Sharing Success: The Northeast Michigan CWMA

Jennifer Muladore | Huron Pines Ecologist September 11, 2013

About Huron Pines

Conserving the forests, lakes, and streams of Northeast Michigan �  Nonprofit, 501(c)(3) �  40 years in business �  12 full-time staff plus

AmeriCorps program and seasonal crew

�  Projects include: �  River restoration �  Land stewardship �  Watershed

planning �  Kirtland’s Warbler

Initiative

Overview

� Background and CWMA basics � How do you solve a problem like phragmites? � Scales and priorities � Landowner motivation � Other lessons and discussion

What are Invasive Species?

�  Live outside their historical distribution

�  Potential to negatively affect native plants of the natural ecosystem, the local economy, or human health

�  Don’t have to be from other countries—even native plants can get so aggressive that they are labeled invasive!

Background

What is a CWMA?

�  Cooperative Weed Management Area

�  Partnership that works together to fight invasive plants in a defined area

�  Governed by an agreement that lays out partner roles and responsibilites

�  Funding not always required, but the CWMA is helpful for applying for it

Background

Key Points about the Northeast Michigan CWMA

�  Many of our resources are still high quality

�  Early Detection-Rapid Response: find invaders fast and treat them before they become a big, expensive problem

�  Priority species: phragmites, garlic mustard, Japanese knotweed, purple loosestrife, European frogbit

Background

How are we different from other efforts?

� Early Detection-Rapid Response

� Landowner focused with regional goals

� Prioritized hotspots � Combination of

outreach and treatment

� SWAT Team!

Background

The Campaign to End Phragmites

� Phrag is still an EDRR species in most of Northern Michigan

� There are many special natural places worth protecting

� Phrag is becoming more visible to the public in other places

� Funding is available for phragmites treatment

Phragmites

The Campaign to End Phragmites: Components

�  Inventory (annual) � Agency partnerships � Cost-share to private

landowners � Our staff does the

treatment except at large properties

Phragmites

But… With 467 miles of shoreline and hundreds of inland lakes and streams, how do we choose where to go first?

The 3-tiered approach: Sites �  Highest priority: Keep invasive species out of high value sites and treat

outlier infestations whenever possible but especially near high value sites �  Lands with endangered, threatened and special concern species or species of

greatest conservation need and/or high quality natural communities. �  Lands that are currently managed as State parks, nature preserves, or in

conservation ownership. �  Private lands bordering state parks, nature preserves or lands in conservation

ownership   �  Medium Priority: Contain or eradicate large source populations

�  Lands which include large blocks of landowners or single landowner with large coastal properties.

�  Lowest Priority: Capitalize on treatment of any site where resources are

immediately available and success is likely �  Individual privately owned properties without rare species, natural communities

and that do not border state parks, preserves or conservation lands will be given the lowest priority.

Prioritization

The 3-tiered approach: Species �  Highest priority: True Early Detection and Rapid Response

Garlic mustard, Japanese knotweed, phragmites, European frogbit, black swallowwort, etc. These species are not widespread in our service area and still have a reasonable probability of being prevented from taking over region-wide.

�  Medium Priority: Watershed-Wide Control

Purple loosestrife, buckthorn, wild parsnip These species are widespread but can be controlled in a larger area or prevented from spreading to important habitats.

  �  Lowest Priority: Site-by-site Removal

Autumn olive, spotted knapweed, mullein, burdock, thistles, queen anne’s lace, ox-eye daisy, St. John’s wort These species are considered noxious weeds and are heavily distributed throughout Northeast Michigan, but they can be removed at important sites where complete habitat restoration is taking place, or where rare species are threatened.

Prioritization

Public vs. Private Lands Ownership

Public Land Owners (2) Private Land Owners (250)

Large parcels Small parcels

Often multiple species, high density in large areas

Usually one or two species, low density or small area

Decisionmaker sometimes hard to locate

Owner sometimes hard to locate

General good understanding of need to remove IS

Often misinformed or uninformed (but many well-informed, enthusiastic!)

Multiple levels of red tape and internal and external paperwork

Low paperwork individually, willing to adapt to change

Willing to pay for work and provide technical assistance

Willing to pay for work and provide technical assistance

Usually not willing to work beyond property lines

Often willing to group together or pay for neighbors if needed

Private landowner characteristics in Northeast MI

� Many 2nd homes � Full-time residents

some of the poorest in the nation

� Many sites are remote, close to public land or abandoned

Motivation

A Typical Invasion

Motivation

Eradication difficult

Eradication simple

Only expensive LOCAL management possible

Eradication feasible

Area

inva

ded"

Time"

Introduction"

Detection"

Thanks to Ellen Jacquart, TNC and the MNFI!

Widespread awareness"

How we motivate landowners � Offer cost-share and

relief from red tape � Push neighbor-to-

neighbor contact and organization

� Continual print and in-person education

Motivation

Success

What have we learned? �  Outreach needs to be

constant, even to multi-year participants

�  Landowners and funding sources need a “bridge” to help them work toward mutual goals

�  Economic and political issues influence even the best-funded project

�  Some people can’t be convinced.

Lessons

What have we learned? � Funding is a puzzle

that we have to piece together to make all aspects of the program work each year

� Future challenge: keeping the program going as internal and funder interests change

Lessons

2013 Puzzle Pieces � Michigan DEQ Coastal Management

Program (NOAA) � National Fish & Wildlife Foundation � Natural Resources Conservation Service � North American Hydro � Private Landowners � U.S. Forest Service (GLRI) � U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Funders

Questions for you � What are the local

values in your area? � What activities will

best remove invasive species and uphold those values?

� What are some barriers to total eradication of invasive species?

� What are you willing to settle for?

Discussion

Questions for me? Jennifer Muladore Huron Pines 4241 Old US 27, Suite 2 Gaylord, MI 49735 (989) 448-2293 ext. 31 jennifer@huronpines.org www.huronpines.org

Discussion