literature review of reclamation practices in the central ... · pdf fileas a result, aspen...

Literature Review of Reclamation Practices in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue Natural Subregions

For additional copies contact:

Environment and Parks Land Policy Branch Range Resource Stewardship Section Great West Life Building, Fourth Floor 9920 - 108 Street Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5K 2M4 780-427-3595

Desserud, P. 2016. Literature review of reclamation practices in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue natural subregions. Land Policy Branch, Alberta Environment and Parks. 26pp.

ISBN: 978-1-4601-2913-5 (Printed Edition) ISBN: 978-1-4601-2910-4 (On-line Edition) Printed April 2017

Title Literature Review of Reclamation Practices in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue Natural Subregions

Number

Program Name Land Policy Branch

Effective Date February 2017

This document was printed on April 2017

Small cover photos:

Top photo: Rough fescue grassland in the Northern Fescue NSR east of Drumheller (Sherritt 2007)

Bottom photo: Wetland in the Central Parkland Rumsey Natural Area with aspen and willow stands and surrounding rough fescue grassland (Desserud 2006)

Large cover photo: Rough fescue grassland in the Central Parkland with aspen stands (Desserud 2006).

i


Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1

Physical Attributes of Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs ................................................. 2

Soils ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 Native Vegetation ................................................................................................................................. 2

Reclamation Practices ............................................................................................................................. 4

Seeding ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Plains rough fescue .................................................................................................................... 4 Western porcupine grass ........................................................................................................... 6 Wheatgrasses ............................................................................................................................ 7 Cultivars and Ecovars™ ............................................................................................................. 7

Other Reclamation Practices ............................................................................................................... 8 Natural Recovery........................................................................................................................ 8 Natural Recovery in Sandy Soils .............................................................................................. 11 Native Grass Hay ..................................................................................................................... 11 Transplants or Sod ................................................................................................................... 13 Plugs ........................................................................................................................................ 13

Construction Practices .......................................................................................................................... 14

Competition among Native and Invasive Species ............................................................................... 15

Soil Management Techniques ............................................................................................................... 17

Handling Topsoil ................................................................................................................................. 17 Irrigation ............................................................................................................................................. 17 Soil Amendments ............................................................................................................................... 17 Soil Nutrient Depletion ....................................................................................................................... 19

Effects of Grazing ................................................................................................................................... 20

Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 21

Literature Cited ....................................................................................................................................... 22

ii


Table of Figures

Figure 1. Rough fescue grassland in the Central Parkland with aspen stands (Desserud 2006). ............................ 3

Figure 2. Plains rough fescue 3 years after seeding (Desserud 2009)...................................................................... 4

Figure 3. Newly reclaimed wellsite in the Northern Fescue NSR (Desserud 2007). ................................................. 5

Figure 4. Wellsite 6 years later with seeded and naturally incursion species (Desserud 2013). ............................... 5

Figure 5. Western porcupine grass 6 years after seeding (Desserud 2103). ............................................................ 6

Figure 6. Pipeline install with a Spider© Plough-in in Northern Fescue NSR (Desserud 2009). ............................... 8

Figure 7. Pipeline 1 year later south slope (Desserud 2010)..................................................................................... 9

Figure 8. Sheep fescue and green needle grass evident on a well site in the Central Parkland stripped and seeded, fourteen years later (Lancaster 2012).................................................................................... 9

Figure 9. Natural recovery in the Bodo Hills, Central Parkland (Desserud 2008).................................................... 10

Figure 10. Native hay harvester in rough fescue grassland Central Parkland (Desserud 2006). .............................. 12

Figure 11. Pipeline covered with native hay in the Central Parkland (Desserud 2006). ............................................ 12

Figure 12. Pipeline with native hay 1 year later (Desserud 2007). ............................................................................ 13

Figure 13. Effects of straw on growth of smooth brome (Desserud 2008). ............................................................... 16

Figure 14. Effect of straw on weed cover in the Central Parkland (Desserud 2009). ................................................ 18

1


Introduction

In Alberta’s Central Parkland and Northern Fescue Natural Subregions (NSR), rich black and brown soils have attracted farming and settlement since the late 1800’s. As a result, detrimental farming practices, oil and gas development, and rural and urban growth have contributed to habitat degradation and conversion. In a mapping project, identifying land uses from satellite images, air photos and provincial inventories, Bjorge et al. (2004) concluded less than 12 per cent of original native grassland remains in the Central Parkland and similar degradation has occurred in the Northern Fescue NSR. Only native grassland remnants remain in the area and native plant community ecological integrity and biodiversity are at risk. In addition, native grasslands in the Central Parkland hold a large reserve of soil carbon, which when disturbed is released as a carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas (Sacks et al. 2014). Agriculture land in the Central Parkland releases more nitrous oxide (N2O), another greenhouse gas, than undisturbed grassland (Lemke et al. 1998). Consequently, native grassland should be protected and surface disturbances minimized. This literature review describes current reclamation practices and serves as a background document for Strategies for Minimizing Disturbance in Native Grassland within the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue Subregions.

2


Physical Attributes of Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs

Soils

Black Chernozemic soils dominate the Central Parkland grasslands and Dark Brown Chernozemic soils dominate the Northern Fescue NSR grasslands. Regolsolic soils occur on floodplains or sand dunes, for example in Sullivan Lake Plain in the Northern Fescue NSR or in eth vicinity of Wainwright in the central parkland. Vertisolic soils are found only in the Drumheller area of the Northern Fescue NSR. Solonetzic soils occur throughout the centre of the Central Parkland in the Wetaskiwin - Camrose corridor. Refer to the Range Plant Communities and Range Health Assessment Guidelines for the Central Parkland and Northern fescue NSRs for more detail on soils and related ecoregions (Kupsch et al. 2012; Kupsch et al. 2013).

Native Vegetation

The Central Parkland is the southern-most area of Alberta’s forest zone, forming a gradual transition from the Dry Mixedwood NSR to the north and west to the Grassland Natural regions to the south and east (Kupsch et al. 2013). Grasslands are found in a mosaic with aspen poplar groves, saline wetlands and stabilized sand dunes (Figure 1). Lack of fire in the Central Parkland has resulted in expansion of aspen groves and further reduction of native grasslands. In an assessment of Elk Island in the central Parkland, Bork et al. (1997) found photographs from 1922 reveal many south slopes and crests were grasslands, with trees found only on north slopes. Today, trees are taking over all aspects. With no natural fires, and low herbivory, trees will eventually dominate the park (Bork et al. 1997). Fire may benefit plains rough fescue. An area in the Wainwright military reserve was burned annually, in April, for at least 24 years. As a result, aspen stands decreased, and while plains rough fescue decreased in cover (i.e., shorter tillers), it did increase in number of plants (Anderson and Bailey 1980). In eastern areas of the Central Parkland, with drier and sandy soils (such as south east of the Wainwright area), species dominance shifts to sandgrass (Calamovilfa longifolia), needle and thread (Stipa comata), and sand dropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus) (Kupsch et al. 2013).

3


The Northern Fescue NSR comprises a transition from Central Parkland to the north to the Dry Mixedgrass NSR to the south. Aspen groves give way to shrubland and grassland is mixed with dryer vegetation species (Kupsch et al. 2012). Grasslands in both natural subregions have similar species. Mesic grasslands in the western regions, with loamy soils (such as the Rumsey Natural Area), are dominated by plains rough fescue (Festuca hallii), western wheat grass (Agropyron smithii), western porcupine grass (Stipa curtiseta) and sedges.

Other common grassland species found in both natural subregions include slender wheat grass (Agropyron trachycaulum), June grass (Koeleria macrantha), Rocky Mountain fescue (Festuca saximontana) and blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis). Refer to the Range Plant Communities and Range Health Assessment Guidelines for the Central Parkland and Northern fescue NSRs for more detail on vegetation and related ecoregions (Kupsch et al. 2012; Kupsch et al. 2013).

Figure 1. Rough fescue grassland in the Central Parkland with aspen stands (Desserud 2006).

4


Reclamation Practices

Seeding

The most common reclamation practice is seeding a disturbed site, to provide vegetation cover to control erosion and potentially to return the site to pre-disturbance conditions. Quick growing species such as western and slender wheat grasses are easily found as cultivars. Other cultivars include green needlegrass (Stipa viridula) and prairie sand reed grass. However, Neville and Lancaster (2008) noted these species were persistent and larger than native species on parts of the Express Pipeline in the Northern Fescue Natural Subregion. Species that establish easily with seeding include June grass, blue gramma, and needle and thread grass (Sherritt 2012; Desserud and Naeth 2013c). Other native species may not be readily available and some grassland species have particular problems. The following describes research on seeding results of species common to the Central Parkland and Northern fescue NSRs.

Plains rough fescuePlains rough fescue is particularly difficult to restore and much research has been done on why this long-lived species responds so poorly to disturbance. Rough fescue, both plains (F. hallii) and Foothills (F. campestris), may not produce large volumes of seed every year, making wild-harvesting difficult (Johnston and MacDonald 1967). This also poses a problem for greenhouse propagation, meaning seed may not always be available. Plains rough fescue germinates readily in greenhouse conditions (Desserud and Naeth 2013c) and Desserud and Naeth (2013c) and Sherritt (2012) had success seeding plains rough fescue on reclaimed sites in the Northern Fescue NSR. Nevertheless, plains rough fescue requires at least three to five years to become well established (Figure 2) (Woosaree and James 2004; Desserud and Naeth 2013a). All researchers found plains rough fescue was particularly susceptible to competition from other species and fared best when seeded as a mono-culture.

Figure 2. Plains rough fescue 3 years after seeding (Desserud 2009).

5


In a Northern Fescue NSR field trial, Desserud and Naeth (2013c) seeded part of a 1 ha wellsite with a monoculture of plains rough fescue (Figure 3). After three years plains rough fescue was well established, and they found incursion of several native grasses, e.g., June grass, blue grama, wheatgrasses, western porcupine grass and numerous forbs. They concluded the small stature of slow-growing rough fescue provided sufficient space for other species to become established. In plots on the same wellsite seeded with a native mix including 20 per cent plains rough fescue and only 5 per cent slender and western wheatgrasses, wheatgrasses dominated after 3 years and almost no rough fescue was found. Five years later, slender wheatgrass had died back; however, still no rough fescue was found (Figure 4).

Figure 3. Newly reclaimed wellsite in the Northern Fescue NSR (Desserud 2007).

Figure 4. Wellsite 6 years later with seeded and naturally incursion species (Desserud 2013).

6


In an assessment of areas disturbed by oil and gas in the Central Parkland, Vujnovic et al. (2002) found reduced dominance of plains rough fescue close to the disturbance and increased density of exotic species, especially Kentucky bluegrass. They attributed exotic species dominance to reduced litter and shade as plains rough fescue declined, as well as tolerance to increased mineral soil. Deutsch et al. (2010b) found litter improved re-growth of plains rough fescue grassland following de-foliation. In the Central Parkland, plant litter conserves soil moisture, especially in plains rough fescue mid-season (June and July) growing, resulting in greater above-ground biomass (Deutsch et al. 2010a).

Sometimes germination in controlled environments, e.g., a greenhouse, is not reflected in field conditions. Romo et al. (1991) observed that when moisture is held constant most of the decline in germination of plains roughs fescue was due to seed age. Nevertheless, Desserud (personal communication) and Neville (personal communication) found plains rough fescue germinated after seven to ten years of storage.

Timing of seeding could affect establishment success. Romo et al. (1991) found plains rough fescue to be particularly sensitive to moisture requirements and that water stress overrides temperature stress and narrows the conditions at which germination will occur. Sherritt (2012) had success seeding plains rough fescue in late June and early July; however, Desserud and Naeth (2013c) had success seeding plains rough fescue in late July and early August.

Western porcupine grassHard-coated seeds, e.g., many Stipa species, such as western porcupine grass, may not germinate in the first year unless scarified. Without seed treatment they should be seeded with non-competitive, early establishers such as slender wheatgrass, or forbs such as yarrow (Achillea millefolium) to give them a competitive edge after germination in the second year (Nurnberg 1994). Pahl and Smreciu (1999) recommend seeding western porcupine grass in late summer or fall. Desserud and Naeth (2013c) seeded western porcupine grass in late July and early August. They found no evidence of germination until the third year, during which it became well established. Nurnberg (1994) found hard-coated seeds such as Stipa species, may not germinate in the first year unless scarified, which may be the reason for requiring a winter season following seeding. In a greenhouse experiment simulating three years of storage and exposure to winter and summer conditions, Desserud and Naeth (2013c) also found western porcupine grass germinated only after exposure to two winters (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Western porcupine grass 6 years after seeding (Desserud 2103).

7


WheatgrassesCultivated rhizomatous wheatgrasses, e.g., western, slender and northern wheatgrasses are common in reclamation seed mixes. They establish (i.e., “green-up”) quickly and provide early cover and soil stabilization. Nevertheless, they may persist long after seeding, preventing native species from establishing. In an assessment of 10 pipelines and 36 wellsites in the Rumsey Natural Area, Elsinger (2009) found that approximately half were dominated by western and northern wheatgrasses, up to ten years or longer following seeding, with no evidence of plains rough fescue. Desserud and Naeth (2013c) concluded the large stature of the initial slender wheatgrass stands outcompeted plains rough fescue in its early stages and prevented its establishment.

Cultivars and Ecovars™The majority of seed available from commercial producers are cultivars, a plant variety which has undergone genetic restriction through selection by plant breeders, and which has been registered by a certifying agency (Ferdinandez et al. 2005). Stewart (2009) recommends checking any purchased seed for purity, such as foreign or non-seed material, and germination rates. The seed company may provide this information or the seed may be tested by a laboratory. Downing (2004) cautioned native cultivar or ecovar™ suitability in one Natural Subregion does not necessarily imply suitability in another. A monitoring strategy that considers site characteristics, restoration techniques, cultural practices (e.g., grazing, windbreaks, stubble planting), and genetic attributes of the cultivars or ecovars™ should be implemented to assess the positive and negative impacts of their use both within and outside the Subregions for which they were produced.

Despite their production in a subregion which differs from their original source, the genetic uniqueness of native plant cultivars can be maintained by completely renewing the breeder plots every two generations with newly collected wild seed (Woosaree, personal communication, 2007). Some successful native plant cultivars that have been grown by Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures include those suitable for Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs, e.g., Rocky Mountain fescue (Festuca saximontana), Canada wild rye (Elymus canadensis), slender wheatgrass (Agropyron subsecundum), nodding brome (Bromus anomalous), Indian rice grass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) and blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis). Woosaree (2007a) also established plots of plains rough fescue (Festuca hallii).

8


Other Reclamation Practices

Natural RecoveryNatural recovery occurs when a disturbed site is reclaimed with no intervention, allowing seed bank, seed rain and existing propagules to reclaim the disturbance. Natural recovery could result in an effective, though potentially slow native prairie recovery, with reduced revegetation and invasive species management costs. Conversely, the length of time may delay the issuance of a reclamation certificate and expose the site to erosion and invasive species establishment (Hammermeister and Naeth 1996). A number of factors affect potential success of natural recovery such as soil type, seed production on the site, range condition, proximity to undesirable vegetation species, length of soil storage, seasonal timing of soil replacement, exposure of the site to wind and pasture management (Lancaster et al. 2012).

Desserud and Naeth (2013b) and Elsinger (2009) monitored natural recovery of three pipelines in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs. Pipelines were constructed with three techniques: plough-in, narrow topsoil strip, and “ditch-witch” (Figure 6). All techniques resulted in cover similar to undisturbed grassland after three years. Plains rough fescue recovered best on plough-in pipelines, with little recovery on “ditch-witch” pipelines, which were dominated by western and northern wheatgrasses. They concluded reducing sod disturbance contributed to plains rough fescue recovery, where intact sod would result in intact root structure. Plough-in had the most intact sod and the “ditch-witch” method had the greatest sod break-up (Elsinger 2009; Desserud and Naeth 2013b). Nevertheless, Desserud and Naeth (2013b) noted recovery was poorest on hill crests, with low plains rough fescue recovery, and best on north slopes and bottom land (Figure 7).

Figure 6. Pipeline install with a Spider© Plough-in in Northern Fescue NSR (Desserud 2009).

9


Figure 7. Pipeline 1 year later south slope (Desserud 2010).

Natural recovery trials were assessed on the Express Pipeline in southern Alberta 14 years after construction (AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. 2003). Seeded species such as sheep fescue (Festuca ovina) and green needle grass persisted. Plains rough fescue was found on Northern Fescue NSR sites, either from seeding or natural recovery. On one site, invasive non-native species including Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) and smooth brome (Bromus inermis) were found encroaching from adjacent areas (Neville and Lancaster 2008). Neville and Lancaster (2008) caution that natural recovery works best on small or narrow disturbances (< 3-4 m wide) and may not be successful on larger disturbances due to competition by invasive species.

Figure 8. Sheep fescue and green needle grass evident on a well site in the Central Parkland stripped and seeded, fourteen years later (Lancaster 2012).

10


Natural recovery will be influenced by the species composition of adjacent grassland and by the topography of the site. In a seeding and natural recovery experiment on a well site in the Northern Fescue region (Neutral Hills) a natural recovery site was affected by its position, low on a slope with a mesic moisture regime, and the proximity of non-native species in the adjacent grassland (Fitzpatrick 2005). After ten years recovery of one seeded block was predominately plains rough fescue, with other native species such as western porcupine grass, pasture sage (Artemisia frigida), and slender wheatgrass. A third block also had plains rough fescue and slender wheatgrass but also many undesirable forbs, e.g., Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Moist areas were predominately smooth brome (Bromus inermis) and Kentucky bluegrass (poa pratensis) (Fitzpatrick 2005).

In natural recovery, early seral species, such as pasture sage, may appear (Woosaree and James 2006). Woosaree and James (2006) found annual weeds such as Russian pigweed (Axyris amaranthoides) and stinkweed (Thlapsi arvense) cover reached up to 31 per cent in the first year following seeding and was even higher in natural recovery areas. They concluded these weeds were not a concern since they were annuals and would soon be replaced by perennial grasses.

On a pipeline in the Bodo Hills in the Northern Fescue Natural Subregion, Woosaree (2007b) compared natural recovery to two seed mixes. One seed mix had 50 per cent plains rough fescue with 25 per cent wheatgrasses, while the second had 30 per cent plains rough fescue and 5 per cent wheatgrasses. An assessment by Desserud and Naeth (2013b) ten years later showed good recovery of plains rough fescue (14 per cent cover) on the natural recovery sites; however, no rough fescue on either of the seeded sites (Figure 8). Other species found on the natural recovery sites included northern and western wheat grass, June grass, pasture sage and plains muhly (Muhlenbergia cuspidata).

Figure 9. Natural recovery in the Bodo Hills, Central Parkland (Desserud 2008).

11


Natural Recovery in Sandy SoilsEastern regions of the Central Parkland (Wainwright area) are distinguished by having sandy soils. Disturbance recovery appears to succeed better on sandy soils than loamy Chernozem soils (Neville and Lancaster 2008).

Recovery on the Express Pipeline, which travels through Central Parkland and Northern Fescue Areas, was examined over 14 years. After 5 years, trials on sandy soils were the most successful, with vegetation cover 10 percent greater on the unseeded sites than on seeded sites five years after construction. Native vegetation on sandy soils showed the greatest ability to recover quickly from short-term disturbance. Vegetation recovery from the seed or propagule bank resulted in 71 percent cover after five years while seeded soils resulted in a cover of 61 percent. More species were represented on the natural recovery sites than on the seeded sites (AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. 2003). After 14 years, Neville and Lancaster (2008) observed natural recovery on sandy soils resulted in close resemblance to adjacent undisturbed areas. They concluded natural recovery is more successful in sandy soils in the Central Parkland than in other soils.

In a study of recovery of the Alliance pipeline in Central Parkland sandy soils, southeast of Wainwright, Wruck (2004) examined four reclamation techniques two years following disturbance: topsoil stripping and replacement, seeding, erosion control with straw crimping and fall rye seeding, and natural recovery. He found topsoil stripping had no effect on vegetation recovery and erosion control did not improve recovery. Seeding resulted in the introduction of undesirable species, e.g., creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra), sheep fescue and Kentucky bluegrass. He found needle and thread grass and June grass were the most dominant species in topsoil stripped and natural recovery areas. He concluded that in sandy soils natural recovery was the best reclamation technique and advised against seeding (Wruck 2004).

Native Grass HayA variant of wild seed harvesting is cutting hay from native grassland to use as a mulch and seed source. Straw has long been used as a mulch or erosion control mechanism; however, using hay as a seed source is less well known. Factors which affect the viability of native hay include the variability of native seed production from year to year, e.g., some species do not seed every year; the timing, which will result in the dominance of whichever species have seeded at that time; and methods, such as tackifying, to keep the hay in place (Romo and Lawrence 1990). Another factor is the viability of seed if the hay is stored for future use. Reis and Hofmann (1983) found hay storage of one year did not decrease the amount of seedlings, and actually increased the establishment of some, those which require a period of dormancy. They also recommend cutting hay several times over the summer, storing it and cutting again the following year, to obtain the most diversity of seeds, e.g., different seeding times and years.

12


The state of native grassland in close proximity to a disturbance is crucial in determining if native hay is a suitable seed source. In a trial in Central Parkland, Desserud and Neath (2011) used native hay cut from plains rough fescue grassland to reclaim a short pipeline disturbance. Approximately 2.5 times the disturbed area was cut with a modified harvester (Figure 9). Native hay was sprayed and crimped upon a newly disturbed pipeline right-of-way and its growth monitored for three years (Figure 10). Seedling emergence from the hay included plains rough fescue , Kentucky bluegrass, June grass, western porcupine grass, yarrow (Achillea millefolium), and other forbs (Figure 11). They concluded native hay is a good seed source for native species in close proximity to a grassland disturbance, if desired species are present (Desserud and Naeth 2011). They caution that the disturbance should be roughed-up and the hay well crimped to prevent being blown away before seed germination can begin.

Figure 10. Native hay harvester in rough fescue grassland Central Parkland (Desserud 2006).

Figure 11. Pipeline covered with native hay in the Central Parkland (Desserud 2006).

13


Figure 12. Pipeline with native hay 1 year later (Desserud 2007).

Transplants or SodAnother possible reclamation practice which benefits the growth of mature bunch grasses, such as plains rough fescue, is salvaging sod with roots intact. Petherbridge (2000) reported good success with plains rough fescue grassland sod salvage three years following a pipeline restoration in the Northern Fescue NSR. He noted that the species composition of the sod salvage areas more closely resembled undisturbed grassland than seeded areas. From results in a Central Parkland site, Petherbridge (2000) cautioned that if the site initially contained many invasive species that these could proliferate through sod salvage.

PlugsPlugs are transplants of plants grown in greenhouse conditions from seed, normally in root trainer containers. Transplanting established seedlings has advantages over direct seeding, especially for slow-growing species such as plains or Foothills rough fescue. Such seedlings are allowed to develop in an environment protected from competition and environmental effects, thus avoiding the most vulnerable growth periods (Tannas 2011). Tannas (2011) had success with Foothills rough fescue plugs in a wellsite reclamation experiment in southwestern Alberta. Plugs were seeded and grown for three months prior to transplanting. He found Foothills rough fescue plugs had better success than seeding, and also found plugs with larger plant size had the best success.

Climate conditions play an important role in plug survival, possibly even more so than seeds, which may survive dry conditions if not already germinated. Tannas (personal communication) found poor survival of plains rough fescue plugs following a severe drought during a pipeline reclamation in the Northern Fescue NSR.

14


Construction Practices

Minimum disturbance results in the most successful recovery of native grasslands. Natural recovery was successful on a pipeline constructed with a SpiderPlow© in the Northern Fescue NSR (Desserud and Naeth 2013b). A SpiderPlow© does not trench. Instead it cuts sod and inserts pipe sequentially. Sod is then allowed to fall back into place. This technique allows even bunch grasses like plains rough fescue to survive more or less intact (Desserud and Naeth 2013b). A SpiderPlow© can only be used with fairly narrow pipe, e.g., 15 cm diameter or less (Figure 6).

Ploughed-in pipelines may also result in successful natural recovery. A narrow trench (30 – 60 cm width) is dug with a back hoe, pipe is laid, and topsoil and sod is replaced soon after pipe laying. Good recovery was found on a ploughed-in pipeline in the Central Parkland NSR (Desserud and Naeth 2013b).

15


Competition Among Native and Invasive Species

Reclamation efforts often must contend with the presence of non-native agronomic grasses, either on the original site, adjacent to it, introduced by grazing cattle or other human activity, including past reclamation practices. Common invasive species found in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs are smooth brome (Bromus inermis), Kentucky bluegrass, and Canada thistle. Crested wheat grass (Agropyron cristatum) is found to a lesser extent, usually if seeded in close proximity to the reclaimed disturbance.

Invasive species may do more damage than just their presence. In a greenhouse experiment, Jordan et al. (2008) found soil attribute modifications by smooth brome (Bromus inermis) had negative effects on June grass, prairie coneflower (Ratibida columnifera) and blue flax (Linum lewisii). On the other hand, needle and thread grass, green needle grass and plains muhly grass (Muhlenbergia cuspidata) were relatively insensitive to altered soil properties (Jordan et al. 2008). In a similar experiment in Wyoming, Mealor and Hild (2007) transplanted needle and thread plants from two areas: one invaded by quack grass (Agropyron repens) and one not-invaded. They examined evolutionary traits of needle and thread in response to close proximity to quack grass. Their results showed no difference in needle and thread transplants; concluding, needle and thread grass is not affected by invasive species.

On a wellsite in the Northern Fescue NSR, Sherritt (2012) concluded the presence of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), yellow sweet clover (Melilotus officinalis) and smooth brome negatively impacted establishment of seeded native species, such as plains rough fescue, June grass and possibly Hookers oat grass (Helictotrichon hookeri).

Desserud and Naeth (2010) found an unexpected response by smooth brome to straw amended to a wellsite as a carbon source (Figure 12). In areas with high straw applications (1 kg/m2) smooth brome growth was stunted and they were able to duplicate results in a greenhouse experiment. Further research on the chemical processes of straw decomposition and its effect on smooth brome may provide a tool, for controlling this invasive species.

16


Figure 13. Effects of straw on growth of smooth brome (Desserud 2008).

Some species termed weeds, are not noxious or restricted, may appear early in disturbance recovery. They provide soil stability and microsites for perennial grass establishment. Desserud and Naeth (2013c) observed significant cover of annual weeds in the first two years after seeding a well sites in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs, e.g., flixweed (Descurainia sophia), lamb’s quarters (Chenopodium album) or shepherd’s purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris). By the third year, the majority of these weeds had disappeared, being replaced by well-established perennial grasses (Desserud and Naeth 2013c). They noted similar results on a pipeline right-of-way seeded with native hay (Desserud and Naeth 2011).

17


Soil Management Techniques

A diverse vegetation mix is unlikely to develop rapidly unless strategies to initiate diversity are incorporated in the reclamation planning. Such strategies include seedbed preparation through topsoil handling, enhancing the soil chemical and physical properties and improving the nutrient cycle with irrigation or soil amendments.

Handling Topsoil

In a wellsite reclamation experiment in the Northern Fescue Natural Subregion, Desserud and Naeth (2013a) found pH levels on a wellsite with soil admixing (topsoil mixed with subsoil) ranged between 8 and 9; whereas, native grassland and wellsites with intact topsoil had pH levels around 7. Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) favoured higher pH levels; while plains rough fescue had a negative reaction to pH above 7.5. They recommend no soil admixing in disturbance reclamation to reduce potential Kentucky bluegrass invasion and improve plains rough fescue recovery (Desserud and Naeth 2013a).

Irrigation

Because grassland species are adapted to relatively dry conditions, irrigation may not be required to establish native seedlings. Palit et al. (2012) tested plains rough fescue seedling reactions to nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation. They found seeding density increased with additional water and actually decreased with nitrogen applications (Palit et al. 2012).

Soil Amendments

The addition of soil amendments in grassland reclamation may be useful for large disturbances or in times of drought. Blonski et al. (2004) had positive results with hog manure application in Northern Fescue prairie even in drought years. They applied liquid hog manure once, at rates between 10 and 160 kg/ha, injecting the manure into native fescue grassland in good to excellent ecological condition. They found increased dry matter and crude protein yields for both grasses and forbs in the first year. Despite low rainfall, which should have negatively affected plant growth and primary production, yields continued to increase in the second year following manure application (Blonski et al. 2004).

18


Larney et al. (2005) examined the effect on soil properties of four topsoil replacement depths and five amendment treatments: compost, manure, straw, alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and hay, aimed at reclaiming three wellsites in south central Alberta (Foothills Fescue and Northern Fescue subregions). The result was increased organic carbon following the organic amendments. They theorized organic amendments play an important role in improving soil properties related to long-term productivity of reclaimed wellsites, especially where topsoil is scarce or absent (Larney et al. 2005).

Desserud and Naeth (2013a) had success establishing rough fescue (Festuca hallii) in straw-amended soil in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs. They applied straw at two rates – 1 kg and 0.5 kg/ha to topsoil-replaced wellsites. Barley straw was chopped, sprayed onto the wellsite, and rototilled into the soil. They compared straw-treated responses to un-treated soil. Straw treatments positively affected growth of plains rough fescue, slender wheatgrass, western wheatgrass, June grass and blue grama. Weed cover was reduced on the straw treatments (Figure 13). They cautioned straw must be weed free (Desserud and Naeth 2013a).

Figure 14. Effect of straw on weed cover in the Central Parkland (Desserud 2009).

Soil amendments may also have little effect on some grass species. June grass and blue grama did not respond to phosphorous or nitrogen fertilizers, nor to a Penicittium bilaii inoculation in a study of Manitoba grasslands (Friesen 2002).

19


Soil Nutrient Depletion

Nitrogen is a key element in grassland ecosystems, because of its capacity to limit primary and secondary production. In a Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSR experiment, Desserud and Naeth (2013a) tested reducing soil nitrogen to assist plains rough fescue and other native grass establishment and impede Kentucky bluegrass. They incorporated chopped wheat and barley straw, at three rates (1 kg/m2, 0.5 kg/m2 and none) into soil as an amendment on reclaimed wellsites. Plains rough fescue responded well to the straw amendment and lowered nitrogen; however, Kentucky bluegrass showed no trends one way or another (Desserud and Naeth 2013a). Desserud (2011) noted June grass, western wheatgrass and blue grama also responded well to reduced nitrogen. Slender wheatgrass had no reaction to reduced nitrogen and performed well in all treatments.

20


Effects of Grazing

Animal herbivory, in particular cattle and wild ungulates, is a factor in grassland reclamation. Most grassland restoration projects should be protected from grazing, especially for the first few years until the perennial grasses become well established. Cattle are known to congregate on disturbed sites, probably attracted by the young growth, and may adversely affect the establishment of native grasses (Naeth 1985). Nevertheless, plains rough fescue grassland may be tolerant of grazing. Neath et al. (1991) concluded grazing had little effect on litter and soil organic matter in Central Parkland plains rough fescue grasslands, in contrast to negative effects in Foothills Fescue grasslands. Horton (1992) found plains rough fescue is suited to late summer, autumn and winter grazing. However, in a Saskatchewan experiment, Pantel et al. (2011) examined responses of northern wheatgrass and western porcupine grass following mowing during various months. They recommended western porcupine grass-dominated grassland should be rested to at least one year if grazed in August or September.

21


Key Findings

Invasive species found in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue NSRs include smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, Canada thistle, and to a lesser extent, crested wheatgrass. Although Kentucky bluegrass and smooth brome are not considered noxious weeds, they can dominate rough fescue grassland to the detriment of native perennials.

Plains rough fescue germinates readily when seeded; however, it requires 3 to 5 years to become established. During that time it is very susceptible to competition from aggressive species, such as wheatgrass cultivars. If possible, plains rough fescue should be seeded as a monoculture, which should result in attraction of other native species and a return to a resemblance of rough fescue grassland.

Western porcupine grass seed requires several winters before germinating, after which it will establish well. Other Central Parkland and Northern Fescue species, such as needle and thread, June grass, and blue gramma are easily seeded.

Native hay may be a viable technique for ensuring a reliable seed source, but its success depends on the availability of weed-free grassland, at least 2.5 times the size of the disturbance.

Cultivars, such as wheatgrasses and green needle grass, are larger than native species and may persist over time, preventing the establishment of native perennials.

Natural recovery could result in an effective, though potentially slow native prairie recovery, with reduced revegetation and invasive species management costs. The nature of disturbance may affect the results of natural recovery. If deep-rooted species such as plains rough fescue roots are disturbed by sod chopping, e.g., “ditch-witch”, it may not recover. In hilly terrain, plains rough fescue grassland recovers poorly on hill crests, and best on north-facing slopes and level land.

Recovery appears to success best in sandy soils, particularly if left to natural recovery. Seeding may introduce unwanted species of aggressive cultivars that persist over time.

22


Literature Cited

Anderson, H.G. and Bailey, A.W. 1980. Effects of burning on grassland in the asen parkland of east-central Alberta. Canadian Journal of Botany 58: 985-996.

AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. 2003. Express Pipeline Ltd. environmental monitoring final report. Prepared for Terasen Pipelines (Formerly Express Pipeline, a division of Alberta Energy Company Ltd. and TransCanada Pipelines Ltd.). Calgary, AB.

Bjorge, R., Schieck, J., George, L. and Nieman, G. 2004. Conservation and the status of native vegetation in the parkland natural region–central parkland. Proceedings of the 7th prairie conservation and endangered species conference. Natural History Occasional Paper No. 26, Edmonton, AB, 2004. Provincial Museum of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.

Blonski, L.J., Bork, E.W. and Blenis, P.V. 2004. Herbage yield and crude protein concentration of rangeland and pasture following hog manure application in southeastern Alberta. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 84: 773-783.

Bork, E.W., Hudson, R.J. and Bailey, A.W. 1997. Upland plant community classification in Elk Island national park, Alberta, Canada, using disturbance history and physical site factors. Plant Ecology 130: 171-190.

Desserud, P. and Naeth, M.A. 2011. Promising results restoring grassland disturbances with native hay (Alberta). Ecological Restoration 29: 215-219.

Desserud, P. and Naeth, M.A. 2013a. Establishment of a native bunch grass and an invasive perennial on disturbed land using straw-amended soil. Journal of Environmental Management 114: 540-547.

Desserud, P. and Naeth, M.A. 2013b. Natural recovery of rough fescue (Festuca hallii (Vasey) Piper) grassland after disturbance by pipeline construction in Central Alberta, Canada. Natural Areas Journal 33: 91-98.

Desserud, P. and Naeth, M.A. 2013c. Promising results with rough fescue (Festuca hallii) seeding following disturbance, in Central Alberta. Native Plants Journal 14: 25-31.

Desserud, P.A. 2011. Rough fescue ecology and restoration in the Central Parkland and Northern Fescue regions of central Alberta. Dissertation. University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta. 216 pp.

Desserud, P.A. and Naeth, M.A. 2010. Smooth brome: an unexpected response to straw-amended soil (Alberta). Ecological Restoration 28: 133-135.

23


Deutsch, E.S., Bork, E.W. and Willms, W.D. 2010a. Separation of grassland litter and ecosite influences on seasonal soil moisture and plant growth dynamics. Plant Ecology 209: 135-145.

Deutsch, E.S., Bork, E.W. and willms, W.D. 2010b. Soil moisture and plant growth responses to litter and defoliation impacts in Parkland grasslands. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 135: 1-9.

Downing, D. 2004. Ecovars™, native plant cultivars, site restoration, and genetic integrity: an information review. Prepared for Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. Edmonton, AB. 18 pp.

Elsinger, M. 2009. Reclamation status of plains rough fescue grasslands at Rumsey Block in Central Alberta after oil and gas well site and pipeline disturbance. Thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. 247 pp.

Ferdinandez, Y.S.N., Coulman, B.E. and Fu, Y. 2005. Detecting genetic changes over two generations of seed increase in an awned slender wheatgrass population using AFLP markers. Crop Science 45: 1064–1068.

Fitzpatrick, C. 2005. Neutral hills well site recovery project vegetation survey and range health summary. Unpublished report, prepared for Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. Lethbridge, AB. 4 pp.

Friesen, G.M. 2002. Native grasses: improving the seedling vigor and seed production of blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) and prairie Junegrass (Koeleria macrantha) ecovarstm. University of Manitoba, 162 pp.

Hammermeister, A.M. and Naeth, M.A. 1996. The native prairie revegetation research project: description of reclamation practices and research sites in the Dry Mixed Grass natural subregion. Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP). Edmonton, AB. 74 pp.

Horton, P.R. 1992. Some effects of defoliation on plains rough fescue (Festuca hallii (Vasey) Piper) in central Alberta. Dissertation. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. 300 pp.

Johnston, A. and MacDonald, M.D. 1967. Floral initiation and seed production in Festuca Scabrella Torr. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 47: 577-583.

Jordan, N.R., Larson, D.L. and S.C., H. 2008. Soil modification by invasive plants: effects on native and invasive species of mixed-grass prairies. Biological Invasions 10: 177-190.

Kupsch, T., France, K., Loonen, A., Burkinshaw, A., Willoughby, M. and McNeil, R. 2013. Range plant communities and range health assessment guidelines for the Central Parkland subregion of Alberta. Alberta Environment and Sustainable Development. Red Deer, AB. 213 pp.

24


Kupsch, T., Richman, J., France, K. and McNeil, R. 2012. Range plant communities and range health assessment guidelines for the Northern Fescue Subregion of Alberta. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. Red Deer, AB. 70 pp.

Lancaster, J., Neville, M. and Hickman, L. 2012. Long-term revegetation success of industry reclamation techniques for native Mixedgrass Prairie: Cypress Uplands and Majorville Uplands. Prepared for Petroluem Technology Alliance Canada (PTAC). http://www.foothillsrestorationforum.ca. [Accessed January 31, 2013].

Larney, F.J., Akinremi, O.O., Lemke, R.L., Klaassen, V.E. and Janzen, H.H. 2005. Soil responses to topsoil replacement depth and organic amendments in wellsite reclamation. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 85: 307-317.

Lemke, R.L., Izaurralde, R.C., Malhi, S.S., Arshad, M.A. and Nyborg, M. 1998. Nitrous oxide emissions from Agricultural soils of the Boreal and Parkland regions of Alberta. Soil Science Society of America Journal 62: 1096-1102.

Mealor, B.A. and Hild, A.L. 2007. Post-invasion evolution of native plant populations: a test of biological resilience. Oikos 1493-1500.

Naeth, M.A. 1985. Ecosystem reconstruction following pipeline construction through solonetzic native rangeland in southern Alberta. Thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.

Naeth, M.A., Bailey, A.W., Pluth, D.J., Chanasyk, D.S. and Hardin., R.T. 1991. Grazing impacts on litter and soil organic matter in mixed prairie and fescue grassland ecosystems of Alberta. Journal of Range Management 44: 7-12.

Neville, M. and Lancaster, J. 2008. Field observations of the recovery of native rangeland plant communities on Express Pipeline. Pincher Creek, AB. Pp. 30.

Nurnberg, D. 1994. Germination, productivity, surviorship and competitive ability of six native grass species from the Northern Mixed-Grass prairie for use in prairie vegetation restoration. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. 168 pp.

Pahl, M.D. and Smreciu, A. 1999. Growing native plants of western Canada: common grasses and wildflowers. Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. Edmonton, AB. 118 pp.

Palit, R., Cahill, J.F. and Lamb, E.g., 2012. Irrigation but not N fertilization enhances seedhead density in plains rough fescue (Festuca hallii). Grass and Forage Science 68: 120-124.

Pantel, A.W., Romo, J.T. and Bai, Y. 2011. Above-ground net primary production for Elymus lanceolatus and Hesperostipa curtiseta after a single defoliation event. Rangeland Ecology and Management 64: 283-290.

25


Petherbridge, W.L. 2000. Sod salvage and minimal disturbance pipeline restoration techniques: implications for native prairie restoration. Thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.

Reis, R.E. and Hofmann, L. 1983. Numer of seedlings established from stored hay. Western Michigan University. Kalamazoo, MI.

Romo, J. and Lawrence, D. 1990. A review of vegetation management techniques applicable to Grasslands National Park. Canadian Parks Service technical Report 90-1/GDS. Environment Canada. Saskatoon, SK. 63 pp.

Romo, J.T., Grilz, C.J. and Young, J.A. 1991. Influences of temperature and water stress on germination of plains rough fescue. Journal of Range Management 44: 75-81.

Sacks, A.D., Teague, R., Provenza, F., Seth Itzkan, S. and Laurie, J. 2014. Restoring atmospheric carbon dioxide to pre-industrial levels: re-establishing the evolutionary grassland-grazer relationship. In T. Goreau (ed.), Geotherapy. CRC Press.

Sherritt, D.E. 2012. Festuca hallii (vasey) piper (plains rough fescue) and Festuca campestris Rydb. (foothills rough fescue) responses to seed mix diversity and mycorrhizae. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. 84 pp.

Stewart, N. 2009. Cultivating our roots . Growing authentic prairie wildflowers and grasses. Nora Stewart. Arcola, Saskatchewan.

Tannas, S. 2011. Mechanisms regulating Poa pratensis L. and Festuca campestris Rybd. within the Foothills Fescue grasslands of Southern Alberta. Dissertation. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. 362 pp.

Vujnovic, K., Wein, R.W. and Dale, M.R.T. 2002. Predicting plant species diversity in response to disturbance magnitude in grassland remnants of central Alberta. Canadian Journal of Botany 80: 504-511.

Woosaree, J. 2007a. Native plant species for revegetating oil and gas disturbances in the sandy soils of the Parkland ecoregion of Alberta: Final Report. Prepared for Alberta Research Council Inc. Vegreville, AB. 43 pp.

Woosaree, J. 2007b. Restoration of rough fescue prairie on a pipeline right-of-way in Bodo Hills. Alberta Research Council, Vegreville, AB.

Woosaree, J. and James, B. 2004. Development of native species adapted to the sandy soils of the Parkland ecoregion of Alberta. Alberta Research Council. Vegreville, AB.

Woosaree, J. and James, B. 2006. Native plant species for revegetating oil and gas disturbances in the sandy soils of the Parkland ecoregion of Alberta. Alberta Research Council Inc. Vegreville, AB. 53 pp.

Wruck, G.W. 2004. Revegetation and spatial pattern of pipeline reclamation in sandhills of Alberta Aspen Parkland. Thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB. 117 pp.

26


literature review of reclamation practices in the central ... · pdf fileas a result, aspen...

Documents