMCCONSERVATION
                                                                                                                                                . , .:: EASEMENT.'.
                                                                                                                                                 ... ....    . .......
                                                                                                                                                               ................
                                                                                                                                            ... THE NATURE'-
                                                                                                                                                                                                             ..... . .....
                                                                                                                                                            Kcr                                          . .....
                                                                                                                                                  ...........                               ........... .
                                                                                                                                                                ..................

                                                                                                                                                      ............  ....              ......





         r-L



         CD
















                                             e.







                                                 IL










              PROJECT PREVIEW
                      This project consisted of three components: control, survey, and public/landowner
              education. The Nature Conservancy hired a project coordinator who surveyed areas of purple
              loosestrife that were to be treated, contacted landowners and public groups, purchased supplies,
              coordinated activities with other organizations, supervised the purple loosestrife control crew, and
              writing quarterly and final reports. A four person control crew was hired during the anticipated
              peak flowering period to chemically treat purple loosestrife. The Conservancy also coordinated
              volunteers and the work that they accomplished. The Band and GLIFWC continued to supervise
              and support their existing crews in surveying and control work.



              FIELD SEASON PREPARATION
                      The Nature Conservancy's control work focused on four areas: Mghbridge, Sioux River,
              Long Island and Oak Point. Highbridge was designated as a priority area by GLIFWC because it
              contained the highest concentration of purple loosestrife in the areas they surveyed in 1994'.
              Highbridge has a rich seed bank and is a seed source for the lEghway 13, Silver Creek, and
              Marengo River purple loosestrife populations. The purple loosestrife in 11ighbridge can reach the
              Bad River Sloughs by traveling down Silver Creek (which flows through lEghbridge) into the
              Marengo River and into the Bad River. With a highly populated area that has a direct seed
              dispersal path to the Bad River Sloughs, the 11ighbridge population was a key area for the
              Conservancy's control work. Areas that were covered in ffighbridge are shown in Figure 2.

                      The Sioux River also has a high population of purple loosestrife. It flows directly into
              Chequamegon Bay and poses a threat to the Kakagon Sloughs due to the seeds floating on the
              water and the boat traffic that may increase dispersal. The Department of Natural Resources
              (DNR) had been treating this area for the past few years, but due to budget cuts and constraints
              they were not- able to treat this summer. The DNR donated the use of their backpack sprayers
              and chemicals to the Conservancy's crew.

                      Oak Point and Long Island both harbor high concentrations of purple loosestrife. Due to
              their close proximity to the Kakagon and Bad River Sloughs and the high amount of boat traffic in
              this area, there exists the potential to spread and establish vast seed banks if it is not suppressed.
              Steve Richter, Land Steward for The Nature Conservancy, has held volunteer work parties to
              control purple loosestrife on Oak Point and Long Island for the past four summers. He returned
              again this summer to educate and train volunteers about the detrimental effects purple loosestrife
              and assisted the National Park Service on their control efforts in these areas.


                      The Bad River Band and GLIFWC treated areas within the reservation and watershed.
              The Band focused much of their efforts within the Kakagon and Bad River Sloughs, in areas that
              have known populations of purple loosestrife. Areas within and outside of the watershed which
              had known infestations of purple loosestrife were treated by GLIFWC.




                                                                 3




















                                                                                                             . . .. . .....



                     Marengo
                  islx@                                                                                         IN

                                                   County C






                                                           Poor Farmm Ro



                                                   QY 13

                                                                         Highbridge


                                                                                      U                                 0
                                                                                                                       9
                                                                                                                        N


                                                                                      0
                                                                                      U

                              Areas of purple loosestrife control                                                 @O


                             Railroad and utility fight-of-ways






                       Figure 2. Purple loosestrife control in and near I-fighbridge, Wisconsin
                                                                                        v




                                                                  4







                     GLIFWC'assisted The Nature Conservancy in the initial planning and strategies regarding
             treatment and education. In preparation for the field season of treating purple loosestrife, the
             Conservancy gathered needed equipment including: backpack sprayers, herbicides, surfactant,
             clippers, water containers, chest waders, hipboots, coveralls, safety glasses, respirators, and safety
             equipment.

                     The Conservancy also spent the start of the summer making contacts with officials and
             landowners in order to get permission to treat on private land and to educate the public about the
             concerns surrounding purple loosestrife. Landowners who had known patches of purple
             loosestrife on their property were approached and educated. Most landowners were receptive to
             purple loosestrife control efforts on their land. Permission to treat on the railroad and utility
             right-of-ways were granted and permits were obtained from the Department of Transportation to
             treat along the state highways. County and town road crews allowed the treatment of purple
             loosestrife along the roadside before they mowed. In order to increase public awareness and to
             discuss proposed treatment in 11ighbridge, representatives from The Nature Conservancy spoke at
             a meeting for the Town of Ashland. Educational brochures were distributed in the FEghbridge
             Post Office. The Nature Conservancy talked with classes from Penokee 11ills Home School and
             the Washburn School District.



             FIELD SEASON EFFORTS AND RESULTS


             The Nature Conservancy
                     The project coordinator and the control crew spent four weeks, or approximately 800
             hours, treating purple loosestrife. Ten volunteers and three staff from The Nature Conservancy in
             Madison contributed three days, or 254 hours, to purple loosestrife control at Long Island and
             Oak Point. Two days were spent by the crew near the Sioux River Sloughs treating on state land
             and state highway fight of ways.

                     The crew spent  18 days in I-1ighbridge treating on 5.28 kilometers (3.3 miles) of railroad
             fight of ways, 4.8 kilometers (3 miles) of utility right of ways, and 17.6 kilometers (I I miles) of
             state, county and town road right-of-ways. The crew treated purple loosestrife on eight private
             land parcels that covered 140 hectares (350 acres). Four additional landowners in adjacent areas
             allowed the crew on their property, but there was very little purple loosestrife found on their 52.8
             hectares (132 acres) when surveyed. I-Eghbridge had a serious infestation of purple loosestrife.
             Dense areas of growth provided a substantial seed bank that allowed for the plants to continually
             spread. Most areas were so thick that it was impossible to spray each plant individually and the
             crew was forced to broadcast spray an entire area. Only a limited amount of other species of
             plants were found in these areas and they were already out shaded by the purple loosestrife.
             Plants ranged in height from less than 3 0 centimeters (12 inches) to over 2.7 meters (9 feet) tall in
             Mghbridge. The ground was generally moist to dry, but it was apparent that at various times of
             the year water flowed through the areas that were treated and allowed for seed travel in ditches
             and ravines.



                                                               5









                    Volunteers used the technique of cutting flower heads and dabbing or spraying herbicide
             directly on the cut stem. The herbicide used with this method was Rodeo. Rodeo is a systemic,
             generalist herbicide that only takes a small amount to be effective, but will kill any plant it
             contacts. Nine and one half liters (2.5 gallons) of Rodeo was applied using a 20% ratio of Rodeo
             to water. The crew went through 47.5 liters (12.5 gallons) of Garlon 3A and sprayed 380
             backpack sprayers, using a 1% ratio of Garlon 3A to water. All ratios are based on a total
             solution of herbicide including active and non-active ingredients. Garlon 3A is a dicot-specific
             herbicide, and will only kill broad leaf plants. Garlon 3A allowed grasses, forbs, and other
             monocots to continue to colonize the treated area.


                    The crew used backpack sprayers almost exclusively and used Garlon 3A on both young
             plants, under 30 centimeters (12 inches) tall, and very mature stands of plants, over @3 meters (9
             feet) tall. When returning to the areas after treatment, both young plants and mature plants were
             found dead. Treatment of purple loosestrife began at the early stages flowering. Concern was
             expressed that spraying at this time may not be compatible with the energy flow in the plant and
             may not transport the chemical to the roots, causing the plant to die. However, upon returning
             to the areas, plants that were sprayed before and after flowering were found dead.

                    Education was an integral part of our effort, and many people were reached due to
             Wisconsin Coastal Management Program's funding. The Nature Conservancy mailed over 914
             educational brochures concerning purple loosestrife to residents of northern Wisconsin. Personal
             contacts were made with ten landowners in Highbridge. In addition, nine individuals stopped and
             talked to the crew while they were treating in Highbridge. Twelve individuals attended the
             meeting for the Town of Ashland and discussed the concerns surrounding purple loosestrife.
             Over 115 school children from the Washburn School District and Penokee Hills Home School
             were presented with information concerning purple loosestrife and how it interferes with the
             natural processes where it occurs. All received a brochure and were informed of the threats
             purple loosestrife poses to the area in which they live. Road crews for the county and state were
             made aware of the Conservancy's efforts and supported them by agreeing not to mow the
             shoulders of the highways until the purple loosestrife in that area had been treated.

                    An observation was made in the response of purple loosestrife in cow pastures. Two cow
             pastures in the Highbridge area contained populations of purple loosestrife. The purple
             loosestrife mainly grew in small ravines that provided the only source of water for the cattle. In
             the first field the purple loosestrife was basically trampled by the cattle, with a small amount being
             grazed. This field had very few shade trees and the cattle may have found these wet areas with
             purple loosestrife cooler. Very little of this purple loosestrife was left standing and allowed to
             bloom. In another field, the cattle grazed heavily on the purple loosestrife, but did not trample it
             down. This field had many shade trees and areas with drinking water that did not contain any
             purple loosestrife. The areas that did contain purple loosestrife were grazed as far in as the cattle
             could reach, due to fencing and muddy conditions. The cattle grazed the plants to 60 centimeters
             (2 feet) off the ground, this allowed the plants to not only recover, but to branch out and create
             additional stems. If the additional stems produce seed heads, the cattle could potentially create a


                                                             6








              hardier plant that could produce more seeds than if it was not grazed. If the additional stems do
              not produce seed heads then the grazing could help control the spreading of seeds for that year by
              not allowing seed production to occur. More data needs to be collected to assess the potential
              positive and negative effects of grazing on purple loosestrife.



              Bad River Band
                     The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa have been intensively treating purple
              loosestrife. The Band had a three person crew start when the purple loosestrife began blooming.
              An additional three person crew started a month later to reach areas that had not been treated.
              The Band spent 600 hours in purple loosestrife control work. At the time of this report, three
              weeks of control work was still scheduled and their accumulative data could not be totaled.


              Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission
                     The Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission's' three person control crew worked
              for 30 days. They used backpack sprayers to apply 34.2 liters (nine gallons) of Garlon 3A
              concentrate and 3.8 liters (one gallon) of Rodeo. They covered many areas in the watershed and
              around Chequamegon Bay including Fish Creek Sloughs, Wbittlesey Creek, the mouth of
              Whittlesey Creek, I-Eghbridge, Highway 13 South, and Kakagon Sloughs. In addition, GLIFWC
              hired a crew to study the effectiveness of their control methods by establishing 100 square meter
              (120 square yard) test plots. Their results are in the process of being compiled. Jon Gilbert,
              GLIFWC Wildlife Section Leader, is currently assembling a report containing numerous
              recommendations for the improvement of purple loosestrife control.



              DISCUSSION


              Benefits
                     This project has helped to reduce a significant threat to the Kakagon/Bad River Sloughs.
              Strong efforts were made to reduce the population of purple loosestrife. The Nature
              Conservancy's efforts were focused in the I-Eghbridge area, a potential seed bank to the Sloughs.
              The Band spent the majority of their time in the reservations making direct progress on purple
              loosestrife plants that are already in the Sloughs. GLIFWC controlled purple loosestrife in the
              both the reservation and the watershed eliminating plants in known problem areas. Considering
              the prolific seed production and dispersal capabilities of purple loosestrife, it may dominate a large
              wetland a few years after it reaches 20% of the plant biomass. By trying to eliminate or reduce
              the population nowArill keep it from expanding to the point where it may cause substantially more
              ecological harm and be difficult or impossible to remove. This is the ecological equivalent of the
              saying that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." The control work that was
              accomplished because of this project will significantly contribute to that ounce of prevention.

                     In addition, this project has benefitted the public/landowner awareness of purple
              loosestrife. This awareness is essential in the battle against an exotic species, especially against


                                                                7








              one that has a visually appealing flower. Many people became aware of the negative impacts of
              purple loosestrife and now know ways that they can help prevent the plant from spreading to
              other areas. Fortunately, most land owners that we contacted were already informed about purple
              loosestrife, but they were not aware of what they could do on their own land to control it. This
              project helped to motivate and empower the public to provide actions of their own that will help
              to contain purple loosestrife populations.

                      The favorable impacts that this project has provided includes: protection of the diverse
              and healthy natural communities, and rare species, in the Sloughs; protection of many important
              economic, social, and cultural uses including wild rice harvest, duck hunting, furbearer trapping,
              and wildlife viewing. This project also demonstrated how the cooperation among many partners
              and people at a watershed level can reduce a common environmental threat.



              Recommendations
                      The implementation of this project was very successful and free of major problems. Some
              recommendations for improvement include; a more flexible working time frame for the control
              crew, thoroughly treating all plants in an area and revisiting treated sites, and using different
              applicators for different situations.

                      Since there are native plants of similar appearance, the best time to identify and treat
              purple loosestrife is while it is flowering, but before seed production occurs. The previous long
              winter and cool, dry spring, along with other factors caused the purple loosestrife to bloom late
              this past summer.. The blooming period normally begins mid to late July and lasts until early
              September. This year the plant did not start heavy blooming until early August, The Band did
              not begin treating until the second week of August and continued treating until the end of
              September. The Nature Conservancy's crew started late July and ended late August. It may have
              been easier to schedule around unanticipated events such as the late flowering and weather if at
              least a six week time frame was used instead of four week time frame for the crew to accomplish
              the same amount of work.


                      When doing control work it seemed to work best to return to an area to make sure all
              plants had been sprayed and were dying. Visual effects from the herbicide were apparent within
              three days after being sprayed. To insure thorough treatment, The Nature Conservancy crew
              returned to the most intensively populated areas to cover any plants that were still living. This
              technique seemed to work well.

                      Adding blue dye to the mixed herbicide solution was also very helpful in accurately
              treating purple loosestrife. The dye was not permanent and does not stain the equipment or
              clothing. It remains visually apparent on the plants for 15-20 minutes. This is long enough to
              treat an immediate area and to make sure all plants are sprayed.

                      The Nature Conservancy also found a need for different applicators for different


                                                                  8









             situations. Backpack sprayers worked the best for the majority of the time, but other methods of
             application could be used for dfferent situations. When treating along the shoulder of a road that
             was not heavily infested, hand held spray bottles worked better than backpack sprayers. Hand
             held sprayers were quicker and created less hassle when getting in and out of the vehicle to treat
             individual plants. This method also works well when canoeing into remote areas to treat small
             populations of plants. It is also easier to work with hand held spray bottles when cutting flower
             heads and spraying the Rodeo on cut stems.

                    It would be impossible to successfully eliminate every individual purple loosestrife plant
             from a given area with only one treatment effort. Areas treated this year'M11 need to be treated
             for the next few years to remove plants established from the seed bed or plants missed from
             previous treatments.





































                                                             9











            LITERATURE CITED


            Gilbert, J., B. Carlson, and R. LaRue. 1994. Purple loosestrife survey of the Bad River
                    Watershed, 1994. Administrative Report 95-01. Odanah, Wisconsin.

            McKeon, W.H. 1959. A preliminary report on the use of chemical herbicides to control purple
                    loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) on a small marsh. Proc. Northeast. Weed Control Conf.
                    13:329-332.


            Meeker, J. 1992. Wild Rice of the Kakagon Sloughs. PhD Disertation. University of
                    Wisconsin, Madison.

            Smith,L.S. 1959. Some experiences with control of purple loosestrife at the Montezuma
                    National Wildlife Refuge. Proc. Northeast. Weed Control Conf. 13:333-336.

            Stuckey, R.L. 1980 Distributional history of Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) in North
                    America. Bartonia 47:3-20.





































                                                          10




 A




                                                                                                  I
                                                                               I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  1.
                                                                                                .1
                                                                                                t
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I

                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                  I
                                                                                                .1
                                                                                                  I
                                                                      f                           I
                                                                       INNIIIIIIIIIIIIII
                                                                        3 6668 14100 6942


                                                                                                  1