aquatic communities: status, needs, and goals · 2013-10-02 · 1981, karr et al. 1986, iepa1 9 9 6...

Chapter 6

Aquatic Communities:Status, Needs, and Goals

7 6

6 . 1I n t r o d u c t i o n

This chapter describes and assesses aquatic communi-ties—those of rivers and streams, of inland lakes andponds, and of Lake Michigan. It reports on the status ofthe communities and their habitats in terms of their condition and problems, defines goals, and identifiesactions needed.

The information presented in this chapter is based on theknowledge of participants in the expert workshops andreviewers of the resulting working papers. Much of thecontent is based on professional experience, rather thanthe published literature, and is provided to give an indi-cation of priority and direction for future conservationwork. Workshop reports on which this chapter is basedcan be found on the Chicago Wilderness web site( w w w. c h i w i l d . o rg). Each of the aquatic communities wasexamined by a diff e rent assessment process, as describedin each section.

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency lists 76s t reams within the Illinois portion of the Chicago Wi l d e r-ness region (IEPA 1996). In addition, there are appro x i-mately 20 streams in the Indiana and Wisconsin portions.Each stream’s watershed boundary can be mapped tohelp delineate important water re s o u rce areas for biodi-versity protection and recovery planning. These water-sheds are the basic management units for determiningrecovery goals and actions for aquatic biodiversity.

The following sections describe the streams of ChicagoWilderness in terms of their general descriptive classifi-cation, protection and recovery goals, quality assessment,prioritization, threats, and recommended actions.

6 . 2Stream communities—status,

recovery goals, and recommended actions

6.2.1 Stream classificationS t ream ecosystems within watersheds of the ChicagoWilderness region fall into three general categories: head-w a t e r, low-ord e r, and mid-ord e r. Within these groups aresubcategories defined by flow, gradient, and substrate.The following is a brief description of each class andexamples of streams within those classes.

Headwater streamsC o n t i n u o u s - f l o w headwater streams are first-ord e rs t re a m s1 with small drainage areas and little or no pooldevelopment. They are characterized by relatively sta-ble, cool temperatures and consistent levels of dissolvedoxygen. They have low habitat heterogeneity and lowt rophic complexity. Indicator fish species include sculpinsand dace. Invertebrate indicator species include caddisflies and stone flies. Plants include waterc ress, chara,water parsnip, and berula. There are two general typesof continuous-flow headwater streams: those with coarsesubstrates (e.g., Black Partridge Creek and Silver Cre e k )and those with fine substrates (e.g., Rob Roy Cre e k ) .

I n t e r m i t t e n t - f l o w headwater streams are first-order stre a m swith highly variable flows and temperatures. They areinhabited by colonizer species with high re p ro d u c t i v erates or are largely abiotic. Indicator fish species includebluntnose minnow and striped shiner. Intermittent-flowheadwater streams can also be divided into those withcoarse substrates and those with fine substrates.

6 . 1 6 . 2

1 A f i r s t - o rder stream is a headwater stream without any tributaries. When two streams of the same order unite, the resulting stream israised one level. Thus, when two first-order streams unite, the resulting stream is a second-order stream. When two-second ord e rs t reams unite, the resulting stream is a third ord e r. The order of a stream is not increased when a lover- o rder stream enters it.

Chapter 6. Aquatic Communities—Status, Needs, and Goals

7 7

Low-order streamsH i g h - g r a d i e n t l o w - o rder streams are second- to fourth-o rd e r, small- to medium-sized creeks, often with distinctr i ffle and pool development. They have more complexhabitats and trophic characteristics than headwaters t reams. High-gradient low-order streams fall more thant h ree feet per mile and have coarse substrates, mostlycobble, gravel, and sand with some silt. Indicator fishspecies include darters, stonerollers, hornyhead chub,and juvenile suckers. Examples include Tyler Cre e k ,Buck Creek, and Long Run Cre e k .

L o w - g r a d i e n t l o w - o rder streams are second- to fourth-o rder creeks that fall less than three feet per mile andhave predominantly fine-textured substrates. Indicatorfish species include creek chub and bluntnose minnow;plants include sago pondweed, water star weed, andAmerican pondweed. Examples include Lily CacheC reek, Skokie River, Plum Creek, and Mill Cre e k .

Mid-order streamsH i g h - g r a d i e n t m i d - o rder streams are fifth- to eighth-ord e r,l a rge creeks to medium-sized rivers with relatively stableflows, temperatures, and high habitat diversity. Theyhave the most complex habitats, are highest in speciesd i v e r s i t y, and harbor abundant predators. High-gradi-ent mid-order streams fall more than three feet per mileand have coarse substrates. Indicator fish species includesmallmouth bass, northern hogsucker, and re d h o r s e .Examples include Kankakee River, Kishwaukee River,and the Lower Fox River.

Low-gradient m i d - o rder streams differ from high-gradientm i d - o rder streams in that they fall less than three feetper mile and have finer substrates. Indicator fish speciesinclude largemouth bass, pike, and channel catfish.Examples include the Upper Fox and the Upper DesPlaines River.

6.2.2 Functions of streamsS t reams and rivers are familiar features in the ChicagoWilderness region. They perform many important func-tions, some obvious and some not so appare n t .

Drainage is their most obvious function. Streams conveyru n o ff from the land, most noticeably during floods,when even the least conspicuous drainageway canbecome a raging torrent. Streams also convey the tre a t e dand untreated wastes of our urban and agriculturallands. In fact, during the drier times of the year, tre a t e dwastewater constitutes virtually the entire flow in someof our more urban stre a m s .

S t reams also are valued for re c reation because of theirpotential to support fishing, swimming, wildlife obser-

vation, and boating. Healthy streams provide habitat fordiverse communities of fish, amphibians, insects, andaquatic plants. Stream and river corridors also areviewed as aesthetic amenities for residential develop-ment and public open space, and they provide travel cor-ridors for wildlife.

H i s t o r i c a l l y, however, conflicts have arisen between thevarious uses and functions of streams. In particular,i n c reased reliance on streams as conduits for storm waterand wastewater has greatly diminished their ability top rovide benefits of re c reation, habitat, water quality, anda e s t h e t i c s .

T h e re are two principal causes for these conflicts. Thefirst is the alteration or destruction of the stream channeland its adjacent corridor, or r i p a r i a n zone. Activities suchas stream channelization or straightening destroy criti-cal habitat and upset the natural balance between as t ream and its floodplain that has developed over thou-sands of years. The second cause is the alteration of thes t ream’s watershed. For example, the conversion of farm-land to subdivisions and shopping centers increases theimpervious land surface. This can result in adversechanges to both the quantity and quality of stre a m - f l o w.These changes can upset the natural equilibrium of as t ream, often resulting in channel erosion, lost habitat,degraded water quality, and frequent flooding.

6.2.3 Stream assessment and prioritizationOne of the goals of the biodiversity recovery plan is tobuild consensus on the protection and enhancement ofs t reams that provide a high degree of biological func-tion. Watersheds of streams that have exceptional aquaticbiological integrity, or have the potential to be re s t o re d ,should be identified in order to establish priorities forf u t u re efforts in protection and re c o v e r y.

The information in this section results from a ChicagoWilderness project called “Stream Biodiversity RecoveryPriorities.” As a first step, the project identified pere n-nial streams that support or have the potential to supportnative fish and aquatic life populations in the six-countynortheastern Illinois region (Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake,M c H e n r y, and Will Counties) were identified. The pro j e c tdeveloped a stream prioritization method that classifieds t reams into four categories according to the followingrecovery goals: protection, restoration, rehabilitation, andenhancement. Streams for which the goals are pro t e c t i o nand restoration are considered of very high priority andhigh priority re s p e c t i v e l y. (See Figure 6.1.) The stre a m sw e re classified by the following criteria:

7 8

Biodiversity Recovery Plan


7 9

• Index of biotic integrity (IBI)

• Species or features of concern

• M a c roinvertebrate Biotic Index (MBI)

• Abiotic indicators

The following describes each of these criteria and dis-cusses their use and limitations in determining prioritiesfor protection and recovery in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s sre g i o n .

Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI)The IBI uses fish-sampling data to indicate the overallhealth and integrity of a stream. The IBI assesses thehealth of fish communities using twelve diff e rent met-rics. These twelve metrics fall into three categories:species composition, trophic composition, and fish abun-dance and condition. Data are obtained for each metric ata given site, and a number rating is assigned to each met-ric. The sum of the twelve ratings yields an overall sites c o re, with scores in Illinois ranging from 12 for excep-tionally poor quality to 60 for exceptionally high quality.The IBI integrates information about individuals, popu-lations, communities, and the ecosystem into a singleecologically based index of water- re s o u rce quality (Karr1981, Karr et al. 1986, IEPA 1 9 9 6 ) .

IBI data from Illinois were used to characterize stre a m s .S t reams with an IBI score of greater than 50 were desig-nated as very high priority, with a primary goal of pro-tection. Streams with an IBI score of 50 or less, but withspecies or habitat features of concern (described in thenext section), were also designated as very high priority.S t reams with IBI 41–50 that lacked species and habitatf e a t u res of concern were designated as high priority, witha goal of restoration. Streams with IBI 31–40 that lackedspecies and habitat features of concern were assigned agoal of rehabilitation. Streams with IBI less than 31 thatlacked species and habitat features of concern wereassigned a goal of enhancement. Figure 6.1 shows themethod for developing stream and watershed prioritiesand gives examples of watersheds for each category.

Species or features of concernThese include state threatened and endangered speciesas well as other unique aquatic habitat and biologicalcharacteristics. Professional experience and judgementw e re used in cases where fish and invertebrate data wereunavailable, where unique cold-water habitats exist, orw h e re unique fish and invertebrate communities werebelieved degraded because of point and non-points o u rces of pollution. Streams that contained species orf e a t u res of concern were designated as very high priority,with the goal of protection. Table 6.1 gives a pro v i s i o n a llist of stream-based species and features of concern.

Macroinvertebrate Biotic Index (MBI)MBI values, based on pollution-tolerance ratings form a c roinvertebrates, were compiled for streams wheredata were available. Streams with IBI scores of less than40 and with MBI scores of less than five may indicateg o o d - q u a l i t y, healthy stream ecosystems that have somepotential for restoration, rehabilitation, or enhancement.H o w e v e r, until a relationship between MBI and IBI val-ues can be verified, other criteria must be used to assigngoals for recovery and pro t e c t i o n .

Abiotic indicatorsFor streams where biological data are extremely limited(for example, almost all headwater streams), abioticwatershed variables need to be considered in order top redict biotic potential and assign a recovery or pro t e c-tion goal. Abiotic watershed variables are fre q u e n t l ycomponents of both aquatic a n d t e r restrial ecosystems.Land-use patterns, percentage of impervious land sur-face, stream-flow obstructions, in-stream habitat, degre eof erosion and sedimentation, degree of alteration andchannelization, stream width, and substrate are all exam-ples of abiotic factors affecting streams. Until these con-ditions can be adequately described and a prioritizationmethod established, the assignment of recovery prioritygoals will rely primarily on professional judgement.

6.2.4 The relationship between streamquality and urban developmentThe biotic quality of streams and rivers in the ChicagoWilderness region is highly variable. As in other parts ofthe country, there is clear evidence that watershed urban-ization has adverse impacts on the ecological integrityand beneficial uses of downstream bodies of water. Innortheastern Illinois, this impact is reflected in a re l a t i o n-ship between urbanization, as measured by watershedpopulation density, and stream quality, as measured bythe fish-based Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI). The assess-ment of over 40 northeastern Illinois streams and riversshows that nearly all streams in urban and suburbanwatersheds (that is, with population densities exceedingroughly 300 people per square mile) exhibit signs of con-siderable impairment of their fish communities, withconditions being described as fair to very poor. In con-trast, most rural streams support fish communities thata re rated good or excellent.

6.2.5 Status of streams in northwest IndianaArecent study provides details on the stru c t u re and func-tion of fish communities in the Lake Michigan watershedof northwest Indiana (Simon and Stewart 1999). Therea re three functioning riverine watersheds in northwest

8 0


Indiana, the Little Calumet River, the Grand CalumetR i v e r, and Trail Creek. In addition, there are creeks drain-ing the area of the Great Marsh in the Indiana DunesNational Lakeshore. The natural hydrology of this part ofthe Chicago Wilderness region has been greatly changedf rom natural conditions by human actions over the past200 years, beginning with changes in drainage patternsby Native Americans (Indiana DNR 1999).

T h e re are no high quality re f e rence sites for stre a m sremaining in this region, and few areas qualify even as“least-impacted.” The Trail Creek watershed is the onlyone with a significant percentage of species that are intol-erant of degradation in water and habitat quality. The fishcommunity in each watershed is composed of at leastt e n - p e rcent exotic species, with the Grand Calumet Riverfish community having nearly 60 percent exotic species.I m p rovements in native species richness and the biolog-ical integrity of these streams will re q u i re extensive habi-tat restoration, as even the protected lands in the area arenot functioning as high quality fish habitat (Simon andStewart 1999).

6.2.6 Long-term vision and recovery goalsThe goals in this chapter focus on achieving a desire dbiotic integrity and biological diversity for streams of theChicago Wilderness region. The goals provide the basisfor actions, such as best management practices, informa-tion and education activities, land acquisition, and otherinitiatives that would promote stream biodiversity,c a p a c i t y, and re s i l i e n c y.

We use the terms p rotection, restoration, rehabilitation, a n de n h a n c e m e n t to describe the recommendations for man-aging streams and watersheds. The following goal state-ments help define the terms as they are applied towatersheds throughout the region (see Figure 6.1 andF i g u re 6.2).

P r o t e c t i o n is used for high-quality streams that fullysupport their potential biological integrity and diversity.C o n t rolling point- and non-point-source pollution, chan-nelization, impoundment, and other threats to biologi-cal integrity and diversity is necessary to assure that

M u s s e l s

S l i p p e r s h e l lS p i k eE l l i p s eC reek heelsplitterE l e p h a n t - e a rR a i n b o wWavy-rayed lampmusselS n u ff b o xHiggins eyeSalamander musselS h e e p n o s eP o n d h o rnS p e c t a c l e c a s e

I n s e c t s

H i n e ’s emerald dragonfly

F i s h

Iowa dart e rWe s t e rn sand dart e rRainbow dart e rPallid shinerMottled sculpinBlacknose shinerPugnose shinerG reater re d h o r s eBanded killifishI roncolor shinerBlackchin shinerWeed shinerLongnose daceB rook lampre yPugnose minnowS t a rhead topminnowBanded dart e rB o w f i nSpottail shinerBrassy minnowL a rgescale stonero l l e rC reek chubsuckerPirate perc h

Amphibians and re p t i l e s

Spotted turt l eSmooth softshell turt l eB l a n d i n g ’s turt l e

M a m m a l s

River otter

P l a n t s

H e a rt-leaved plantain, Plantago cordataWater marigold, Bidens beckii

Other feature s

S t reams with > 8 species of musselsOther conditions that are known

to harbor unique biological c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

Table 6.1S t ream based species features of concern


8 1

F i g u re 6.2 Priority watersheds in nort h e a s t e rn Illinois

8 2


s t ream quality is maintained and not degraded. For exam-ple, if a stream is supporting a high-quality fish commu-nity or an endangered species, the goal is to protect thosec o n d i t i o n s .

R e s t o r a t i o n is used for streams that are moderatelydegraded and only partially meet their potential biologi-cal integrity and diversity. Restoration seeks to re p l a c elost or damaged biological conditions, restoring ecologi-cal processes and linkages (such as energy flow, dispersalmechanisms, and succession). For example, if a stream issupporting a moderate-quality fish community and isd i rectly linked to a viable source of species re c o l o n i z a-tion, as is the Kankakee River, the goal is to re s t o re thes t ream to a more diverse fish community by re s t o r i n glost habitat and improving degraded water quality.

R e h a b i l i t a t i o n is used for streams that are more severe l ydegraded and do not meet their potential biologicalintegrity and diversity. The goal here is to replace some ofthe lost or damaged biological functions and linkages ofthe stream. For example, if a low-quality fish commu-nity retains some functional linkage to a viable source ofrecolonization, the goal is to re-establish some biologicalintegrity by partially restoring some habitat or water-quality components.

E n h a n c e m e n t is used for streams that are the mosts e v e rely degraded. The goal is to reclaim severely dam-aged ecosystems. For example, if a very poor fish community has no functional linkage to a source ofrecolonization, the goal is to mitigate the sources ofdegradation in the stream, but to recognize that this willonly have a limited effect on biological functions.

6.2.7 ThreatsAs watersheds undergo development, land is covere dwith impervious materials (such as pavements androoftops) or surfaces that limit infiltration (such as culti-vated fields and areas with shallow-rooted plants). As aresult, stormwater collects on or near the surface.G roundwater re c h a rge areas are restricted and surfaceru n o ff becomes the principal source of stream flows. Theresult is “flashier” streams that are prone to flooding ands e v e re erosion. Watersheds with greater than 10%–15%impervious surface area tend to produce degradeds t ream habitat and biodiversity (Center for Wa t e r s h e dP rotection 1998a). In addition, drainage of wetlands andother low-lying storage areas and channelization ofs t reams alter a watershed’s hydrology and re d u c eaquatic biodiversity.

Based on watershed assessments of impaired stre a m s ,both point and non point sources of pollution are majorcontributors to impairment. While point sources, partic-

ularly municipal wastewater- t reatment plants and com-bined sewer overflows, generally contribute the gre a t e s tpollutant loads to most urban rivers and streams, dra-matic reductions in the concentration of pollutants in d i s c h a rges have occurred in the last two decades. Impair-ments from non-point-source pollution are substantialand are actually increasing in many watersheds due toexpanding suburban development in the region. Thus, amajor challenge is to better control the impacts of devel-o p m e n t - related non-point-source pollution to protect theregion’s remaining high-quality stre a m s .

R u n o ff from residences, businesses, construction sites,and industries carries sediment, nutrients, pesticides,metals, grease, oil, bacteria, salts, and debris to nearbys t reams. Runoff from agricultural areas carries similarpollutants but at diff e rent rates and concentrations.Losses in dissolved oxygen and thermal pollution areother water-quality problems associated with humanimpacts on streams and watersheds.

As development occurs, streams are often impounded,straightened and channelized, the banks sometimesa r m o red with concrete or stripped of native vegetation—all to accommodate buildings, roads, flood control andstormwater conveyance systems. The resulting stre a mhabitat degradation severely limits aquatic life, encour-ages exotic species, and reduces healthy biodiversity.

6.2.8 Recommended actions

• Reduce hydrological alteration

✔ Continue to identify watersheds with streamsthat have exceptional aquatic biological integrityto inform planning efforts and set priorities.This chapter describes a technique, using well-established indicators, for classifying stre a m sa c c o rding to their biological integrity and suggestspriority goals for protecting or restoring their bio-d i v e r s i t y. This process has been applied to thes t reams in the Illinois portion of the ChicagoWilderness region but should be extended to coverthe entire region, so that priorities can be set at theregional level.

✔ Limit development in some high-priority s u b w a t e r s h e d s .Recent re s e a rch has shown that the amount ofimpervious cover in a watershed can be used top roject the current and future health of many head-water streams. There also is strong evidence sug-gesting that impervious cover is linked to thequality of other water re s o u rces such as lakes,reservoirs, and aquifers (Center for Wa t e r s h e dP rotection 1998b).


8 3

✔ Direct development into areas that limit hydrological alteration.Many model land-development principles havebeen documented to limit adverse stormwaterimpacts and to benefit both the stream enviro n m e n tand the community. These principles involve thec a reful location and design of residential stre e t s ,parking lots, building footprints, and conservationa reas (Dreher and Price 1994).

✔ Promote cluster development.Cluster development uses smaller lot sizes and lesspavement to minimize impervious area, re d u c ec o n s t ruction costs, conserve natural areas, pro v i d ecommunity re c reational space, and promote water-shed protection. Relaxing side-yard setbacks, allow-ing narrower frontages and shared driveways, andp roviding shared parking arrangements are alltechniques for cluster development.

✔ Require stormwater detention that effectively controls the full range of flood events.Local standards for stormwater ordinances areusually intended to prevent increases in flood dam-age. Drainage and detention facilities should bedesigned to minimize ru n o ff volumes and rates,so that the natural hydrologic and water- q u a l i t yfunctions of streams, wetlands, and floodplains arep ro t e c t e d .

✔ Promote natural drainage as an alternative to storm sewers.W h e re density, topography, soils, and slopes per-mit, open vegetated swales and constructed wet-lands should be used to temporarily detain, convey,and treat ru n o ff from a range of storm events. Newstormwater outfalls should not discharge unman-aged stormwater into jurisdictional wetlands,aquifers or sensitive are a s .

✔ Create buffer strips and greenways along streams.Riparian stream buffers are variable-width stripsof land continuously vegetated with native plants.They encompass environmental features such aswetlands, steep slopes, the 100-year floodplain,multiple-use greenways and trails, wildlife corri-dors and additional safety widths adjacent to high-impact, high-density development. Buffers shouldbe maintained throughout the stages of planre v i e w, construction, and post-development.

✔ Acquire additional land for conservation.Results of open space re f e renda in several ChicagoWilderness counties showed that the public gener-

ally supports acquisition of new parks and fore s tp reserves for multiple benefits, including re c re-ation, aesthetics, wildlife habitat, clean air, andclean water. Additional open space, with its pro-tection of trees and other deep-rooted vegetation,enhances stormwater infiltration and gro u n d w a t e rre c h a rge, and it can help to mitigate damagescaused by flashy stream flows.

✔ Develop stormwater management plans.Stormwater management plans establish a frame-work of standards for minimizing storm damagesto stru c t u res, public health, and safety. They shouldi d e n t i f y, protect, and improve waterways andg roundwater re c h a rge areas by requiring all newdevelopment to minimize or reduce stormwaterdamages. The plans should protect and impro v ewater quality, promote public awareness ofstormwater issues, and identify revenue sources forthe adopted pro g r a m .

✔ Enforce erosion-control measures on new construction.Many effective practices for controlling erosion andsediment have been developed specifically for useon construction sites. Developers and local off i c i a l sshould work together to choose the best techniquesto minimize off-site sedimentation. For this to hap-pen, building inspectors, contractors, and engineersmust all understand the principles, benefits, andlimitations of best management practices for ero-sion and sediment contro l .

✔ Create or restore streamside wetlands.S t reamside wetlands are complex ecosystems thatp rovide many ecological functions beneficial totheir adjoining streams. They are biologically pro-ductive systems that provide fish and invertebratehabitat, water pollution control, sediment contro l ,water supply, floodwater storage, and barriers toe rosion. In addition, streamside wetlands pro v i d ehabitat for threatened and endangered species suchas the spotted turtle and river otter.

✔ Educate decision-makers about development patterns and the effects of land uses on streams.Elected officials and local governments should bea w a re of model watershed-development principlesand how they apply to their watersheds. Off i c i a l sshould evaluate their zoning codes and subdivisiono rdinances based on those principles. The Centerfor Watershed Protection (1998a), NIPC (1992) andD reher and Price (1997) give details on modeldevelopment principles.

8 4


• Reduce deterioration of habitat quality

✔ Remove unnecessary dams.Many dams in the region impede the movement offish and other aquatic life up and down the water-w a y. Dams can cause degradation of habitat inu p s t ream areas and can have dramatic negativee ffects on water quality. Consequently, high-qualitys t reams sometimes abruptly deteriorate above orbelow a dam. Where dams are not needed for waters u p p l y, flood control, or re c reation, they should beremoved or fitted with stru c t u res that eff e c t i v e l ypermit the passage of aquatic species. By re m o v-ing a dam, the owner can often eliminate the costof repairing the dam while improving the stre a m ’ sb i o d i v e r s i t y. State and federal agencies shoulddevelop guidelines and policy for dam re m o v a lactivities, which at a minimum should re q u i restudy of a removal alternative for any dam repair orrebuild proposal, including economic and enviro n-mental analysis.

✔ Retain or restore emergent and n e a r-shore vegetation.A thriving, diverse vegetative community is animportant component of a functioning stream ors t reamside wetland. If a degraded stream’s hydro l-ogy and water quality can be stabilized, vegetationcan be re-established by planting seedlings, ro o tstocks, bulbs, or transplants. Native plant speciesshould be used in riparian buffer areas to pro t e c tand re s t o re important functions such as bank sta-b i l i t y, wildlife habitat and forage areas, ru n o ff fil-tering, and shading. The choice of native plantsdepends on local needs and conditions. The USDA(1997) has published information on local speciesthat are best adapted for stream conditions.

✔ Re-meander channelized streams.Meanders are naturally occurring bends in a stre a mthat help dissipate energy of flowing waters. Theyc reate a variety of flow velocities and pro v i d eimportant habitat features for some aquatic species.T h e re are many opportunities to re c reate meandersin artificially straightened streams in the ChicagoWilderness re g i o n .

✔ Restore riffles, pools, sandbars, and other elements of in-stream habitat.A r i ffle is a shallow rocky area that separates deeperpools in a stream. Riffles enhance water aerationwhile providing habitat for many aquatic speciessuch as darters and stoneflies. In channelizeds t reams, riffle sequences are typically diminished oreliminated altogether. Sandbars and mud flats pro-vide valuable habitat for a variety of birds andi n v e r t e b r a t e s .

✔ Study the effects of riparian management.U n f o r t u n a t e l y, relatively little monitoring has beenconducted on managed riparian lands. Experi-mental model projects, such as the one at MellodyFarm Nature Preserve on the Middle Fork of theNorth Branch of the Chicago River, should be care-fully studied to evaluate the biodiversity benefits tothe stre a m .

✔ Survey how people use aquatic resources and study the economic impacts of uses such as fishing and recreational boating.Surveys, like the one conducted by the ChicagoRiver Demonstration Project, should be taken tohelp describe and understand how user and inter-est groups currently perceive and use streams ofChicago Wilderness, and how they would like tosee the corridors improved for re c reation andrelated values.

✔ Use bioengineering solutions to control streambank erosion.Bioengineering methods combine live plant materi-als with built stru c t u res to stabilize eroding stre a mbanks, resulting in a living and sustainable ero s i o n -c o n t rol system. By using native plant species andwith considerable care and maintenance in the firstfew years, bank stabilization can become self-sus-taining and, to an extent, self-repairing since theplants are adapted to growing and re p roducing inthe stream enviro n m e n t .

• Reduce deterioration of water quality

✔ Rigorously enforce non-degradation standards.P o l l u t i o n - c o n t rol agencies such as the IllinoisE n v i ronmental Protection Agency (IEPA) havebeen criticized for failing to adequately enforc erules that prohibit adverse impacts of discharges ons t reams as called for in the Clean Water A c t .E ffective anti-degradation policies and enforc e-ment pro c e d u res will ensure that pollutant levels inwastewater and stormwater discharges do notexceed levels that are damaging to stream biodi-v e r s i t y, especially in high-quality stre a m s .

✔ Develop and implement best management practices to control soil erosion, sedimentation, and storm water runoff .E ffective efforts to protect streams and their water-sheds usually include the use of best managementpractices. These are actions or stru c t u res that areneeded to control ru n o ff pollution and flooding.Examples of some commonly used practices areuse of vegetative buffers, streambank stabilization,


8 5

wetland creation or restoration, use of grassedswales or waterways, sediment basins, diversions,keeping streams above ground, re m e a n d e r i n gs t reams, and wildlife plantings.

✔ Find alternatives to new and expanded effluent discharges to high-quality streams. For example,route sewage flows to regional facilities and useland treatment.O rganic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus, and micro-nutrients in storm water and wastewater are gener-ally harmful when discharged to high-qualitys t reams and lakes. Land treatment systems anddetention facilities should be designed to ensurethat pollutants do not reach streams, especiallyhigh-quality stre a m s .

✔ Re-examine standards and practices for sewage treatment.T h e re is a need to establish sewage-treatment poli-cies that ensure protection for high-quality stre a m sand that allow restoration of low-quality stre a m s .While improvements to sewage-treatment plantshave improved quality in degraded urban stre a m s ,the same standards and discharge limits are pro v-ing insufficient to protect high-quality streams innon-urban areas. Aging sewage- treatment facilitieseventually develop structural problems or worn-out mechanical systems that are difficult or uneco-nomical to replace. Plant managers should, to theextent of their authority, assess downstream aquaticbiodiversity when determining how to meet permitlimits and water-quality standards for pollutantremoval and when establishing policies for newplants and updated equipment.

✔ Promote effluent polishing through constructed wetlands for all discharges to moderate- and high-quality streams.Wastewater effluent should not be directly dis-c h a rged to streams, especially high-quality stre a m s .Instead, treatment trains should include tertiaryc o n s t ructed wetlands or provide reuse options suchas irrigation, industrial processing, gro u n d w a t e rre c h a rge, fire protection, and/or limited-contactre c re a t i o n .

✔ Encourage pollution-control regulators to usebiocriteria for water quality standards.Biocriteria are measures of the quality of stre a m sbased on living organisms. Standards for pollutiond i s c h a rges are based on the impact of the discharg eon these living elements. Wa t e r-quality metricsused by the Illinois Environmental Pro t e c t i o nA g e n c y, for example, do not recognize the gradedcontinuum of stream systems and do not give

recognition to unique areas of biodiversity. The stateof Ohio, on the other hand, has developed a set ofmetrics that have given a higher measure of pro t e c-tion to many of the high-quality streams there .

✔ Gain community support for watershed m a n a g e m e n t .Watershed planning and management are perh a p sthe most important stre a m - p rotection tools. Man-agement plans should be developed with commu-nity consensus on the goals for water re s o u rces andthe techniques and practices needed to meet thosegoals. Techniques may include overlay zoning,c o s t - s h a re incentives, growth boundaries, and con-servation easements. See Section 0 (especially 8.3.3)for further discussion.

✔ Evaluate aquatic insects as indicators of water quality.The presence or absence of indicator organisms isan indirect measure of water pollution. Benthicm a c roinvertebrates, including aquatic insects (suchas mayflies, stoneflies, caddisflies, midges, and bee-tles), snails, worms, freshwater clams, mussels, andcrayfish are sensitive to changes in a stream’s eco-logical integrity. However, the relationship betweenbenthic macroinvertebrates and other water- q u a l i t yindicators, such as fish and water chemistry, has notbeen clearly established.

✔ Evaluate the need for improved water quality standards.The state of Illinois does not have numerical stan-d a rds for two major causes of stream degradation:p h o s p h o rus and sediment. The State should evalu-ate and develop appropriate standards that are pro-tective of designated stream uses.

✔ Encourage volunteer monitoring. In the State of Illinois, the goal of the Critical Tre n d sAssessment Program to track changes in stre a mhabitats over time can only be met with a combi-nation of volunteers and scientists working in col-laboration. Volunteer monitors enable the state tocollect large amounts of information economically,and this information is providing an importantbank of knowledge about local conditions ins t reams and other ecosystems. Curre n t l y, there areunlimited opportunities for volunteer monitors tobecome trained citizen scientists through theIllinois EcoWatch Network. The ConservationFoundation also participates in these monitoringp rograms. In Indiana, a similar program entitledHoosier Riverwatch involves citizens in efforts toc a re for and monitor the health of streams andr i v e r s .

8 6


Table 6.2P re l i m i n a r y assessment showing

exceptional lakes

No. of No. C o u n t y Lake name native of E/T

f i s h e s s p e c i e s

C o o k Wolf Lake 2 8 5L a k e Bangs Lake 2 2 5L a k e Cedar Lake 2 7 9L a k e C ross Lake > 1 4 * 5L a k e Deep Lake 1 8 5L a k e Deer Lake-Redwing > 1 4 * 1

S l o u g hL a k e East Loon Lake 2 3 5L a k e F o u rth Lake > 1 4 * 2L a k e Gray's Lake 1 5 2L a k e Timber Lake > 1 4 * 1L a k e Lake Catherine 2 1 1L a k e West Loon Lake 2 3 8L a k e Mud Lake > 1 4 * 1L a k e Petite Lake 1 7 1L a k e Sullivan Lake > 1 4 * 2L a k e Sun Lake > 1 4 * 1L a k e Tu rner Lake 2 2 1L a k e Wooster Lake > 1 4 * 3M c H e n ry C rystal Lake 2 3 2M c H e n ry Elizabeth Lake 1 9 6M c H e n ry Lake Defiance 1 8 1M c H e n ry Lake Killarn e y 1 9 2M c H e n ry Lily Lake 1 6 2

The Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission’s“Restoring and Managing Stream Gre e n w a y s ”(1998) further explains some of the actions describ-ed above. This handbook addresses landscapeb u ffers, channel maintenance, stream bank stabi-lization, and techniques for restoring in-stre a mh a b i t a t .

6 . 3Lake communities—status,

recovery goals, and recommended actions

6.3.1 Lake classificationIn addition to Lake Michigan, three types of natural lakesoccur in the Chicago Wilderness region: bottomlandlakes, vernal ponds, and glacial lakes. Bottomland lakesa re shallow lakes adjacent to large streams and are sea-sonally flooded. There is seasonal re c ruitment of speciesin bottomland lakes. Vernal ponds a re small, seasonallyinundated depressions that have no fish species. G l a c i a llakes a re divided into two types: kettle and flow-thro u g h .Kettle lakes a re isolated basins, while f l o w - t h rough lakes a reconnected to a stream system. Glacial lakes are the mostbiologically diverse of the lake types. In addition to thenatural lakes, the region has a number of manmade lakes.

In planning for biodiversity re c o v e r y, the classificationsystem for lakes is less useful than the terrestrial classifi-cation system. The glacial lakes are the most ecologicallyimportant of the lakes, and are thus the primary focusfor conservation attention, although other lakes do con-tribute to the region’s biodiversity. To help establish pri-orities for conservation efforts and recovery goals, aworking group for lake recovery plans developed a sys-tem to assess the status of the lakes’ biodiversity.

6.3.2 Lake assessment and prioritizationThe method to assess the current condition of biodiver-sity in the region’s lakes is in part based on Ve r m o n t ’ ssystem (Garrison 1994–1995). This system defines fourcategories for lakes. The categories are intended to beoperational and to promote various conservation actionsfor the region’s lakes, rather than to be rigid or re s t r i c t i v e .The four categories are exceptional, important, re s t o r a b l e ,and o t h e r. The criteria used to place various lakes in acategory are driven solely by the biodiversity in the lake.We recognize that other features of lakes such as waterquality are important indicators of environmental qual-

i t y, but we believe that biodiversity provides the mostd i rect measure .

The criteria for the lake status assessment are as follows:

Exceptional lakes• Must have threatened or endangered species of flora

or fauna

• May have other watch species

• Have more than eight native plant species and morethan 14 native fish species.

* For these lakes, data on number of native fishes wasnot available, but experts at the workshop expect highnative fish diversity based on overall lake condition.

6 . 3


8 7

Important lakes• Have more than eight native plant species and more

than14 native fish species

• May have exotic species present, but not dominant

• May have watch species

• A c c o rding to historic re c o rds, have had threatened ore n d a n g e red species of flora or fauna

Restorable lakes• A c c o rding to historic re c o rds, have had threatened or

e n d a n g e red species of flora or fauna

• A re glacial lakes with physical characteristics thatwould support re i n t roduction of endangered andt h reatened species

• May be currently dominated by exotics that could bec o n t rolled with appropriate management

Other lakes• A re unlikely to support sensitive species and may be

better managed for purposes other than biodiversityc o n s e r v a t i o n .

We conducted a preliminary assessment of the re g i o n ’ slakes. Tables 6.2 and 6.3 show preliminary results forexceptional and important lakes. Information used forthis assessment includes data from the Illinois NaturalHeritage Database, the Illinois Department of NaturalR e s o u rces, The Nature Conservancy, and the McHenryADID study, as well as expert opinion. It should be notedthat the data used did not include information on nativeplant species present, and in some cases numbers ofnative fish species are not re c o rded. In cases where com-plete information was not available, scientist and landmanagers made a determination based on what they didknow about the lake. As new information becomes avail-able, the status of the lakes may change.

6.3.3 Long-term vision and recovery goalsExceptional lakes: The vision for these lakes is to manageall of them for maximum aquatic biodiversity. This willinclude allowing native vegetation to dominate shore-lines and keeping littoral-zone disturbance to a mini-mum. A goal is for no exceptional lake to lose any nativespecies, particularly endangered or threatened species.Over time, the number of exceptional lakes shouldi n c rease due to improvement in the condition of impor-tant lakes, yet none of the exceptional lakes shoulddecline in condition. A goal is to manage exceptionallakes as part of their watershed. To achieve this, water-shed plans should be developed, implemented, andchanged as needed to maintain the exceptional status of alake. To help achieve these goals, all historical biodiver-sity data should be retained. A d d i t i o n a l l y, the state lawson endangered and threatened species should bes t rengthened to provide adequate protection for theseaquatic species. More re s e a rch is needed on the life his-tories of endangered and threatened aquatic species. Forpriority species, specific recovery plans should be devel-oped and implemented.

Important lakes: The goals for these lakes are similar tothe goals for exceptional lakes. The vision for importantlakes is to improve their condition so that most of theimportant lakes move up to the category of exceptionallakes. Management plans need to be implemented notonly to improve the conditions of these lakes but also top revent them from falling into a lower category. A g o a l

Table 6.3P re l i m i n a r y assessment showing important lakes

No. of C o u n t y Lake name native fishes

C o o k Axehead Lake 1 4C o o k Beck Lake 1 6C o o k Busse Woods Lake 2 2C o o k Maple Lake 1 5C o o k M a rquette Park Lagoon 1 6C o o k Midlothian Reserv o i r 1 5C o o k Tampier Lake 1 8D u P a g e M a l l a rd Lake 1 8D u P a g e P i c k e rel Lake 1 8D u P a g e Silver Lake 1 8L a k e Channel Lake 2 2L a k e Diamond Lake 2 0L a k e F o x / N i p p e r s i n k 2 3L a k e Gages Lake 2 2L a k e Lake Marie 2 2L a k e Lake Zurich 2 2L a k e Long Lake 2 1L a k e Old School Pond 2 2 0L a k e Pistakee Lake 1 8L a k e Sand Lake 1 4L a k e Sterling Lake 2 5M c H e n ry Griswold Lake 1 8M c H e n ry Lac Louette 1 6Wi l l Braidwood Lake 3 8Wi l l Lake Milliken 1 9

8 8


is to have landowners value the natural state of a shore-line and play an active role in conserving and pre s e r v-ing lakes.

Restorable lakes: For these lakes, the goal is to contro linvasive species and sources of impairment eff e c t i v e l y.Many of these lakes can and should be re s t o red to thepoint where endangered and threatened species can bere i n t roduced. With proper restoration efforts, nativespecies should be surviving the challenge of exotics. Agoal is for most restorable lakes to move up to the cate-gory of important lakes through restoration eff o r t s .Demonstration projects that clearly show how it is pos-sible to re s t o re a lake to exceptional condition should beconducted as part meeting this goal. The goal of re s t o r a-tion efforts is to return lakes to a condition in which theycan retain their historical native species.

Other lakes: Lakes that are not viewed as re s t o r a b l e( f rom a biodiversity perspective) should provide re c re-ational and cultural services that do not jeopardize thebiodiversity goals of other lakes. These lakes may serveimportant educational purposes, and natural habitatsshould be encouraged in these lakes. A goal for theselakes is to have all of them contribute positively to theirwatershed’s overall quality, either through water- q u a l-ity or stormwater management. Fisheries managementneeds to be better understood, and anglers and otherre c reational users should have a better understanding ofthe importance of biodiversity. The goal is for the publicto understand the limitations of a finite re s o u rce and toadjust their expectations accord i n g l y.

6.3.4 ThreatsThe most severe threats to lakes are invasive species,nutrient loading, sedimentation, loss of native sub-m e rged and emergent vegetation, and managementactions focused on only a narrow range of species (suchas game fish). While invasive species, hydrologic change,and loss of native vegetation are common threats to bothaquatic and terrestrial systems, aquatic communities aremuch more sensitive to sedimentation, toxic substances,and excess nutrients.

P roblematic invasive species include Eurasian water mil-foil, carp, and zebra mussels. Species most often invadelake communities either through human intro d u c t i o n(knowingly or not) and through hydrological connec-tions. There f o re, lakes without significant public accessand with few or no hydrological connections are moreresistant to invasion than other lakes.

Nutrients enter lakes through a variety of sources. Theses o u rces include effluent from sewage-treatment plants,agricultural ru n o ff, lawn fertilizers, and waterfowl.

Causes of erosion resulting in turbidity and sedimenta-tion include carp, shoreline development, upland devel-opment, agricultural ru n o ff, and other man-maded i s t u r b a n c e s .

S u b m e rged and emergent vegetation can be lost eithert h rough turbidity and siltation, deliberate removal, shad-ing by excess algae caused by nutrients, or from thee ffects of invasive species. The loss of submerged vege-tation is particularly important, because of its value ashabitat for fish and other organisms and its role in set-tling sediments.

D i ff e rent from terrestrial communities, which are signif-icantly threatened by the lack of management, lakes oftens u ffer from narrowly focused management activities,which are generally not aimed at protecting biodiversity.Lakes are often “managed” for re c reational purposes orfor particular species of game fish. This type of manage-ment tends to disre g a rd biodiversity and hence becomesa threat to the region’s lake communities. For re c re a t i o n a lreasons, native aquatic plants are often removed eithert h rough harvesting or herbiciding, which can be extre m-ely detrimental to biodiversity. These activities are par-ticularly damaging to the littoral zone. Wa t e r- l e v e lmanipulation and dredging, if done solely for re c re-ational purposes, are also very damaging to the lake bio-d i v e r s i t y. Recreational motor boats and jet skis are alsop roblems because they create waves and turbulence inexcess of natural frequency and intensity. This aff e c t sboth shore erosion and the bottom in shallow are a s .A d d i t i o n a l l y, motor boats and jet skis disrupt lakebedand shoreline soils, re q u i re large open-water areas thata re often created by removing emergent vegetation, andharm the vegetation that does remain.

When fisheries are managed for a few particular speciesor when there are uncontrolled levels of stocking, theoverall lake biodiversity often suffers. Not all manage-ment for game species conflicts with biodiversity goals,and lakes important for biodiversity can also supportre c reational fishing activities. The challenge is for man-agers to explicitly consider and address biodiversityissues in sports fisheries management activities, particu-larly in high-quality lakes.

Lakes also face several other threats. Lake hydrology isoften interrupted through disconnection between lakesand other hydrological breaks. The introduction into lakesof contaminants, such as heavy metals, pesticides, andsalt, has detrimental effects on the biodiversity. Finally, theloss of vegetation and overhanging canopy around a lakecan lead to loss of essential habitat and fish species.


8 9

✔ Plan, protect, and manage lakes at the watershed levelFor exceptional and important lakes, opportunities forpublic acquisition of shoreline and upland are a sshould be identified and prioritized. Critical water-shed areas also should be identified. In general, lakesshould be managed as part of their watershed, andwatershed-planning efforts should account for thebiodiversity needs of lakes.

✔ Develop a region-wide process to track and study threats to lakesA region-wide re c o rding system should be developedthat collects information about the types of pesticidesbeing used in the region and specifically where theya re applied. The system should also track the status oflakes. These re c o rds are needed to better understandthe threats to lakes and to adapt management and pol-icy accord i n g l y.

✔ Conduct research to better understand habitatrequirements of aquatic speciesTo better manage for fish diversity, more re s e a rch isneeded on environmental partitioning by fish species.T h e re is more to learn about how fish use their habitat.A d d i t i o n a l l y, very little is known about the status andhabitat re q u i rements of many invertebrate and algaespecies. To manage for biodiversity, more informationis needed on these poorly understood species.

✔ Investigate and mitigate the threat of salinizationWhile salinization is a known threat to lake commu-nities, more re s e a rch is needed on the specific eff e c t sand impact thresholds of salt on lake biodiversity.Until more is known about the effects of salt, the gen-eral practice should be to minimize loading of salt tolakes, especially those not having outlet flows thatrelieve accumulation.

✔ Investigate and prepare for the possibility of reintroduction of native speciesAs conditions of restorable lakes are improved to thepoint where they can support a variety of species, it isrecommended that species be re i n t roduced to theselakes. However, protocols and models should bedeveloped to ensure that re i n t roductions will be eff e c-tive and eff i c i e n t .

✔ Strengthen laws protecting species and their habitatsLaws on endangered and threatened species need to bes t rengthened and enforced to provide adequate pro-tection for these species. Another recommended action

6.3.5 Recommended actionsLakes are very diff e rent from the terrestrial communi-ties in Chicago Wilderness, in that most lakebeds arel a rgely in private ownership. Consequently, conserva-tion of lake biodiversity cannot be focused just on thee fforts of the Forest Preserve and Conservation Districtsand other land-owning public agencies. Some specificactions can be taken to manage directly for biodiversity.Some management needs will re q u i re additional re-s e a rch and an adaptive management approach. How-e v e r, the fate of lakes lies more directly in the hands ofthe private citizen. There f o re, there are numerous re c-ommendations to improve conservation of lake biodi-versity through both regulations and volunteer activitiesby the public. Both regulation and incentive tactics willre q u i re better knowledge of the laws and issues by thegeneral public. Creating a balance among the multipleuses of lakes is an overarching need and goal of manyrecommended actions. Pro g ress can be made in re a c h-ing this balance through better guidelines and lawsre g a rding human activities around and in lakes. Mostimportant, extensive public education and communica-tions are needed to create a heightened awareness ofissues affecting lake biodiversity. All of the pre c e e d i n grecommendations in 6.2.7 for protecting the hydro l o g yand water quality of streams also are appropriate forl a k e s .

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s

✔ Develop specific recovery plans for species and lakes of concernIt is recommended that recovery plans for specificspecies be developed and implemented. Some priorityspecies for specific recovery plans include pugnoses h i n e r, fern pondweed, white-stemmed pondweed,water star grass, grass-leaved arrowhead, and waterc e l e r y. Of all the fish species, pugnose shiner servesas a good indicator species; if recovery actions re s t o reviable populations of pugnose shiner, then otherspecies will be helped as well. In addition to specificspecies, recovery plans for specific lakes are re c o m-mended. A first step is to develop criteria to identifypriority lakes for lake-specific recovery plans.

✔ Develop better mechanisms to control the invasion of exotic speciesBetter control mechanisms are needed for invasivespecies, particularly Eurasian water milfoil and carp,and this will re q u i re re s e a rch. Biological controls suchas beetles and weevils to control Eurasian milfoil holdp romise as the best long-term solutions, but great caremust be taken to prevent introduction of controls thatcould themselves become pro b l e m s .

9 0


is to strongly encourage naturally vegetated shore l i n ezones, particularly in critical watersheds. The excep-tional lakes are of particular importance to the conser-vation of the region’s aquatic biodiversity. There f o re ,rules and regulations to limit uses of the exceptionallakes and mitigate negative impacts warrant additionald i s c u s s i o n .

✔ Integrate biodiversity concerns into laws, policies, and guidelinesState laws, particularly those dealing with the use of pesticides and herbicides, need to be improved tointegrate biodiversity issues. State policies on aquatic-plant management should ensure that plant manage-ment both respects property rights and encouragesdiverse plant communities. Guidelines for land-useplanning that recognize biodiversity and impro v ewater quality should be developed. In general, biodi-versity concerns need to be much more broadly incor-porated into land-use and wastewater- t re a t m e n tplans. Model ordinances for alternative developmenta round lakeshores should be enhanced and pro m o t e d ,and conservation easements around shorelines shouldbe promoted. In short, alternative methods that reflect biodiversity needs should be enhanced andp resented to the public. A d d i t i o n a l l y, Chicago Wi l d e r-ness should work directly with municipal govern-ments in lake are a s .

✔ Clarify ambiguous laws relating to lakes and their managementOne particularly problematic legal issue is Illinois’swater law. How this law relates to water use, owner-ship, and management is unclear and inadequate.T h e re are numerous legal interpretations of the law,and this confusion currently stands in the way ofrestorative issues and actions. It is recommended thatChicago Wilderness take a leading role in working tohelp resolve this issue.

✔ Increase public understanding of lake biodiversity issuesFor the conservation of lake biodiversity, the mostimportant action is to balance human uses withecosystem constraints. Public recognition of the valueof lake biodiversity and appreciation that lakes are alimited re s o u rce will be important to achieving con-servation goals. Recreational and other human usesmust not exceed what lakes can support. As a firststep, the negative environmental impacts of develop-ment, re c reation, and misuse should be documented,as well as the positive effect of management practices.Public information and education should make thesewell known, particularly to lake association members

and other potential supporters. Revisions to incen-tives, programs, laws, and regulations should then fol-low together with appropriate public hearings.

✔ Increase public involvement in lake management and protectionT h e re are already a number of volunteer lake moni-tors and stewards, but their numbers should beexpanded, not only to increase the amount of data col-lected and the number of lakes monitored, but also toc reate a broader network of people knowledgeableabout lakes. It is recommended that Chicago Wi l d e r-ness promote cooperation and communication amongl a k e f ront owners and users. Active lake users need tolearn the full impacts of their collective uses of thelakes on biodiversity and realize the ecological limitsto their uses. Lake-use plans that offer a range of re c re-ational uses consistent with a balanced, diverseecosystem need to be developed. Development ofthese plans will re q u i re the input of knowledgeablecitizens and consumers. Additional funding for biodi-versity conservation and non-consumptive usesshould be generated, at least in part, from consump-tive uses of the lakes.

6 . 4N e a r-shore waters of

Lake MichiganLake Michigan is a vast aquatic ecosystem in its ownright, and its near- s h o re waters in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s sregion function primarily as part of that system. However,they are an important part of Chicago Wilderness, bothin their impact on adjacent ecological communities andintrinsically as an important ecological community. LakeMichigan provides climatic diversity and supplies sand tonourish its changing beaches and dunes. The seasonaland year-to-year changes in water level support lakeshorewetland communities. Its near- s h o re waters provide habi-tat for many fish and other aquatic species and are usedby migrating waterfowl and shore b i rd s .

Much of the shoreline in the Chicago Wilderness area hasbeen filled for buildings, parks, and marinas, eliminat-ing coastal wetlands. The areas that remain in near-original condition tend to be beaches with re l a t i v e l yh i g h - e n e rgy wave systems and relatively little org a n i csubstrate to support ecological communities. Stru c t u re sinstalled to protect harbors and lakefront developmenthave in many cases interrupted movement of sand ordeflected it into deep water where it is lost from thebeach-nourishment pro c e s s .

6 . 4


9 1

The fish communities are in a state of flux due to manychanges throughout Lake Michigan. Major factorsi n c l u d e :

• historic invasion by lamprey and alewife and intro-duction of Pacific salmon

• excessive fish harvest

• recent invasion by zebra mussels, which are changingabundance and species mix of algae and zooplankton(including algae that create taste problems in drink-ing water)

• ongoing invasion by gobies and other species

Historic problems with excessive nutrients, acute toxicity,and floating materials have been solved, but pro b l e m swith persistent toxic substances that bioaccumulate infish are still a problem for human health, although eff e c t sin the ecosystem are not appare n t .

Wanton filling of shallow areas and gross pollution hasended, but care must be taken not to allow additional fill-ing and not to allow stru c t u res that interrupt curre n t sand supplies of sand. A major current fishery problem isthe decline of lake perch, which is being addressed by thefish-management agencies in the respective States.

T h e re are opportunities that should be addressed locallyto re s t o re aquatic habitat and biodiversity in some shel-t e red areas such as harbors, river mouths, and lagoons.Even intensely urban settings offer opportunities to cre-ate incidental habitat while designing projects focused onother purposes such as shore stabilization or bro w n - f i e l dre d e v e l o p m e n t .

Recommended actions• Identify information gaps concerning the Lake

Michigan shoreline in the region with respect to sur-viving habitat, and opportunities for habitat re s t o r a-tion, so that practical goals can be developed.

• Identify key site-specific aquatic habitat re s t o r a t i o nopportunities to support local and lake-wide biodi-v e r s i t y.

• Identify site-specific opportunities to provide shore-line protection that also provides improved habitat.

9 2

Chapter 7

Status of Endangered andThreatened Species: Assessment

and Recommendations

7 . 1Importance of endangered

and threatened species to the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s

recovery planThis plan is concerned with the conservation of biodi-versity at all levels—natural communities, species, andgenes. The process of assessing this nested diversityseeks to answer basic questions about its status: howmuch is there or how much remains, what is its qualityand viability, what are the trends—stable, increasing, ord e c reasing? The ultimate goal of assessment is to developp rograms that ensure recovery of all the elements of bio-d i v e r s i t y. Except for the few species that have been thesubject of intensive re s e a rch or recovery programs, usu-ally those on the federal list of endangered and thre a t-ened species, we are just beginning to answer thesequestions for individual species.

E n d a n g e red and threatened species are recognized byfederal or state governments as being in danger of extinc-tion or being sufficiently compromised that they are atrisk of becoming endangered, either nationally or in astate. Some states, including Wisconsin and Indiana, alsocategorize species as rare or of special concern.

Because of their rarity, endangered and thre a t e n e dspecies possess an aesthetic appeal to the public that can-not be overestimated. In general, rare organisms are val-ued, the sight of them is genuinely thrilling, and their lossis mourned. A beautiful and conspicuous endangere dplant like the eastern prairie fringed orchid can serve asa symbol to enlist public support for all rare species. Therecovery of a species can be a success for all to celebrate.Aspotting of the rare upland sandpiper can bring bird e r s

f rom considerable distances simply for the opportunityto view it. (However, caution must be used in pro v i d i n gpublic access to these organisms so as not to create addi-tional threats to their survival.)

Some species are of special interest because they arerelicts, surviving in the region after climatic change.Many more plant species are regionally significantbecause they are members of characteristic, and oftenimperiled, natural communities of the region. A d d i t i o n a lspecies are significant because they play key roles in localecosystems (such as canopy trees or obligate food plantsfor insects) or simply add to the direct human value ofsuch systems.

E n d a n g e red and threatened species make up a substan-tial component of the region’s biodiversity. For example,the 237 plant species listed as endangered or thre a t e n e dat the state level re p resent nearly 15% of the re g i o n ’ snative plant species. Twelve of these species occurringwithin Chicago Wilderness are ranked as globally signif-icant, because they occur only within the region and adja-cent regions (called “near endemics”) or because theya re highly rare and imperiled. Of these, five are curre n t l yrecognized by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as thre a t-ened or endangered at the national level.

Among the mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, andfish there are 114 state level endangered or thre a t e n e dspecies. Five of these are federally listed and several morea re federal candidate species.

Quantitative data are available for some aspects of thestatus of endangered and threatened species, such asnumbers of occurrences of populations or subpopula-tions (known as element occurrences), amounts andtypes of monitoring being done, and levels of pro t e c t i o n .Much of the assessment of their status and future viabil-ity is qualitative; nevertheless, it is based on the com-

7 . 1

Chapter 7. Status of Endangered and Threatened Species: Assessment and Recommendations

9 3

bined best judgement of re s e a rchers and land managersexperienced both in studying and managing these taxa.As part of the recovery plan process, the Science andLand Management Teams Endangered Plants Task Forc edeveloped a list of endangered and threatened speciesmeriting additional conservation attention. This list is inAppendix 6.

7 . 2Endangered and

threatened species within acommunity context

In Illinois, the 1978 Natural A reas Inventory found thatless than 1% of the original Illinois landscape (fore s t s ,prairies, savannas, wetlands, lakes, and ponds) re m a i n e din relatively high-quality, undisturbed condition. Indianaand Wisconsin lands have suff e red similarly. This level ofcommunity disturbance has had a direct impact on ani-mals and plants. Instead of being dispersed across thelandscape, these organisms have re t reated to—or survivein—the few remnant areas. Once widespread, nativespecies have become scarce and naturally rare specieshave become increasingly rare if not extirpated.

This plan focuses on the assessment and appro p r i a t emanagement of communities in order to preserve andenhance the biodiversity occurring within them. Themajority of endangered plant and animal species fallwithin this overall community perspective. The soundmanagement of communities outlined in the RecoveryPlan will, there f o re, work toward their preservation andeventually their re c o v e r y. However, special considera-tions and concerns arise for endangered and thre a t e n e dspecies. This chapter addresses those considerations.

7 . 3Why are organisms rare?

Some plant and animal species were always rare in ourregion because of geographic distribution, narrow habi-tat re q u i rements, and low-density populations. It isimportant to ensure that the conditions that supportthese species persist despite radical changes in land andre s o u rce usage.

Many species were once widespread, but have becomer a re because of habitat loss or fragmentation, fire sup-p ression, encroachment of invasive species, and other

human disturbances. Their plight mirrors that of re g i o n ’ sbiodiversity in general. Many more native species arealso dwindling—the more common species of todaycould well become the threatened species of tomorro w.By documenting and re s e a rching the region’s endan-g e red and threatened species, we can learn about the bio-logical and ecological needs of a broad spectrum of floraand fauna. This information also contributes overall tothe field of conservation biology.

Many plant species are rare because of their dependenceon specialized biological or environmental factors such asspecific pollinators, soil micro o rganisms, hydro l o g i c a lconditions, soil chemistry, or soil parent materials. Manyof these factors have been adversely affected over thelast century of intensive development. In the case of self-incompatible plants, small, isolated populations lack thepollen from other populations needed for re p ro d u c t i v esuccess. In some cases, rare animals are dependent on acommon plant for food, or a rare plant may parasitizeanother more common plant. Understanding the com-plex interdependence among organisms is critical to afull understanding of regional biodiversity and its re c o v-e r y. Recognizing these specialized life histories and there q u i rements that vary from species to species can help inc reating effective plans for their recovery within a com-munity context.

Many species are rare because they are restricted to anda re sometimes characteristic of rare and regionally orglobally significant habitats such as fens, bogs, seeps andsprings, pannes, dunes, dolomite and sand prairies, oaksavannas, and shrublands. Some of these habitats may beremnants from earlier climatic or geophysical re g i m e ssuch as glaciation. The continued presence of healthypopulations of these rare species and their associatesreflects the quality of these areas today.

Some species are rare within a region because they are atthe limits of their range here, but they may be abundantor stable in other areas. These species contribute to bio-diversity in important ways, but have less priority in aChicago Wilderness Recovery Plan because they are lessat risk throughout their range.

Some rare plant species re q u i re early successional habi-tats or natural disturbances, such as fire, grazing,d rought, soil disturbance, or periodic flooding. These dis-turbances cause their appearance in sporadic and ran-dom ways and give them a niche within high-qualitya reas. These disturbance re q u i rements must be under-stood and incorporated into management plans andpractices to ensure the survival of these species.

7 . 2

7 . 3

9 4


7 . 4Threats and stresses to

endangered and threatened species

By definition, endangered and threatened species are atrisk of being lost from the region. Both state and federalgovernments recognize the plight of these species andtheir need for special attention and protection by placingthem on endangered and threatened lists. As outlinedabove, a variety of causes lead to rarity, some of themintrinsic to the biological nature of the species. However,many threats and stressors are strongly correlated withhuman impacts, which have greatly escalated over thepast several decades. Most of these factors negativelya ffect the region’s natural biodiversity, both at the com-munity and species levels. In general, threatened ande n d a n g e red species are the first to be at risk under thesep re s s u res. Threats are imminent problems that havepotential to radically change or eliminate a habitat orpopulation. Stressors are the chronic problems thate rode diversity and quality of habitats and species overtime. As described in Chapter 3, threats and stre s s o r sinclude loss of habitat, fragmentation, fire suppre s s i o n ,invasive species, imbalances of native species, collect-ing pre s s u res, hydrological change, and other enviro n-mental and abiotic factors, including pollution, ero s i o n ,and contaminants. Often, rare species have declined dueto an interaction of factors. For example, habitat lossmultiplies the problems of habitat fragmentation. Fires u p p ression leads to habitat alteration, invasion of exoticspecies, and finally to habitat loss. In conjunction withthese general threats to communities, individual rareo rganisms may have additional stressors particular totheir life history and re q u i rements. These circ u m s t a n c e smust be dealt with in greater depth in any recovery planfor a listed species.

7 . 5Protection status of

listed speciesP rotection status is a rough but useful guide to determinepriorities. Species that are protected (within NatureP reserves or in some portions of national parks) or semi-p rotected (on publicly owned conservation lands thatmay have multiple purposes) have a better chance ofbeing adequately managed or monitored. If 50% or fewerof the sites on which a species occurs are protected, thespecies is at much greater risk of being lost. A n i m a l s ,unlike plants, are mobile and in many instances can

move from site to site and are protected while they are ona protected site. On the other hand, as property of thestate, animals receive more protection than do plantsw h e rever they are .

P l a n t s

I l l i n o i s• 28.7% of element occurrences (EOs) (209 of 728) have

no protection or semi-protection. Most of the unpro-tected EOs occur on privately owned pro p e r t y.

• 26.8% of the listed species (40 the 149) have 50% orfewer of their EOs protected or semi-pro t e c t e d .

I n d i a n a(based on records documented since 1979; an additional 39listed species have not been documented since 1979 or are con-s i d e red extirpated)

• 44.8% of EOs (189 of 422) have no pro t e c t i o n .

• 47.9% of listed species (47 of 102) have only 50% orfewer of their EOs on public lands.

A n i m a l s

Illinois • 58.7% of EOs (285 of 485) of listed animal species are

u n p rotected: 81.1% of fish, 85.7% of mammals, 23.1%of amphibians and reptiles, 57.5% of birds, and 4.3% ofi n v e r t e b r a t e s .

• 60% of listed animal species (33 of 55) have only 50%or fewer of their occurrences pro t e c t e d .

I n d i a n a( f rom records documented since 1979)

• 60% of EOs (138 of 238) of listed animal species areu n p rotected: 100% of fish, 80% of mammals, 43% ofamphibians and reptiles, 64% of birds, and 42% ofinvertebrates (Lepidoptera re p o r t e d ) .

• 58% of listed animal species (18 of 31) have only 50%or fewer of their occurrences pro t e c t e d .

7 . 6Management and recovery

r e c o m m e n d a t i o n sN a t u r a l - a rea scientists and restorationists have long sincelearned that mere protection is not enough to pre s e r v esystems and their species adequately. For these rare

7 . 4

7 . 5

7 . 6

Chapter 7. Status of Endangered and Threatened Species: Assessment and Recommendations

9 5

species to continue at present levels or to increase, soundmanagement and restoration programs are essential,involving knowledge of the make-up of communitiesthat include rare species and of the means of maintain-ing their stru c t u re and function. While sound communitymanagement plans will go a long way towards the con-servation and recovery of many endangered and thre a t-ened species, some species will always re q u i re specialmanagement attention, accompanied by a well-designedmonitoring pro g r a m .

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ A c q u i re more public land to increase the size and

number of available habitats. Among the criteria toconsider in purchasing land should be the pre s e n c eof endangered and threatened species; greater empha-sis should be placed on land acquisition as a means ofp rotecting rare species. Priority should be given to cre-ating complexes of communities, since many animalspecies depend on a variety of habitats.

✔ Legal protection of plants, in contrast to that of ani-mals, is weak. Enact stronger legislation for the pro-tection of rare native plants.

✔ E n l a rge and consolidate existing natural communi-ties by creating buffers, or by restoration, to counteractthe effects of fragmentation, particularly the isolationof populations of rare species. For some species, suchas insects, it is more important to enlarge sites than toc reate new ones.

✔ I n c rease the levels of protection for unprotected ors e m i - p rotected sites with known occurrences ofe n d a n g e red and threatened species. For example, in-corporate such sites into the Nature Preserves system.

✔ Work with private landowners, either individual orcorporate, to protect the endangered and thre a t e n e do c c u r rences on their pro p e r t y. Use conservation ease-ments and other incentives to protect endangered andr a re re s o u rces on private land.

✔ In management plans for all sites with endangere dand threatened species, include specific provisions toeliminate stresses and threats and to enhance re c o v e r yof these species.

✔ To measure effects of management activities on rarespecies, design monitoring programs (for re p re s e n t a-tive populations) to provide feedback to adapt man-agement activities and appro a c h e s .

✔ Institute a region-wide monitoring program for rarespecies, implemented by trained volunteers as well asagency staff, to enhance and coordinate current eff o r t sto measure population trends. Protocols should bes p e c i e s - b a s e d .

✔ Rotate and diversify management treatments in ord e rto maintain a variety of habitats needed by manys p e c i e s .

✔ C reate a common Chicago Wilderness database. Toavoid duplication of re s e a rch and effort, managersshould have access to centralized information aboutthe needs of rare species and management practicesrelated to them for adaptation to their own sites.Linking with Natural Heritage Databases in Illinois,Indiana, and Wisconsin is critical to this pro c e s s .

✔ Expand ex situ p rograms for endangered and thre a t-ened plant species so that adequate seed or plantmaterial is available for appropriate re i n t roduction asm o re sites are re s t o re d .

✔ Develop recovery plans for both federal-listed speciesand state-listed species that have been identified aspriorities. The Chicago Wilderness Endangered andT h reatened Species Task Force has identified appro x i-mately 150 species as priorities for recovery in theregion, assigned to six categories (see Appendix 6).The plans should be realistic, suited to the CW re g i o n ,and workable within county and other regional stru c-t u res and agencies. Reference should be made torecovery plans already developed or in process forfederally listed species as models to be adapted andsimplified for state-listed species. Essential elements ofthese recovery plans include:

• Historical and present extent of populations (usingGIS-based mapping)

• O c c u r rences on private and public lands

• Life history characteristics

• Identification of stressors, threats, and tre n d s

• Ecological re q u i rements and availability of appro-priate habitats for re i n t ro d u c t i o n

• Identification of seed sources and germination andnursery facilities for re i n t roduction of plant stock;identification of source populations and re a r i n gfacilities for re i n t roduction of animal stock

• Outline of appropriate management practices

• Monitoring the effects of management practices aspart of a species-based monitoring pro g r a m

• Identification of re s e a rch needs

9 6

Chapter 8

Preserving Land and Wa t e rResources for Biodiversity

8.1 I n t r o d u c t i o n

The previous chapters reviewed the types of naturalcommunities found in the Chicago Wilderness area andthe goals and actions needed to sustain them. As noted inChapter 3, the natural areas of the region can be seen asshrinking islands in an increasingly non-natural land-scape. To overcome this, two categories of action standout: 1) enlarging natural areas by protecting the land and2) managing the land to sustain native ecological com-munities. This chapter discusses the first of these twoactions; Chapter 9 discusses the second.

B e f o re the remaining unprotected natural areas disap-pear from the Chicago Wilderness region, it is essentialthat we identify and protect the land that is important tosustaining our natural ecological communities. A c q u i s-ition and other protection must be accomplished as soonas possible and must be focused on high-priority sites.Also, natural areas within publicly owned land must bep rotected from conversion to intensive uses such as golfcourses and playing fields.

The landscape is being shaped by market forces, and con-servation needs to take account of and function withinthe economic and regulatory processes. Consumption ofland has accelerated faster than population growth, butconsumers are showing increasing pre f e rence for envi-ronmentally sensitive developments with well designedopen space and natural areas. And as development cov-ers the remaining open areas of Chicago Wilderness, thepublic is supporting re f e renda for acquisition of addi-tional natural areas. Acquisition by entities devoted toconservation is the most direct and certain form of pro-tection and should be strongly supported. But manyother methods can help provide protection. The follow-ing sections describe these methods.

Ownership of natural areas in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s sregion is a mix of public and private. The core of ChicagoWilderness consists of public land permanently dedi-cated to the conservation of nature. However, as humanuse of the land intensifies, the choices made by privatelandowners become increasingly important. Land man-agement by private owners can strongly affect the courseof events in nearby public natural areas. Fortunately,every year more citizens and public officials inquireabout techniques for, and become more adept at, pre-serving open space and restoring habitat.

8 . 2Private landowners:

initiatives for conservation

8.2.1 IntroductionPrivate property owners can play a critical role in Chic-ago Wilderness. Especially important are those who own:

• lands that harbor significant habitat

• critically situated lands with important re s t o r a t i o np o t e n t i a l

• lands that adjoin high-quality habitat

P roperty owners with lands meeting any of thesedescriptions can make a long-term commitment of all orpart of their property to the overall fabric of larg e - s c a l eecosystem restoration. The privately owned pro p e r t i e sthat can play an especially important role in ChicagoWilderness are those that include remnant habitats ofgood to high quality, those with lesser-quality habitatsthat could be improved by restoration of missing species,and those on which degraded habitats can be re p l a c e dor soil hydrology can be re s t o re d .

8 . 1

8 . 2

Chapter 8. Preserving Land and Water Resources for Biodiversity

9 7

Ty p i c a l l y, the larger the property the better, but alsoimportant are clustered, separately owned, smaller siteswith cooperative neighbors and also all sites that adjoin ord i rectly affect properties with threatened or endangere dspecies or rich natural communities. In addition, all pro p-erties in critical watersheds have a role to play. The criticalwatersheds are those of very high-priority and high-pri-ority streams, and those of exceptional and importantlakes, as defined in Chapter 6. Types of privately ownedp roperty most likely to play an important role in ChicagoWilderness are include residential lots three acres andl a rg e r, golf courses, corporate campuses, commonlyowned open space in planned unit developments, huntclubs, undeveloped investment properties, and re c re-ational lands owned by individuals and corporations.

Recommendations for private property owners

✔ P roperty owners who believe they own importanthabitats should have inventories of their land made bythe staff of local, state, or federal agencies or by expe-rienced citizens associated with local conservationo rg a n i z a t i o n s .

✔ P roperty owners who wish to commit to long-rangep rotection and enhancement of their habitats shouldfirst assess the various methods of legal pro t e c t i o n(listed in detail below).

✔ P roperty owners who do not wish to encumber or selltheir land, but recognize its habitat value, should pur-sue habitat-enhancement techniques, participate inl a rger landscape restoration efforts, inspire neighbor-ing property owners, and share information onuncommon species observed on their pro p e r t y.

✔ P roperty owners who have already established a strat-egy to protect and re s t o re their property should assesspotential impacts on their habitat from changes toland use on neighboring properties and, based on thatassessment, pursue strategies with neighboring pro p-erty owners to insure protection and expansion of thehabitat re s o u rc e s .

✔ Corporate property owners should re s t o re nativeplant and animal communities on their lands orexpand existing restorations wherever possible toexpand, link, or enhance nearby habitats. This can pro-vide employee and community benefits and, in somecases, can achieve significant savings on land man-a g e m e n t .

✔ Chicago Wilderness should map and catalog theextent of private properties in the region that couldplay an important role in broader ecosystem re s t o r a-tion eff o r t s .

✔ Chicago Wilderness should establish a process where-by private property owners can become effective par-ticipants in broader efforts to re s t o re ecosystems.

Conservation strategies available to private pro p e r t yowners are described in the remainder of section 8.2.

8.2.2 Conservation easementsIllinois statutes allow private property owners to donateconservation easements to governmental bodies or not-f o r- p rofit conservation organizations certified as 501c3by the IRS. The property owner retains title to the pro p-e r t y, but the easement is granted in perpetuity, to pro-tect the natural re s o u rces from major changes in landuse, such as the building of stru c t u res, removal of nativeflora or fauna, grading or disruption of soils, or similarrestrictions specific to each pro p e r t y. The management ofthe property to enhance natural re s o u rce values, or therole it would play in a larger ecosystem restoration, isnormally spelled out in a separate management agre e-ment, which can be amended periodically to respond tochanging conditions.

A p p roximately 2000 acres of land have had conserva-tion easements applied by private property owners. Thekey not-for- p rofit organizations who hold conservationeasements include: Corlands (1400 acres), the Conserv-ation Foundation of Du Page County (200 acres), theLand Foundation of McHenry County (150 acres), LakeF o rest Open Lands 300 acres, plus 220 acres in easements170 acres managed for others under lease agre e m e n t s . ) ,and the Fox Valley Land Foundation (50 acres). Examplesinclude the Weers easement in McHenry County, theMerit Club in Lake County, the Shaw easement in KaneC o u n t y, and the Barbara and Allan Wilson easement inLake in the Hills.

8.2.3 Illinois Nature PreservesIllinois Nature Preserves can be established on pro p e r-ties that hold threatened or endangered species or espe-cially high-quality habitats. Sixteen privately ownedIllinois Nature Preserves have been established in theChicago Wilderness area. They constitute some of therichest concentrations of biodiversity that have survivedsince presettlement times. Examples include the ParkerFen in McHenry County and the Bystricky Prairie inMcHenry County.

H o w e v e r, the integrity of Nature Preserves can still bec o m p romised by impacts from surrounding land uses.Thus, continuing efforts are needed to expand and buff e rthese preserves, as well as to link them to a bro a d e rre s t o red landscape. Buffer zones can be established withany of the other mechanisms described in section 8.2.

9 8


8.2.4 Illinois Land and Water ReserveIllinois Land and Water Reserves are approved by theland owner and re g i s t e red with the Illinois NatureP reserves Commission and the Illinois Department ofNatural Resources. Eligible sites include high qualityhabitats, large blocks of habitat that support area sensi-tive species, natural community restorations and endan-g e red species relocation sites. Land and Water Reservesmay also be used to buffer nearby or adjoining IllinoisN a t u re Preserves. Examples include the Bro o k l a n d sWood Reserve in Antioch Township, Lake County,Illinois; and the Webber Reserve in Antioch To w n s h i p ,Lake County, Illinois.

8.2.5 Transfer to restricted trustA p roperty owner may establish a limited trust that ownsthe property and has trustees who operate the trust withspecific instructions to preserve and manage the tru s t .The trust can take ownership during the owner’s life-time, allowing the owner to continue residence on thep ro p e r t y, or it can come into existence upon the death ofthe owner. Such a trust needs to be funded in perpetuityin order to pay taxes, insurance, normal maintenance,and natural-area management. This is not a commonmethod of land preservation because of the commitmentneeded from the trustees, but it is a possible strategy incertain situations.

8.2.6 Commitments, less than perpetuityThe vast majority of property owners in the ChicagoWilderness area who maintain their lands in a naturalcondition have not made long-term, legally binding com-mitments to restrict changes or development of theirp ro p e r t y, nor have they participated in coord i n a t e de fforts to re s t o re habitat within their local watershed ortheir neighborhood. Yet thousands of private pro p e r t yowners actively enhance or re s t o re their lands for habi-tat purposes because of a personal commitment.

Because of the positive news reports of native landscaperestoration, as well as the educational initiatives of envi-ronmental advocacy groups and individuals, more p roperty owners every year are attempting to re s t o recommunities of associated native flora and fauna (prair-ie, woodland, wetlands) or to enhance habitat for indi-vidual species (butterfly gardens, bluebird boxes, batboxes). Their level of success in establishing optimumbiological integrity depends wholly on the quality ofinformation and advice they re c e i v e .

Many of these properties can perform very importantroles within the Chicago Wilderness because of their loca-tion within large potential bioreserves. These pro p e r t i e salso are the primary source from which future conserva-tion easements, Illinois Nature Preserves, and Land andWater Reserves will be drawn. Because of their gro w i n gand dispersed nature, an important task for ChicagoWilderness members will be to catalog their extent, todetermine their roles in larger preservation and re s t o r a-tion efforts, and to establish a process through whichp roperty owners can participate in the overall eff o r t .Examples include the Abbott Laboratories prairie re s t o r-ation and native orchid habitat protection in NorthChicago, the Perle Olsson prairie and woodland re s t o r a-tion in Ringwood, and the Joan and John Knoll prairierestoration in Bull Va l l e y.

8.2.7 Landscape restoration to serve a corporate purposeAn increasing number of corporations are using nativelandscape restoration to minimize groundskeeping costs,to provide areas of interest for employees, and to achievegood public relations with a conservation-minded localc o m m u n i t y. In most cases, these restorations have nounderlying long-term commitment, but nonetheless theyopen up such a possibility. These restorations can play astrategic role in protecting on-site habitat, buffering orlinking nearby habitats, or increasing stormwater absorp-tion. As one example, Commonwealth Edison has seededprairie plants into its rights of way in Cary, Orland Park,Zion, Mokena, and the south side of Chicago. As anotherexample, Modine Corporation has seeded prairie plantson its property in Ringwood. For discussion of naturallandscaping, see section 11.3.2 and Appendix 9.

8.2.8 Transfer of private property to public ownership or to conservation organizationsP roperty owners who wish to preserve their lands forhabitat protection and public use have various optionsfor transferring their property to a public land-holdingbody or to a not-for- p rofit conservation organization inthe region. Each of these agencies operates under finan-cial limitations as well as a strategic acquisition plan orset of criteria for purchases or acquisitions. In certaincases, property owners may find no agency willing top u rchase property or to accept a donation. This is aregion-wide issue that needs to be resolved. One sourc eof information on local public agencies and land trusts isthe OpenLands Pro j e c t .


9 9

Donation by property ownerOutright donation: Full title and ownership of property isdonated to a conservation agency. Income tax deductionsa re usually available for this charitable donation.

Donation by devise: A gift of land to a conservation agencyis accomplished through a will, expressly stating that, ifaccepted, the land will be used for conservation purposesand not sold or developed. An income tax deduction isnot received, but estate taxes may be substantiallyre d u c e d .

Donation with reserved life estate: Land is donated to a con-servation agency, but with a provision that the donorretains a right to live on it or otherwise use it. The chari-table contribution is computed based on the fair marketvalue of the donation minus the value of the life intere s tin the property as determined using IRS actuarial tables.

Sale by property ownerSale at fair market value: A conservation agency pays thefair and reasonable appraised value for property if it fallswithin its strategic acquisition area, and if the agency hasthe funds to make such a purchase. The seller is liablefor income tax on the capital gain.

B a rgain sale: The seller sells the land for less than theappraised market value and gains a charitable IRSdeduction, thus avoiding some or all of the capital-gainst a x .

Installment sale: A portion of the land is sold yearly ratherthan all of it at one time, lessening the capital-gains tax.

Sale with reserved life estate: P roperty is sold to a conser-vation agency while the seller retains the right to live onthe property for all or a portion of his or her lifetime. Thismechanism can provide the means to meet both theneeds of the seller and the long-term objectives of theb u y e r.

L e a s e - b a c k : P roperty is sold with a pre-established rightof the seller to retain its use through a lease for an agre e d -upon period of time. It is similar to a life estate in meetingthe needs of the seller while satisfying the objectives ofthe buyer.

Right of first re f u s a l : A conservation agency is usuallynegotiating with several property owners at any giventime, and its yearly budget may not allow it to purc h a s eall potential properties on the market. Or the agency maynot offer a seller as much as the seller wishes to receive. Inthese situations, a conservation-minded property ownercan assign a right of refusal to the conservation agency.This guarantees the agency the right to match a priceo ff e red by another potential purc h a s e r.

Recommended actions for ChicagoWilderness member organizations to facilitate transfer of private property

✔ Educate the land-owning public about the options andincentives available for transferring open space topublic and not-for- p rofit conservation agencies.

✔ A s s u re that all areas within the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s sregion are served by one or more organizations thatwill take title to important habitats in order to man-age them.

✔ Look for funding mechanisms so that lack of re s o u rc e sfor ongoing ecological management is no longer animpediment to the donation of important habitat.

8 . 3Local governments: plans,

ordinances, contracts, and strategies

Local governments already have the framework for pre-serving and restoring habitat in their codes. In most cases,s t a n d a rds for protecting and restoring habitat may needto be added, but rarely do new approaches need to be cre-ated. However, a well-implemented policy for pre s e r v a-tion and restoration of habitat by a local government willinclude evaluating and amending all plans, ord i n a n c e s ,contracts, codes, and strategies and making amendmentsw h e re needed. P rotecting Nature in Your Community: AGuidebook for Protecting and Enhancing Biodiversity w a sp re p a red by NIPC to educate local governments on theimportance of biodiversity, and to provide tools forrestoration and protection. Additional roles for localmunicipalities are discussed in Section 11 . 2 . 2 .

Recommendations for local governments

✔ Encourage local citizens to offer ideas for habitatp reservation and restoration in community visioninge x e rc i s e s .

✔ Identify lands with high habitat value and lands withgood restoration potential and designate them as nat-ural re s o u rce preserves in comprehensive, strategic,and special–area plans. Consider municipal owner-ship and management of these lands for open spaceand biodiversity values.

✔ Designate stream corridors, swales, and hydric-soilnetworks as open-space links in comprehensive plansand in strategic and special-area plans.

8 . 3

1 0 0


✔ Develop five-year capital improvement programs forstormwater management that minimize infrastru c t u reinvestment, replacement, and maintenance by usingbest management practices that:

• Use natural swales

• “Daylight” storm sewers by converting them toopen swales

• Encourage infiltration with perforated pipe

• Adopt zero - d i s c h a rge standards when appro p r i a t e

• Plant deep-rooted native vegetation on the banks ofs t reams and detention ponds to control ero s i o n

• Develop programs to minimize use of pesticidesand fertilizers on municipal lands through Integrat-ed Pest Management policies or other means.

• Use other best management practices such as thoseidentified by NIPC (1992, 1994, 1997)

✔ Develop five-year capital improvement programs forsewage treatment that minimize infrastru c t u re invest-ment, replacement and maintenance costs by usingbest management practices that:

• Use land-treatment systems

• Use re s t o red wetlands as absorption fields

• Use created wetlands for “polishing”

• Use other best management practices such as thoseidentified by NIPC (1992, 1994, 1997)

✔ Develop general-purpose capital improvement pro-grams that minimize infrastru c t u re investment,replacement, and maintenance using best manage-ment practices that:

• Use native plants to landscape rights of way

• Encourage stormwater infiltration via swales, veg-etated filter strips, and perforated pipe

• Make roadway widths no wider than necessary toe n s u re public safety and to accommodate othermodes of travel such as bicycling

• Avoid seeps, springs, and organic soils when locat-ing new roads and facilities

✔ Adopt zoning ordinances that incorporate natural-re s o u rce overlay zoning districts and hydric-soil overlay districts, which supplement other zoningre q u i rements that apply to specific areas. Adopt zon-ing ordinances that re q u i re developers to protect andre s t o re natural re s o u rces, to provide buffers for wet-lands and streams, to minimize impervious surfaces,and to cluster home sites.

✔ Adopt subdivision regulations that re q u i re :

• Inventory of natural habitats, designation of hydricsoils, and location of underg round tiles at thesketch-plan stage

• Design of detention areas to achieve or appro a c hz e ro discharge for two-year storms

• P reservation of habitats and hydric soil systems

• B u ffers for wetlands, streams, and drainage corri-d o r s

• Designation of lands with conservation easementsor dedication to local government at the pre l i m i-nary planning stage.

✔ Use engineering standards and practices that incor-porate measures to protect and re s t o re naturalre s o u rces, that emphasize infiltration over discharg eof storm water, and that are flexible enough to re s p o n dto varying environmental situations.

✔ I n s u re the municipal code allows and encourages therestoration of natural plant communities and habitatsfor native wildlife in residential and commercial land-s c a p i n g .

✔ Use native landscaping on municipal lands andre s t o re existing natural areas to create wildlife habi-tat, protect water quality, and demonstrate these land-scaping practices for residents and businesses.

✔ C reatively design annexation and development agre e-ments to protect and re s t o re natural re s o u rces to thehighest possible degree, including immediate identi-fication and protection of major re s o u rces and ap rocess for identification and protection of otherre s o u rces in later stages

✔ Use TIF districts to acquire or re s t o re natural habitatsand community open space as part of re d e v e l o p m e n t ,to provide habitat and implement hydrological bestmanagement practices such as those recommended bymunicipal consultants and by NIPC (1992).

✔ Adopt intergovernmental agreements between oramong neighboring communities to coordinate pro-tection and restoration of natural re s o u rces and ofh y d ro l o g y.

✔ Undertake municipal conference initiatives that focuson the protection and restoration of natural re s o u rc e s ,the identification of local ecosystems, and the modifi-cation of stormwater systems as described above inthis section.

✔ Chicago Wilderness organizations should develop atraining and technical assistance program for munici-pal and county officials by which they would re c e i v einformation on how to incorporate biodiversity intheir plans, programs, ordinances and re g u l a t i o n s .


1 0 1

8.3.1 Examples of public and privateinitiatives for open space and habitat Parkland dedication: Nunda Township accepted title to30 acres of drained hydric soils from the developer ofadjoining land. The township converted a portion to aprairie restoration, created several soccer fields, and leftthe remainder as passive open space.

Watercourse dedication: The Kane County Fore s tP reserve District obtained title to Otter Creek and adjoin-ing wetlands from the developer of the Thornwooddevelopment in South Elgin.

Greenway dedication: The Kane County Forest Pre s e r v eDistrict obtained a broad greenway through the MillC reek development, which includes Mill Creek andadjoining wetlands and uplands.

Road corridor dedication: Most roads in the Village ofLong Grove include habitat easements that are dedicatedas part of the process of reviewing development plans.

Wetland dedication: The Valley Hill Estates developerin the Village of Bull Valley established a conservationeasement on the Boone Creek Fen, an Illinois NaturalA rea Inventory site, and an adjoining oak ridge that actsas a buff e r.

Habitat dedication: Due to planned-development agre e-ment, annexation agreement, or other developmenta g reement, 120 acres of a 191-acre, 74-lot developmentw e re preserved as open space and for habitat re s t o r a t i o nt h rough an agreement among seven diff e rent parties,including the Lake Forest Open Lands Association, LakeCounty Forest Preserve, and City of Lake Fore s t .

Cooperation between government units to protect habi-t a t : The Village of Inverness postponed consideration ofan annexation proposal for 90 days to allow the CookCounty Forest Preserve District to purchase a five-acreb u ffer to the Baker’s Lake Nature Pre s e r v e .

Open space associated with sewage treatment forb u ffering effluent: The Northgate development inHuntley will use a land-treatment system that pipest reated effluent to dedicated open space. This avoids dis-c h a rge from a sewage-treatment plant into the Class-A-rated Kishwaukee River system, while also pro v i d i n gexpanded habitat for the upland sandpiper in a portionof the treatment are a .

Habitat as part of common private ownership of opens p a c e : The 667-acre Prairie Crossing development inGrayslake retains 463 acres of open space, including 160a c res of re s t o red wetlands, re s t o red prairie, fields, mead-

ows, and parks. The development is designed to havez e ro discharge for two-year storms.

Habitat associated with golf courses: The Ruff l e dFeathers Golf Course in Lemont incorporates 29 acres ofre s t o red wetlands and uses the design principles advo-cated by Audubon International for habitat pro t e c t i o n .The Village of Lakewood purchased a bankrupt 18-holegolf course in 1992; learned that it included a 36-acre ,high-quality fen, and dedicated it in 1995 as theKishwaukee Fen Illinois Nature Pre s e r v e .

Restoration projects funded with fines from regulatoryenforcement actions or mitigation agreements: The OakLawn Park District re c reated meanders for three quartersof a mile of Stoney Creek into a broader floodway, re s t o r-ed riparian native vegetation, and established a publicg reenway and trail in place of a deeply incised, over-g rown stream channel with little public access. Fiftyspecies of birds, fish, and other fauna have re d i s c o v e re dthe area. See box for case study from Northwest Indiana.

8.3.2 RegulationShort of purchasing or leasing a piece of land or acquir-ing some of the rights that constitute land ownership,governments at all levels have various rights to re g u l a t ethe development or use of land. This authority is mostcommonly delegated by state governments to countiesand municipalities, whose zoning regulations are theprincipal local tool for regulating the use of land. Zoningo rdinances often re q u i re specified amounts of permanentopen space, typically in the form of lot-size re q u i re m e n t s ,setback re q u i rements, or maximums for a building’s sitecoverage. These ordinances can be applied to pre s e r v esmall natural are a s .

Counties and municipalities may also regulate develop-ment to prevent specific environmental impacts. Forexample, many of the local governments throughout theIllinois portion of Chicago Wilderness have adoptedmodel local ordinances for stream and wetland pro t e c-tion, erosion and sedimentation control, floodplain man-agement and stormwater drainage and detention, or theyhave developed and adopted their own codes. NIPC hasp re p a red model ordinances for use by local govern-ments, including the Model Floodplain Ordinance, ModelStormwater Drainage and Detention Ordinance: A Guide forLocal Officials, Model Stream and Wetland Pro t e c t i o nO r d i n a n c e , and the Model Soil Erosion and Sediment Contro lOrdinance: A Guide for Local Officials.

Regulations affecting the development of flood plainsmay aid in the preservation of natural communities.H o w e v e r, these regulations usually do not pre c l u d edevelopment unless it diminishes flood storage capacity

1 0 2


Conservation and restoration of Karner blue butterfly habitatA case study at National Steel Corporation’s Midwest Division in Portage, Indiana

In July of 1992, National Steel Corporation, Midwest Division (Midwest Division) applied to the United StatesE n v i ronmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and Indiana Department of Energy Management (IDEM) for a Class 3 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit modification to expand the existing Gre e n-

belt Hazardous Waste Landfill currently in operation on its pro p e rty in Portage, Indiana. As part of perm i t t i n gre q u i rements, U.S. EPA and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (U.S. F&WS) conducted several site visitsto determine whether the landfill expansion would negatively impact any state or federal, proposed/listed thre a t-ened or endangered species.

During a U.S. EPA site visit to the project area (known as “Greenbelt II”) in 1992, lupine plants were discovere dg rowing in the area to be impacted. This plant serves as the sole larval host for the Karner blue butterf l y, whichwas known to occur nearby in the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. On a subsequent visit with personnel fro mthe Indiana Department of Natural Resources, one adult male Karner blue butterfly was observed at the impactsite. Due to rapid population declines over the past 15 years, this butterfly species is listed as federally endan-g e red under the Endangered Species Act.

All permits issued under RCRA must be in compliance with other federal laws, including the Endangered SpeciesAct. As part of this re q u i rement, U.S. EPA must consult with U.S. F&WS if any actions under its jurisdiction havepotential to impact any proposed/listed threatened or endangered species. Because a Karner blue butterfly pop-ulation occurred in the impact area, U.S. F&WS re q u i red that U.S. EPA provide a Biological Assessment to deter-mine if the proposed landfill expansion would adversely affect the Karner blue butterfly or its habitat. MidwestDivision pre p a red the Biological Assessment and provided it to U.S. EPA and U.S. F&WS for re v i e w

F rom data gathered during the Biological Assessment, it was determined that approximately 17 acres of moder-ately suitable habitat for the Karner blue butterfly would be impacted by the 30 acre expansion of the existingG reenbelt landfill and clean-up of the Eastside Solid Waste Management Unit (Eastside SWMU). Pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. F&WS pre p a red a Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement, outlining the expected damages to the Karner blue butterfly and measures for mitigating these disturbances. Anunused portion of Midwest Division’s pro p e rty (known as the Conservation Area) was selected as the mitigationsite because of the presence of relatively undisturbed oak savanna habitat, lupine, and a variety of Karner blueb u t t e rfly nectar sources. The Conservation Area totaled 45 acres in size, of which approximately 25 acres wasrelatively undisturbed oak savanna with a dense understory of young black oak, sassafras and cherry trees. Theremaining 20 acres consisted of old agricultural fields, black locust thickets, and areas recovering from pre v i o u ssand mining operations.

P a rt of mitigation for the loss of habitat re q u i red by the Greenbelt expansion permit included translocating lupineplants from the Greenbelt II site to the Conservation Area. It was thought that any over-wintering Karner blue b u t t e rfly eggs would also be translocated with the lupine plants. In March and April of 1993, 759 plugs of soilcontaining 1,610 lupine plants were moved from the Greenbelt II landfill expansion site to the Conserv a t i o nA rea. Each of the soil plugs containing lupine was placed in one of 13 “Lupine Translocation Areas” located onthe edges of the wooded portions of the Conservation Area. Each lupine plant was marked with a metal tag anda colored pin flag. In May and June of 1993, 7,987 additional lupine seeds and 2,063 lupine seedlings wereplanted on the translocated plugs. This was done to ensure that Karner blue butterfly larvae occurring therewould have sufficient food sources. In addition to the translocated lupine, seeds and seedlings, dense native populations of lupine (over 30,000 plants) already occurred throughout the Conservation Are a .

(Continued on next page.)


1 0 3

Following lupine translocation, Midwest Division was re q u i red to conduct habitat restoration activities at theC o n s e rvation Area. The Karner blue butterfly re q u i res a mosaic of open to partially closed canopy oak savannawith a ground cover dominated by lupine (the only known foodplant for the larvae of this species), grasses andadult nectar sources. Lupine and many of the adult nectar sources are dependent on fire for their continued s u rvival. Fire suppression over the past 20-30 years had resulted in the growth of a dense understory of youngt rees at the Conservation Area. These trees shaded out the herbaceous layer, making much of the area unsuit-able as Karner blue butterfly habitat. Over 35,000 young trees and shrubs were removed manually in the winters of 1993 and 1994. In addition, more than 9,000 black locust trees and saplings were cut and tre a t e dwith herbicide.

Midwest Division was also re q u i red to implement biological monitoring programs to track shifts in various habitat characteristics following restoration. They were also re q u i red to monitor the survivorship of translocatedlupine and any Karner blue butterflies that may have been moved to the Conservation Area. Over 65 percent of the translocated lupine plants had survived as of 1997 and 75 percent of the plugs had at least one lupineplant present. Initial butterfly surveys in the spring of 1993 found that no Karner blue butterflies were translo-cated to the Conservation Area. However, these surveys did identify a previously unknown population of the but-t e rfly already occurring at the Conservation Area. Between 1993 and 1997, this population steadily incre a s e din size from approximately 160 individuals to more than 1,000. In 1998, the Conservation Area was deededto the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (IDNLS) for inclusion in their West Beach Subunit.

In addition to the Conservation Area, Midwest Division also purchased a privately-owned, 50 acre parcel ofland along Stagecoach Road and adjacent to the Inland Marsh Subunit of IDNLS. This parcel of land is knownto contain a viable Karner blue butterfly population and numerous plant species considered very rare in theg reater Chicago re g i o n .

or exposes stru c t u res to flood damage. Thus withoutadded specific habitat protection regulations, flood plaino rdinances alone are insuff i c i e n t .

State and federal rules also apply to development aff e c t-ing wetlands. Permits to dredge or fill wetlands are sub-ject to the approval of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineersand state agencies. However, other damaging impacts,such as excavation or vegetation removal, may not bec o v e red by federal or state regulations. The permit can beobtained only if appropriate mitigation measures aretaken. For high-quality wetlands, mitigation may not bepermitted. Often, developers search for an entity towhich they might donate wetlands as permanent openspace. This search is often frustrated by a lack of localconservation management organizations or their inabil-ity to take on the management of small or fragmentedwetlands unless adequate long-term funding is pro v i d e d .

Development projects using federal dollars may be sub-ject to an environmental impact statement (EIS). An EIShas, in some instances, provided the impetus for com-p romises or adjustments to the design of a project for thebenefit of natural-area preservation. Projects that pose a

h a z a rd to threatened or endangered species can be chal-lenged under both federal and state law.

In the area of wastewater management in Illinois, theE n v i ronmental Protection Agency has authority to setboundaries for systems that collect and treat wastewater.A natural area lying outside any designated service are athus enjoys a limited form of protection from develop-ment that would normally re q u i re sewers. The IllinoisE n v i ronmental Protection Agency has been reluctant tolimit the expansion of wastewater service areas uponrequest, even if the expansion would expose high-qual-ity streams to discharges of treated wastewater. It is re c-ommended that the Illinois EPA establish a process forreviewing and approving the expansion of wastewaterservice areas that takes into consideration the impacts onthe total natural environment within affected watersheds.

One of the best tools available to local governments forp rotecting natural areas is their power to pre p a re andadopt comprehensive plans. While such plans carry onlyadvisory authority, they can set the stage for action top rotect important areas long before development couldcause harm or destru c t i o n .

1 0 4


A m o re specialized type of plan that has proven benefi-cial for preserving natural areas is one specificallya d d ressing future needs and opportunities for parks,open spaces, and greenways. The forest preserve andconservation districts in Illinois, the Illinois Departmentof Natural Resources, and a growing number of park dis-tricts and townships have adopted plans that identifykey areas to be pro t e c t e d .

An increasing number of local governments and org a n i-zations have been actively planning and implementingg reenways (generally defined as open space corridorswith multi-functional values). Many greenways arebased on river and stream corridors and on abandonedrail lines, which often encompass one or more naturalcommunities. The Northeastern Illinois Planning Com-mission and the OpenLands Project have jointly spon-s o red a Regional Greenways Plan for the six Illinoiscounties in the Chicago Wilderness re g i o n .

8.3.3 Watershed planning and m a n a g e m e n tRecent attention has been focused on the unfulfilledpotential of comprehensive watershed planning, involv-ing multiple government units and addressing all aspectsof managing water re s o u rces. This concept bringstogether the various aspects of water management,which have here t o f o re been planned separately, if at all.Watershed management includes regional managementof storm water, of flood plains, of water supply, and ofwater quality, covering both non point source and points o u rce water pollution.

This more comprehensive approach to planning hasarisen, in part, because many of the costly flood contro lp rojects of past years not only have failed to eliminate

flooding but also have often resulted in severe enviro n-mental degradation. By the same token, water- q u a l i t ymanagement planning has tended to focus solely onwastewater collection and treatment and has typicallyfailed to achieve the original national purpose of attainings t reams, lakes, and rivers fit for swimming and fishing.

Examples of integrating various aspects of water man-agement are evolving in several parts of the region, mostnotably where local governmental and citizen-basedg roups have taken an active interest in addressing theirlocal problems in a comprehensive fashion. A Vision forButterfield Creek (Pre p a red by Johnson, Johnson, andRoy for the Butterfield Creek Steering Committee, 1994)is an excellent model for local action. Countywide agen-cies also have played a lead role in organizing stormwa-ter planning. Local councils of governments have alsop rovided leadership such as with the South SuburbanMayors and Managers Association’s South SuburbanStormwater Strategy: APlan for Watershed Management( 1 9 9 8 ) .

8.3.4 Best management practices for new urban and suburban d e v e l o p m e n tNIPC (1992) gives a survey of best management practicesfor the process of urban and suburban development iscontained in the NIPC publication. Among the topicsc o v e red are site planning and design, soil erosion andsediment control, stormwater drainage and detention,and the protection of water bodies and wetlands. Eachof these topics is directly related to the preservation of theregion’s biodiversity. Further information can beobtained from the Center for Watershed Management,located in Silver Spring, Maryland.

1 0 5

Chapter 9

Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring


A major conclusion of this plan is that increased manage-ment is essential if the biodiversity of the region is to bep reserved. To balance the losses being caused by distur-bance of natural processes, ecological restoration andmanagement of this region’s natural communities musti n c rease substantially. Years of experience and re s e a rc hhave demonstrated that certain basic management activ-ities are necessary and effective for the health of naturalcommunities and the conservation of biodiversity of theregion. While continuing re s e a rch is important to im-p rove management techniques, ongoing management isessential for all of our natural communities. A p p l y i n gadaptive management in a context of monitoring andre s e a rch is the best way to improve on existing techniqueswhile reducing and reversing the ongoing rate of loss.

9 . 2Techniques and guidelinesfor ecological restoration

and management

9.2.1 Purpose of the guidelinesTo facilitate increased management in the region, theChicago Wilderness Land Management Team has begunthe task of developing Ecological Restoration andManagement Guidelines. These guidelines will functionat two levels. First, they will provide general informa-tion about why, how, when, and where certain tech-niques are used. Second, the guidelines will pro v i d em o re detailed information that will summarize the stateof knowledge about various techniques to aid land man-

agers in planning, training, and working with other land-management agencies and volunteers.

The objectives of the guidelines are :

• To endorse the use of effective restoration and man-agement techniques

• To identify appropriate (safe, efficient, economical,and effective) approaches and solutions for typicalmanagement pro b l e m s

• To identify gaps in knowledge and to develop and pri-oritize related re s e a rch questions

• To inform planning efforts with practical informationon techniques, costs and benefits, and expected re s u l t s

• To identify situations that re q u i re discussion andinformation-sharing among land managers

• To foster communication among agencies on issuesthat re q u i re collaborative decisions

• To provide regional support for good land-manage-ment decisions

• To provide information to decision-makers with juris-diction over natural re s o u rc e s

Guidelines cannot identify the specific practices or tech-niques to be applied at any given site. No single bestmethod or combination of methods can be applied acro s sthe region for all situations. Instead, management plansneed to be developed for each site using managementpractices adapted to site conditions and appropriate to thegoals for the site. However, guidelines can point out fac-tors and concerns that are helpful in thinking through siteplans and use of various practices throughout our re g i o n .

Guidelines can help in selecting management techniquesto eliminate an ecological stress from a natural commu-n i t y. Some sites with invasive brush can be managedwith prescribed fire alone, while others may re q u i re hand

9 . 1

9 . 2

1 0 6


clearing, and still others will warrant mechanical clear-ing. The goal of all of these treatments is to maintain thesite using only prescribed fire. But due to diff e rent den-sities of brush and other site conditions, diff e rent re s t o r a-tion techniques are needed to get to this stage. In thisexample, the effectiveness of the restoration techniquecan be measured in more than one way. First, one cancheck the reduction of the invasive brush. Second, onecan see the intensity and coverage of the prescribed burn.A t h i rd, longer-term measure would be the recovery ofthe natural community.

In most cases, land managers are trying to correct damagedone from as many as 200 years of neglect. Restoration isa process that re q u i res time, and some sites may take sev-eral years before beginning to show significant signs ofp ro g ress. It is advisable to fully inform the public of whatcan be expected and, where possible, to include practicesthat yield short-term as well as long-term re s u l t s .

In developing guidelines, the Land Management Te a mhas assigned high priority to specific practices. The following sections explain why these techniques areimportant, give basic pre requisites for their use, and off e rrecommendations for enhancing their use across there g i o n .

9.2.2 Prescribed burningChapters 3 and 5 have identified fire as a fundamentaltool in the restoration and management of natural com-munities in our region. This tool allows land managers toe ffectively and economically manage sizable naturala reas using a natural process. It is by far the single mostimportant management technique at their disposal.

Planning is the key to successful use of fire as a manage-ment tool. Although prescribed burns are essential tolong-term health of natural areas, they can have short-term impacts upon some plant and animal (primarilyinsect) life. For this reason, sites are either burned in por-tions or on a landscape level that allows natural patchi-ness to provide refuge. More re s e a rch needs to beconducted to see how several key species and gro u p srespond to prescribed burns of various intensities, cov-erages, and fre q u e n c i e s .

P rescribed burns as applied today have several beneficiale ffects upon degraded natural communities. One of themost important effects is controlling brush by settingsmall saplings and seedlings back. A second importante ffect is stressing plants that are not adapted to fire. Thisallows native species to compete better with the inva-sive species. A t h i rd effect is the recycling of nutrients,which are released from dead vegetation by the fire .Studies have shown that immediately after a fire, plants

g row taller, they flower more and longer, and they pro-duce more seed. Fourth, fire exposes the soil and spro u t-ing plants to sunlight and warmth earlier in the year thanin unburned areas, allowing earlier growth and morerobust plants (Pauly 1997).

A good burn plan includes a clear statement of goals andobjectives, a map of burn units, and a prescription thatdefines the safety parameters: re q u i red limits for windd i rection and speed, relative humidity, and temperature .The plan also should include optimum timing and con-ditions, and it should describe the tools and personnelre q u i red. Ty p i c a l l y, it includes a smoke-managements t r a t e g y, a notification list, and evidence of all re q u i re dp e r m i t s .

Some important re f e rences for developing pre s c r i b e d -burn plans are Collins and Wallace (1990), Hendersonand Statz (1995), Hulbert (1988), Wright and Bailey(1982), Packard and Mutel (1997), Ladd (1991), andMcClain (1994).

While all land managers for major natural areas inChicago Wilderness currently use burning in their pro-grams, some actions that would increase the capacity ofall managers to use prescribed burning as a managementtool. These include the following.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Land-management agencies should develop a com-

p rehensive training program for crew members andburn leaders that emphasizes prescribed burning in Midwest ecosystems and burning in metro p o l i t a ns e t t i n g s .

✔ Land-management agencies should pro c u re suff i c i e n tequipment and workforce so that enough naturala reas can be burned within the appropriate time peri-ods to achieve the goals of this plan.

✔ Chicago Wilderness members should work with theIllinois Nature Preserves Commission to monitor andparticipate in the development of new legislation thata ffects prescribed burning in Illinois. Similarly, mem-bers should work with state Environmental Pro t e c t i o nAgencies as they develop air-quality regulations tofacilitate prescribed burns.

✔ Land-management agencies, in conjunction withother Chicago Wilderness members, should developo u t reach programs to educate local officials, fire chiefs,p reserve neighbors, etc., about the use of fire in man-aging natural ecosystems.

✔ Chicago Wilderness members should cooperate toi m p rove knowledge about re s e a rch questions such as:

Chapter 9. Ecological Management, Research, and Monitoring

1 0 7

• What are the positive and negative effects of pre-scribed burning on endangered, threatened, andwatch species?

• What is the optimum timing and frequency of fireto conserve designated ecological targ e t s ?

• What are the effects of various pre s c r i b e d - b u r n i n gregimes on native shru b s ?

• What are the best uses of fire to control invasives p e c i e s ?

9.2.3 Restoration and management of hydrologyH y d rology includes surface water (ponds and wetlands),g roundwater (springs, seeps, and subsurface flow), andriparian systems (streams and rivers). A c o m p re h e n s i v ea p p roach to restoring and managing the natural commu-nities of any site should include a thorough review of thatsite’s hydro l o g y, both historic and present. Chapters 3, 5,and 6 describe ways in which the hydrology thro u g h o u tthe region has been altered, typically by the installation ofsubsurface drain tiles, the channelizing of streams, thec o n s t ruction of dams, dikes, and ditches, the filling ofwetlands, and the construction of impervious surfaces.

Modifications to hydrology in the past century and a halfw e re usually attempts to make land more suitable forfarming and development, or to convey water off site asquickly and efficiently as possible. Changes in drainageby ditches, tiles, storm sewers, and other means haveg reatly altered the habitats and ecology of the re g i o n .Instead of infiltrating into the soil and then moving asg roundwater through the natural communities, moststorm water and melt water now run off the surface,changing the quantity and timing of water availability.H y d rologic alteration eliminates some communities anddegrades the quality of others.

A review of historical information and a field inspectionshould determine whether a site has undergone hydro-logical modification by human actions. A number ofinformation sources can be useful. These include soilanalysis, physical evidence of drainage alterations suchas field tile or straightened stream channels, aerial pho-tos, topographic maps, and personal contacts with pre-vious owners and local officials. The analysis should alsoconsider the effects of off-site alterations to hydro l o g y.

B e f o re recommending the restoration of hydro l o g y, aland manager must determine if proposed alterationscomply with state drainage laws. For example, will theya ffect surrounding or downstream property owners?This information is essential for obtaining necessary fed-eral, state, and local permits.

Examples of management techniques include re m o v i n gdrain tiles, either in part or in their entirety; fillingditches; removing berms and spoil piles; re m o v i n gw a t e r-level control stru c t u res; remeandering stre a m s ;c o n t rolling invasive species; and re i n t roducing nativespecies. Monitoring of groundwater levels before andafter restoration is an essential component of a success-ful pro j e c t .

Some important re f e rences in planning hydro l o g i c a lrestorations are Brooks et al. (1997), Payne (1992), Mitschand Gosselink (1993), Galatowitsch and van der Va l k(1994), and Hammer (1992).

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agencies

should create a database of current hydrological dataf rom restoration and mitigation projects and make itavailable on the Internet.

✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agenciesshould standardize the methods for collection ofh y d rological data, including the use of remote data-sensing equipment.

✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agenciesshould provide training to land owners and land man-agers in techniques for identifying hydrological dis-turbances, locating and removing agricultural fieldtiles, and installing groundwater monitoring wells.

✔ Local agencies should identify large, artificiallydrained wetlands and prioritize them for re s t o r a t i o n .

✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agenciesshould further develop education and outreach pro-grams on wetland ecosystems, making use of demon-stration and restoration pro j e c t s .

✔ Chicago Wilderness members and local agenciesshould address key re s e a rch questions, such as:

• How do offsite factors affect hydrology at a site,and what are the implications for restoring the site’sh y d ro l o g y ?

• What are the best methods for restoring hydro l o g y,and when should they be implemented?

9.2.4 Reestablishment of native speciesMost restoration management is not focused on individ-ual species. Instead, management seeks to impro v ediversity and health in general through removal of inva-sive species, re i n t roduction of fire, etc. The goal is toi m p rove and enlarge habitat for native plants and ani-mals and to ensure long-term regional viability of nativespecies. In some circumstances, however, the appro p r i a t emanagement technique is the re i n t roduction of native

1 0 8


species previously lost from a site. Five possible objec-tives for the re i n t roduction of native species are :

• To re s t o re natural biodiversity

• To provide expanded habitat for listed or criticals p e c i e s

• To promote conservation aware n e s s

• To develop expanded sources of native plants andseeds and native genetic diversity

• To provide better infiltration of storm water

Species re i n t roduction can reverse the twin trends ofhabitat and ecosystem loss and can help sustain rarespecies. Reintroduction artificially disperses and incre a s-es native biota where natural dispersal patterns havebeen disrupted or fatally compromised. For example,nest predators that prosper in today’s fragmented habitathave severely curtailed re p roduction of the Blanding’sturtle; captive rearing and re i n t roduction programs aremechanisms to sustain the species. Reintroduction alsoserves as a tool for re c reating the large blocks of nativeplant communities and community complexes nowmissing from the Chicago Wilderness region. Seedsand/or plants are re i n t roduced to degraded natural com-munities or to former agricultural lands to fill gaps. Larg eblocks of the native landscape are crucial for the viabil-ity of area-sensitive species, to avoid edge effects, andthey reduce the chance that a chance event will wipe outan entire population.

Native-species re i n t roduction in the Chicago re g i o nbegan early in this century with the extirpated white-tailed deer. In the 1960s the region saw its first prairierestorations, most notably the 100-acre project at theMorton A r b o retum. Larg e r-scale projects have now beenundertaken, such as the 1000-acre Fermilab prairie re s t-oration, where a phased series of projects on old farm-land is creating valuable habitat. In another example ofre i n t roduction, the formerly abundant prairie whitefringed orchid is being returned to appropriate sites.

When planning to re i n t roduce a native species or a mix ofspecies, the site manager must consider several issuesabout the species’ biology and the site, to insure that there i n t roduction has a chance of succeeding and will notharm other conservation or restoration efforts. The fol-lowing items should be considered, especially for sitesthat contain established high-quality communities or rarespecies or when working with rare or threatened species:

• taxonomic status of individuals to be re i n t ro d u c e d

• historical information about the loss and fate ofspecies populations from the region and from the re i n-t roduction site, including losses from any pre v i o u sre i n t roduction

• the status and ecology of the species or groups ofspecies to be re i n t roduced

• the effect the re i n t roduced species will have on theecosystem and on species currently occupying there q u i red habitat

• the rate of re i n t roduction, the optimal number of indi-viduals to be re i n t roduced, and the composition ofthe re i n t ro d u c t i o n

The site must be within the historic range of the speciesbeing introduced and should offer long-term pro t e c t i o n .P revious causes of decline for the species should be elim-inated or significantly reduced. Habitat restoration shouldbe at a stage to sustain the re i n t roduced population.

To retain functioning native communities within ChicagoWilderness, we need seeds and plants of local origin. Insome cases, the supply has run short, and some speciesa re not available in the commercial market. Some actionsto pursue to develop a larger supply of seed and plants oflocal ecotypes include the following.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Land management agencies that have not alre a d y

done so should develop in-house nurseries to pro d u c eseeds and plants. A nursery can produce large quan-tities of seed at low cost and can also produce pro p a g-ules irrespective of natural environmental conditions.

✔ Expand seed and plant exchanges. Member org a n i z a-tions can trade for seed or plants of the local orregional ecotype that are not available within theirown land. This creates a market for the seed andplants that are surplus for one organization but use-ful to another that year.

✔ Donate or exchange the use of facilities. Local conser-vation organizations and landowners can make useof each other’s facilities or landholdings to build upthe number of available propagules. The collabora-tive efforts create a regional economy of scale andassist individual organizations whose re s o u rces ares t retched thin.

✔ Conduct propagation re s e a rch. The task of re c o v e r i n gover 1500 native plant species is a daunting one. Onlyabout 350 of these species have been propagated com-m e rcially or for restoration. The personnel and facili-ties of significant botanical re s e a rch org a n i z a t i o n swithin Chicago Wilderness provide great potential forre s e a rch into propagating native plants for re s t o r a-tion and could act as a clearinghouse for such work.Such botanical facilities include the Chicago BotanicalG a rden and the Morton A r b o retum. Staff from thesefacilities can and also do help in preparing re c o v e r yplans for rare species.


1 0 9

✔ Work with home gardeners. Volunteers have pro v i d e dtheir backyards as nurseries for several plant speciesidentified for inclusion in restoration seeding.G a rdeners receive seed or plants to grow in their back-y a rds. The seed from these plants is collected and usedin restoration pro j e c t s .

R e s e a rch topics of importance to enhance the success ofspecies re i n t roduction projects include how underg ro u n dbiota influence re i n t roduction of flora; autecology andsynecology of little-known species; and propagation anddispersal re q u i rements for selected species. Specificre s e a rch and recovery needs for priority plant species areincluded in Chapter 7.

R e f e rences useful for planning plant species re - i n t ro d u c-tions include Bowles (1990), Falk et al. (1996), Packardand Mutel (1997), and Swink and Wilhelm (1994).

9.2.5 Control of invasive plant speciesThe invasion by aggressive species is an internationalconservation issue of the most serious concern, becauseit threatens native biodiversity in regions and pre s e r v e sa c ross the globe. Invasive species are those that becomeestablished in natural or semi-natural ecosystems or habi-tat, are an agent of change, and threaten native biologicald i v e r s i t y. The international Convention on BiologicalDiversity recognizes invasive species as one of the majort h reats to biodiversity and calls upon the governmentsof the world to take steps to prevent the introduction andmanage the impact of invasive species. The FieldMuseum hosted an international symposium addre s s i n gthis subject in 1997. Locally the goal is to reverse the tre n dof degradation caused by invasion and to minimize thenegative alteration of natural communities.

A p p roximately two dozen invasive plant species are cur-rently causing serious and sometimes devastating dam-age to natural areas in our region, reducing native plantdiversity (and thereby associated animal diversity) bysuccessfully competing for space, water, sunlight, andnutrients. Once established, these plants are difficult toeliminate or control. Most of our invasive species arei n t roduced from the Old World, but others are nativespecies that have become similarly aggressive with thed i s ruption of normal ecological processes, such as alter-ation to natural hydrology or suppression of natural fire .The spread of these species is recognized as a direct thre a tto natural communities and to some endangered species,and it is arguably the greatest single threat to the integrityof the flora and fauna of the Great Lakes re g i o n .

Aplan to control invasive species is an important elementin any management plan. In dealing with invasivespecies, two important maxims are that prevention is at

least as important as eradication and that identifying andresolving the cause of the invasion is a critical step in con-t rol. Some invasive species are of region-wide concern,not only causing impacts where they occur, but also pos-ing a threat to parts of the region not yet invaded. In suchcases it is important for Chicago Wilderness to developa regional component to planning, re s e a rch, and contro l .Decisions about specific methods for controlling invasivespecies depend on several variables including the speciesinvolved, the nature of the invasion, surrounding envi-ronmental conditions, re s o u rces available, and the man-agement objectives for the area. In most cases acombination of control methods works best. Three cate-gories of control are available:

Physical controlPhysical controls include prescribed fire, mowing,restoration of hydrological function, cutting, pulling,g i rdling, and other methods that physically remove orweaken the invasive species, promoting successful com-petition by natives. Mowing can be effective for the con-t rol of some annual and biennial pioneering invaders ifnative plants are available to provide long-term compe-tition. The timing of mowing is important, both toachieve control and to avoid injury to nesting grasslandb i rds. Hand pulling or removal of seeds can be eff e c t i v efor small areas, but is labor intensive. Girdling is animportant tool when working in high-quality areas or forc reating habitat for cavity-nesting birds or bats. Sections9.2.2 and 9.2.3 discuss management with fire and hydro-logical restoration. Flooding by manipulating water lev-els can be effective in some wetland situations wheresome species such as cattails can be dro w n e d .

Biological controlBiological control uses the natural enemies and competi-tors of a species to control its population. Predators ordiseases not currently known in the area are used. Theseshould be host-specific to avoid negative impacts on non-t a rget species. The USDA closely regulates such intro-ductions. Currently biological controls are beingimplemented for purple loosestrife and Eurasian watermilfoil. Early indications look positive. The use of bacte-rial sprays to combat gypsy moths is of some concern,since the bacteria also destroy some native moths andbutterflies. Another form of biological control is the seed-ing of native plant species that may in time out-competeinvasive species under re s t o red natural conditions.

Chemical controlHerbicides are by far the most commonly used pesticidein management of natural areas. They are often used incombination with physical or biological controls. In mostcases, they are used on a temporary basis with the objec-tive of establishing a balanced condition where the nat-

1 1 0


ural processes of fire and competition by native plantswill be sufficient to exclude the invasive species.Herbicide is commonly used to control brush when it hasg rown beyond the size controlled by fire and when itsshade has limited the availability of fuel.

B e f o re any pesticide can be sold in the United States, itmust be re g i s t e red and approved by the U.S. Enviro n-mental Protection A g e n c y. How the pesticide may be usedis governed by terms specified in the product label, whichhas regulatory authority and limits the amounts to beused and the conditions under which application occurs.State governments test and license individuals seeking toapply pesticides commercially or on public land, usuallyt h rough their departments of agriculture. Land-owningentities may have additional rules about use of pesticidesand qualifications of those applying them.

Used according to label re q u i rements, herbicides pro v i d ea cost-effective and safe means of controlling invasivevegetation, especially in short-term situations where thep roblem has arisen because natural processes have beend i s rupted by human activity. In most such cases, the bestlong-term solution is to re s t o re the natural processes tothe maximum extent possible. For example, buckthorncan be controlled by prescribed burns, but only after thel a rge buckthorns and their roots have been contro l l e dwith herbicide.

It is important for each landowner to establish prioritiesfor invasive-species control. Of highest importance are :

• p reventing new infestations

• t a rgeting the existing problems that are the fastestg rowing and fastest spre a d i n g

• t a rgeting species that are the most disruptive to nat-ural ecosystems

• monitoring for new threats and stopping them beforethe new species becomes established

The following species are particularly problematic inva-sive plants in the Chicago Wilderness region. Thesespecies are currently causing biodiversity loss and, if leftunchecked, will cause irreparable damage to our nativespecies and communities.

Garlic mustard Te a s e lCanada thistle Tartarian honeysucklePurple loosestrife Reed canary grassBlack locust C rown vetchM o n e y w o r t White and yellow sweet cloverGiant reed grass Glossy buckthornCommon buckthorn Multiflora ro s eLeafy spurg e Oriental bittersweetAutumn olive N a r row-leaved cattail

Native species can become invasive under some condi-tions. One example is the invasion of prairies and wood-lands by gray dogwood, box elder, elm, ash, etc. in theabsence of regular fire. The control of these speciesshould be addressed in management plans.

In addition to these problem plants, several invasive ani-mal species are causing harm to or threatening biodiver-sity in the re g i o n .

Many of the actions to protect terrestrial and aquaticcommunities from the threat of invasive species are dis-cussed in earlier chapters.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Continue to develop and share cost-effective pro t o c o l s

for controlling targeted invasive species.

✔ Monitor species locally and regionally to identify andanticipate problems before they reach epidemic pro-p o r t i o n s .

✔ Develop region-wide collaborative efforts to contro linvasive species on all public land not already man-aged for biodiversity, including utility and transporta-tion rights-of-way

✔ Develop and promote native landscaping re c o m m e n-dations for residential and commercial properties thats t rongly discourage the use of potentially invasivespecies in landscaping, working through nurseriesand other outlets.

9.2.6 Management of problem wildlifeThe fragmentation of ecosystems in the Chicago Wi l d e r-ness region and the growing populations of some wild-life species (especially deer) present real challenges to theconservation of biodiversity. Each native plant and ani-mal species is valued as a component of ecosystems.Some wildlife species, however, are having quantifiablenegative impacts upon plant and animal communitiesand ecosystems. As discussed in sections 3.3.7 and 5.7.9,many species and natural communities are threatened byoverabundant animals. Over abundance can destroy eco-logical balances, destabilizing relationships within thecommunity and making it vulnerable to invasive species.Such species (native or introduced) are problems thatre q u i re careful attention. Some animal species causedamage or inconvenience to people, and some are at h reat to rare species and healthy natural communities.

In aquatic communities, the zebra mussel, round goby,rusty crawfish, and common carp can drive other speciesto local extinction. Research on the national or larg e rregional level is badly needed to find ways to pro t e c thigh-quality ecosystems from these species. The Canada


1 1 1

goose, though native, has become so abundant (in theabsence of natural predators and through creation of arti-ficial habitat) that it pollutes some waterways and con-flicts with human uses of its favorite local habitat,mowed lawns. It is also very destructive of efforts tore s t o re wetlands.

In terrestrial communities, some native species havebecome overabundant due to the loss of large pre d a t o r s(wolves, mountain lions, and human hunters). Thus inmany areas, breeding birds are heavily impacted fro mhigh numbers of smaller predators such as raccoons,skunks, and opossums.

A s e v e re threat to many songbird species is nest para-sitism by the brown-headed cowbird. The cowbird oncehad only temporary impact, as it followed wanderingh e rds of bison. Today it thrives in mowed areas and isable to invade all parts of most of the region’s fragmentedf o rested habitats, permanently thwarting most re p ro d u c-tion by some species.

Thousands of stray and feral cats roam the Chicago are a ,the suburbs, farmlands, and natural areas. These animalshave significant impacts on wildlife populations and canbe health risks to other cats, wildlife, and humans. Recentre s e a rch suggests, for example, that rural cats inWisconsin are killing an estimated 39 million birds peryear (American Bird Conservancy 1998).

One of the most serious threats to woodland and othercommunities in the region comes from white-tailed deer.The continuing development of open lands re m o v e savailable deer habitat, concentrating deer in limitedremaining open space. These deer consume a great num-ber of plants and, if unchecked, their consumption leadsto the loss of native plants and animals, including endan-g e red species. The effects of excessive browsing arem a n y. (See Crawley (1983) for a summary. )

Deer populations can grow rapidly in the absence of nat-ural predators and regular management. A study ofr a d i o - c o l l a red deer from DuPage and Cook countiesf rom 1994 through 1998 found that adult deer have highannual survival rates (>80%) and few natural pre d a t o r s .Automobiles and trains accounted for more than 60 % ofurban deer mortality (Etter 1998). Populations can morethan double annually in the absence of predators if leftu n c h e c k e d .

Deer management in the Chicago region currently occursunder approved management plans. A plan for manag-ing deer (or other wildlife) involves:

1 . Identifying the problem and measuring the extent ofdamage caused by the wildlife

2 . Evaluating possible solutions and techniques for abat-ing the damage and selecting techniques

3 . Educating the public, agency personnel, and decisionmakers about the problem and the need for the re c-ommended solution

4 . Obtaining all necessary local, state, and federal permits

5 . Developing a monitoring program to evaluate suc-cess and making changes as needed

Important tools in deer-management programs are mod-els that predict the response of a population to manage-ment or lack thereof. With the high degree of scru t i n ythat wildlife-management programs receive, models areessential to the careful choice of a management solution.A p roject funded by Chicago Wilderness has developed asimple deer management model, based on data fro mlocal studies, that helps managers predict trends in a deerpopulation (Etter 1999).

In forest preserves and other public lands in ChicagoWilderness, deer are removed by state-qualified sharp-shooters. Work occurs when preserves are closed.Venison is donated to local charities, including theG reater Chicago Food Depository. This is the best avail-able method and is used by agencies nationwide.Contraceptives may one day offer an effective form ofpopulation control, but no practical programs have beend e m o n s t r a t e d .

I n c reasing the efforts to limit the damage from deer andinvasive animals is of great importance to biodiversityconservation in the region. The following actions wouldenhance the effectiveness of such pro g r a m s .


• D e e r

✔ Until effective alternative methods become avail-able, deer should be harvested regularly to limitnumbers to levels that support a balance that sus-tains a full range of native plants and pro v i d e sdiverse habitat for birds and other animals.

✔ Disseminate any new information on alternativec o n t rol methods to land managers.

✔ Disseminate models that predict responses of deerpopulations to management to managers and en-courage their widespread use. Continue to impro v eexisting models based on additional field re s e a rc hand the incorporation of stochastic functions andspatial components.

✔ As deer populations are managed and reduced insize, there will be an increased need for more accu-rate census techniques. Additional re s e a rch should

1 1 2


be carried out to develop more effective censustechniques in general.

✔ State and federal agencies should provide supportfor collecting information from deer harvests thatcan provide a basis for future decisions about deermanagement. This information would include col-lection locations; gender; the number, gender, andage of fetuses; and re p roductive information.

✔ Public agencies (and private landowners where re l-evant) should cooperate more closely to managedeer across borders of managed lands.

• Zebra mussels and the round goby

✔ Support continued re s e a rch on limiting the spre a dof zebra mussels. Promising re s e a rch pursued byChicago Wilderness members shows that control ofzebra mussels in river systems would be most eff i-ciently focused on particular upriver source sitesrather than on the entire river. Illinois NaturalHistory Survey (INHS) found that removing zebramussels or constructing barriers to prevent down-river dispersal of larvae would have a strong nega-tive effect on down-river populations. Plans areunderway to construct a dispersal barrier to theround goby, another invasive species, in theChicago Ship and Sanitary Canal.

✔ P rovide more public outreach and education call-ing for boat owners to take responsibility for clean-ing boats and boating equipment prior totransporting them from one water body to another.

✔ P romote re s e a rch on methods to control zebra mus-sels and round goby.

• Feral cats

✔ Chicago Wilderness members should lead a publiceducation effort explaining the problems caused byferal cats and advocating that people not feed straycats, support cat licensing laws, support humaneremoval of stray cats from neighborhoods andwildlife areas, and keep domestic cats indoors.

9.2.7 Management plansTo guide and coordinate conservation of biodiversity inthe Chicago Wilderness region, management plans areneeded at several levels. At the broadest, regional scale,this Biodiversity Recovery Plan seeks to describe and gainconsensus on existing conditions, goals for re c o v e r y, andthe major steps needed to reach the goals. At the other endof the geographic scale, each managed site should alsohave a site plan that describes its current condition,d e s i red conditions, and the steps needed to attain them.

Depending on the pre f e rence of the landholder, a siteplan can cover a few acres or thousands. For a large sitewith multiple habitats and ecological communities, a setof plans for smaller areas may be appropriate. Especiallyfor publicly owned lands, plans need to provide a logi-cal basis for conservation and restoration that informsand enrolls support of all stakeholders. Such plansshould also reflect other plans, such as those for re c o v-ery of endangered species, greenways, stream re s t o r a-tion, and water trails.

Between the regional recovery plan and the site planst h e re may be multiple levels of plans by landowners suchas the counties or states, based on their needs and poli-cies. Plans at all levels must support each other, pro v i d-ing a clear path to re c o v e r y.

The content of management plans varies greatly depend-ing on the needs of the organizations involved. In addi-tion to addressing the questions of where we are now,w h e re we are trying to go, and what actions are needed,other important questions are: what natural pro c e s s e shave been disrupted, what human activities are causingp roblems, and how will pro g ress be monitore d ?

The Science and Land Management Teams of ChicagoWilderness are continuing to define management tech-niques, suggested content of site plans, and re c o m m e n-dations for site monitoring. One recommendation canbe made now.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n✔ Chicago Wilderness members should support re g i o n-

al ecological performance standards, monitoring tech-niques to measure attainment of the performances t a n d a rds, and evaluation techniques (such as a re g-ional report card) to evaluate land restoration andm a n a g e m e n t .

9 . 3Monitoring and adaptive

m a n a g e m e n t

9.3.1 IntroductionWhile land managers use the best available knowledgeabout communities and species, there is always oppor-tunity and need to improve management techniques andto learn more about ecosystems. Management and mon-itoring need to be organized so that they help evaluatethe effectiveness of current techniques, and managementneeds re s e a rch projects that answer questions re l e v a n t

9 . 3


1 1 3

to management. Research, monitoring, and inventory aredistinct activities, yet they must be linked to make theirresults immediately useful to conservation practitioners.Management within an experimental framework, mak-ing use of results in future management decisions, isre f e r red to as adaptive management. Developing andimplementing a regional monitoring program and pur-suing a prioritized re s e a rch agenda will provide signifi-cant contributions to conservation of biodiversity.

Central to the adaptive approach proposed here is multi-scale ecological monitoring, a process for measuringp ro g ress toward goals for conservation and ecologicallysensitive development. Chicago Wilderness members aredesigning a region-wide monitoring program that willdetect change in pattern and process at three levels: (1)the landscape, (2) natural and human communities, and(3) species. At every stage of design and implementa-tion, this monitoring program will involve a broad spec-t rum of stakeholders in the region’s ecological health:p rofessional scientists, citizen scientists, volunteers,schools, land managers, local businesses, community-based organizations, and urban planners, among others.

Much ecological monitoring is already underway in theregion. Chapter 11 describes many of these on-goinge fforts under the roles of county and state agencies andvolunteers. Now is the time to unify and strategically addto these efforts, so that their results can keep pace withrapid region-wide change. Critical for this effort will bea monitoring framework that allows integration acro s sspace and time, as well as across organizations, and thats t rengthens and streamlines the participation of diversecontributors. Here we propose a flexible thought pro c e s sfor designing such a framework, to be tested among thecomplexities of this metropolitan ecosystem.

9.3.2 Adaptive management and conservation designConservation design is a process for deriving conserva-tion goals and strategies directly from assessment of bio-logical values and the threats to those values. A l t h o u g hconservation design is site-based, the "site" can scale fro ma single natural area to an entire region. A re g i o n - w i d eecological monitoring program is just one outcome of theconservation design process. Others are a program of sci-entific re s e a rch and an agenda for ecological inventory.We consider monitoring, re s e a rch, and inventory distinctbut closely re l a t e d :

• Ecological monitoring is an iterative process for mea-suring pro g ress toward conservation goals.

• Ecological re s e a rch is a systematic approach of pos-ing and answering questions to reveal cause-and-e ffect re l a t i o n s h i p s .

• Ecological inventory is a snapshot of conditions at onetime (e.g., species richness, population distribution,pattern of vegetation on the landscape) that estab-lishes a baseline against which to measure changeover time.

Conservation design focuses our efforts in monitoring,re s e a rch, and inventory so that they contribute directly toconservation action. Each of these three activities incor-porates human elements into the larger context ofregional biodiversity, with the ultimate goal of impro v i n gquality of life.

We approach conservation design through a series ofquestions that allow us to identify biological (includinghuman) values, threats to these values, and adaptiveaction to protect these values from these threats. Thequestions include:

• What is the geographic scope of our conservatione ff o r t s ?

• How does this site work (at scales ranging from indi-vidual preserves to the whole re g i o n ) ?

• What do we want to protect or enhance within thiss i t e ?

• What do we want these targets to look like in x years?

• What could prevent us from achieving this vision forour targ e t s ?

• What should we accomplish to offset these threats tospecific targ e t s ?

• What will we do to reach these goals and objectives?

The work to produce this recovery plan has provided ini-tial answers for several of these questions. Chapters 4and 6 identify our initial conservation targets to answerthe third question. Chapters 4 and 5 offer vision state-ments to answer the fourth question. Immediate nextsteps are to complete the conservation design and tobegin implementing an integrated program of inventory,monitoring, and re s e a rc h .

One result of this process will be the identification of con-servation and development strategies. These become theexperimental treatments of adaptive management.A d d ressing the most severe threats may re q u i re a mix-t u re of innovative strategies drawn from science, policy,s t e w a rdship, and institution building. Once a strategy isin place, conservation and development actions definethe schedule, people, and funds necessary to implementit. Ongoing work will link strategies to goals; ultimately,our aim is to address human and natural communitiess i m u l t a n e o u s l y. Like the rest of the plan, these strategiesa re evolutionary: we will learn both from our mistakesand from our successes.

1 1 4


9.3.3 The link between managementand monitoringEcological monitoring is the mechanism regulating theloop between our management goals (including goals forrestoration) and our strategies for conservation anddevelopment. How can we make that mechanism bothc o n c rete and adaptive? In Chicago Wilderness, we aretesting an approach to monitoring design that builds onthe process of conservation design. As in conservationdesign, our emphasis is on action.

Ecological surveillance is the measurement of long-termt rends in the ecological condition of species and commu-nities. Though not goal- or action-oriented, surveillancecan complement ecological monitoring by pro v i d i n gadditional spatial and temporal context.

Our approach to monitoring design is as follows:

Choose indicatorsAn i n d i c a t o r is a variable that measures change toward agoal/objective or in completing a strategy/action.Outcome indicators show whether we are reaching ourt h re a t - related management goals and objectives; p e r f o r-mance indicators show whether we actually have imple-mented the strategies and actions that we devised toaccomplish these goals. Although in a few cases we mayfind a single variable that is sufficient to answer our ques-tions about pro g ress for a particular goal or strategy, usu-ally we will use multiple indicators that draw fro mseveral levels of organization and that address some com-bination of composition, stru c t u re, and function. The keyis to find the smallest set of indicators that will give usconfidence in our conclusions. Chicago Wilderness mem-bers are interviewing land managers, planners, and sci-entists to reveal potential monitoring indicators for thelandscape, human and natural communities, and species.Later we will determine the optimal subset of these pos-sible indicators related to our goals and strategies. We willrank these indicators by analyzing threats and will aggre-gate them across geographic scales. Even if we find someindicators that we can use successfully at all sites in theregion, we still will use many site-specific indicators.

We emphasize that indicators are variables, not org a n-isms. We may use the population size of thre a t e n e dprairie species A, for example, as an indicator of pro g re s st o w a rd a goal of reestablishing viability for species A. Ifwe have good evidence that threatened species B orprairie species C shares species A’s conservation needs,we may feel confident in using A’s population size as ap roxy in measuring pro g ress toward our goals andstrategies for B and C. Very rare l y, if ever, will we find anindicator related to a single taxon that will “speak for”

the health of an entire ecosystem. More useful will besuites of indicators, perhaps including composite vari-ables that are indices of quality or integrity.

Set thresholdsA t h re s h o l d is a value of an indicator that, when cro s s e d ,sends up a “red flag” calling for a management re s p o n s e .The response might be a policy change in a human com-munity as well as a change in the practice of ecologicals t e w a rdship of a natural community.) This thre s h o l dmay be tied to status (e.g., “respond if the population ofspecies A declines to 500 individuals”) or to trend (e.g.,“ respond if the population of species A is declining by10 individuals per month”). Like establishing a visionfor conservation or development targets, deciding ona p p ropriate thresholds involves many uncertainties, andhence discomforts, for the decision-makers. In ChicagoWilderness, we will rely on a combination of targ e t e dre s e a rch and the extensive experience of land managersto set and refine these thre s h o l d s .

Plan options for management responsesKnowing w h e n to intervene does not imply that we knowh o w to intervene. Red flags may go up quickly, and wemust be pre p a red to act. Given the uncertainties inher-ent in systems as complex as ecosystems, we are unlikelyto be successful in specifying a fixed management re s-ponse when a particular threshold is crossed. Instead, wemust plan a range of options. For the most part, we willd i rect our responses toward sources of threats, ratherthan the stresses associated with them. Once again, thewealth of knowledge in Chicago Wilderness institutionsand individuals will supply options for managementintervention. Research and cycles of monitoring willmodify these options as time goes on.

Design sampling protocolsOnce we have laid out monitoring indicators, thre s h o l d s ,and responses, we will focus on sampling design, includ-ing intensity of monitoring and methods of data collec-tion. Our methods must be not only scientifically soundbut also as simple and cost-effective as possible. In ourinterviews of land managers, planners, and scientists, wewill use current and past monitoring methods as guidesfor the future. In addition, a workshop will pro v i d eintensive training in sampling design, as well as pro g r a mdesign, specifically tailored to the needs of the re g i o n .

Implement the monitoring programThe monitoring program for Chicago Wilderness isa l ready in pro g ress. Projects range from landscape-levelm e a s u res of change in vegetation cover to measures ofchange in the populations of individual species in par-ticular preserves. Through the process of monitoring


1 1 5

design described above, we will consolidate, adapt, andunify this program so that stewards can benefit from thelandscape-level results and the region can benefit fro mthe data of individual conservation areas. Participationby the broad range of actors in Chicago Wilderness willbe central to success.

9.3.4 The link between research and monitoringTo have confidence in monitoring results, we must haveconfidence in at least two kinds of linkages: betweens o u rce of threat and the stress that it creates on a targ e t ,and between a conservation or development strategy andthe goal that we hope to achieve there b y. Through con-centrating re s e a rch effort on the linkages between thre a t sand the highest-priority targets, and between strategiesand the highest-priority goals, we can ensure that invest-ment maximizes conservation impact.

As with monitoring, re s e a rch at many levels of org a n i-zation is flourishing throughout Chicago Wilderness. TheRecovery Plan outlines overall re s e a rch needs: the gapsbetween what we now know and what we need to knowto promote the quality of human and natural communi-ties. Our next step will be to link these needs for re s e a rc hm o re specifically to the questions given in section 9.3.2.

9.3.5 The link between inventory and monitoringEven in Chicago Wilderness, a landscape with a long his-tory of scientific study, we still lack inventories of sometaxa and natural communities, both for particular con-servation areas and for the region as a whole. As wedesign monitoring programs, biological and socioeco-nomic inventory becomes critical for measuring change.How can we make these assessments cost-effective, aswell as connect them tightly to our goals and strategiesfor conservation and development?

We are experimenting with several nontraditionala p p roaches to ecological inventory. Using satellitei m a g e r y, aerial photography, and Geographic Inform-ation Systems (GIS), we are conducting inventories at thelandscape level, such as vegetation maps and quantitativeanalyses of cover type. As we couple this remote sensingwith ground truthing and re p resentative assessment ofspecies and communities within cover types, we incre a s eour confidence in the use of these landscape units as sur-rogates for units of biodiversity at smaller scales. We alsoa re evaluating the effectiveness of rapid assessment meth-o d s for taxa that give clues to the current condition of nat-ural lands and waters. We recognize the need for a

baseline of human ecological data, as well; we are drawingon existing databases of real-estate trends in Chicago-a rea neighborhoods and are exploring the possibility ofincorporating other social and economic information.

9.3.6 Information management for monitoringT h rough the design process outlined here, we will workt o w a rd a regional framework for conservation science inwhich monitoring, re s e a rch, and inventory interlock andsupport one another. Holding this framework togetherwill be a system of information management that allowsus to scale across geography and across levels of org a n i-zation. Chicago Wilderness has begun to develop an elec-t ronic catalogue of geo-re f e renced data sets held bymember institutions. One of our greatest challenges willbe to integrate data for human and natural elementsa c ross the entire region. One of our greatest strengths isa commitment to participation by a complete cross sec-tion of stakeholders in information management. Partic-ipatory data management not only strengthens ourscientific framework but also fosters the dedication of theregion’s human communities to conservation and eco-logically sensitive development.

9.3.7 Promoting management-related researchThe complexity of ecosystems and ecosystem function isg reater than we are capable of imagining. This becomesm o re apparent when we attempt the tasks of re b u i l d i n gand restoring natural communities. Having a completeunderstanding of these systems is not necessary to beginp reserving them, but improved knowledge is needed tosupport long-term preservation and restoration of allspecies and communities and to improve eff i c i e n c y. If webegin to work while there are sufficient species and frag-ments of habitat left, under intelligent management andwith restoration of natural processes, the fabric of thesenatural communities may mend itself. Nonetheless con-tinued re s e a rch is necessary to better guide re s t o r a t i o n .

Traditional science has enumerated and describedspecies and communities. To d a y, as management of ournatural re s o u rces becomes more important, scientificre s e a rch is critical in guiding and in determining the suc-cess and direction of these management efforts. To re a c hour conservation goals, a better understanding is neededof the presettlement landscape conditions and pro c e s s e s ,of current landscape condition and processes, of the besttechniques to improve ecological health, and of re q u i re-ments for sustaining biodiversity over the long term.Scientists and land managers in the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s

1 1 6


region should work together to compile a prioritized listof re s e a rch needs and to support re s e a rch projects thatwill lead to this improved knowledge.

The Chicago Wilderness consortium has already bro u g h ttogether scientists, restorationists, and policy makers tofocus attention on important re s e a rch questions and gapsin information. Now, an atmosphere needs to be fostere dthat will promote the investigation of these questions. Afirst step is to build better links between land managersand academia and to promote more re s e a rch pro j e c t swithin the re g i o n .

Existing scientific knowledge about regional naturala reas needs to be published and integrated. Integration ofthis knowledge with programs to develop monitoringp rotocols, to conduct further inventories, and to addre s sadditional re s e a rch needs will help to ensure pre s e r v a-tion of much of the biodiversity of the re g i o n .

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Compile a prioritized list of re s e a rch needs and sup-

port targeted re s e a rch projects with internal and exter-nal grants.

✔ Set up a central source of information for students andp rofessors about priority re s e a rch needs.

✔ P romote the Chicago Wilderness region as a re s e a rc hstation. This would help students to identify appro-priate sites and experts, as well as to receive permits.

✔ Compile a thorough literature review of pre v i o u sstudies re g a rding management of natural communi-ties and conservation of biodiversity relevant to eff o r t sin the Chicago Wilderness re g i o n .

1 1 7

Chapter 10

Education and C o m m u n i c a t i o n

The role of communicationand environmental education

10.1.1 BackgroundPublic awareness and support are inherent elements inthe recovery of this region’s biodiversity. As we head intothe next century, we are faced with a variety of threats tothe unparalleled natural wealth of the Chicago re g i o n .The decisions to address those threats will be made by avariety of groups, including elected officials and publiclandowners, as well as by individuals. Individuals notonly drive the larger decisions with their votes but alsomake daily decisions affecting the health of our naturalecosystems, ranging from home building to checkingtheir boats for zebra mussels before transportation.Individuals are also the past, present, and future of theregion’s renowned volunteer stewardship eff o r t s .Indeed, the future of our native landscapes dependsupon the support and involvement of our citizenry.

F o r t u n a t e l y, most Americans consider enviro n m e n t a lp rotection a priority, and there is widespread concernabout air and water pollution, destruction of tropical rainf o rests, and toxic waste contamination (Gallup NewsService 1999). While not ranked as highly, habitat lost todevelopment also elicits broad concern (Belden andRussonello 1996). On a local level, people have a stro n ga ffinity for our parks and forest preserves, and they havedemonstrated solid support for increased land acquisi-tion. Conservationists, then, have a base upon which tobuild public support, a base that includes appre c i a t i o nfor the beauty of nature, a sense of responsibility to futuregenerations, and the desire for a healthy enviro n m e n t .

In garnering support for biodiversity re c o v e r y, however,educators and communicators face many challenges,beginning with the term “biodiversity” itself. A c c o rd i n gto a 1996 poll, only two out of ten Americans had heard ofthe term “biological diversity.” Yet, when the conceptwas explained, 87% indicated that “maintaining biodi-versity was important to them” (Belden and Russonello1996). In order to strengthen and broaden public aware-ness, conservation communicators need to not onlydefine but also to make biodiversity real and to convey itsconnection to our own quality of life.

While it will take time for the word and the concepts ofbiodiversity to enter the public vocabulary and con-sciousness, concerned organizations must act with asense of urg e n c y. As earlier chapters indicate, the re g i o n ’ sremaining natural communities and habitats urg e n t l yneed to be protected and re s t o red in landscapes of suff i-cient size and quality to protect biodiversity. In order toinform the public, organizations must, there f o re, employshort-term communication strategies while buildingl o n g e r-term educational appro a c h e s .

By definition, environmental education is long term inscope and takes significant investment in re s o u rces andtime, but it produces powerful results. Enviro n m e n t a leducation is characterized as a process addressing theknowledge, awareness, attitudes, skills, and participationof a target audience. The following specific objectives, asoutlined by UNESCO in 1978, have been adopted by theChicago Wilderness Education and CommunicationTe a m :

• Fostering clear a w a re n e s s of, and concern about,economic, social, political, and ecological interd e-pendence in urban and rural are a s

• Helping social groups and individuals gain a vari-ety of e x p e r i e n c e s in and acquire a basic u n d e r s t a n d-i n g of the environment and its associated pro b l e m s

1 0 . 1

1 1 8


• Helping social groups and individuals acquire a setof values and feelings of c o n c e r n for the enviro n-ment and the motivation for actively participatingin environmental improvement and pro t e c t i o n

• Helping social groups and individuals acquire thes k i l l s for identifying and solving enviro n m e n t a lp ro b l e m s

• P roviding social groups and individuals with theopportunity to be actively i n v o l v e d at all levels in working toward resolution of enviro n m e n t a lp ro b l e m s

These objectives help guide the development of an envi-ronmentally literate citizenry, capable of making well-informed decisions about protecting local biodiversity.While short-term communications strategies can raisea w a reness and get the public involved at an entry level,both formal and nonformal programs in biodiversityeducation are needed to sustain that interest and developthe deeper understanding that will lead to the active pub-lic support re q u i red to ensure biodiversity re c o v e r y.

10.1.2 Communication opportunitiesT h rough the work of professionals and forums in market re s e a rch, much has been learned about the com-munications challenges for Chicago Wilderness. TheConsultative Group on Biodiversity initiated the Biodiv-ersity Project in 1995 to assess public opinion on biodi-v e r s i t y, develop collaborative strategies to increase publica w a reness and engagement, and lay the groundwork toimplement those strategies. The Biodiversity Pro j e c t(1998) identifies six objectives to guide conservationistst o w a rd fostering public support:

1 . Help the public recognize biodiversity in its everydaye x p e r i e n c e .

2 . Help the public understand its dependence on nature .

3 . Raise fundamental ecological literacy.

4 . Help the public understand the specific humanimpacts on biodiversity.

A new environmental education initiative in northwest Indiana

The Indiana Dunes Environmental Learning Center provides a new re s o u rce for biodiversity education for the entireChicago Wi l d e rness region. Launched in October 1998, the Learning Center is a not-for- p rofit residential facilitydeveloped in partnership with the USDI National Park Service. Located in Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, the

p roject is receiving widespread support from area businesses and industry.

The new facility, located on the site of an old summer camp, has overnight capacity for eighty people in ten cabins, withplans to triple the capacity through expansion. One-fourth of the capacity of the Learning Center is re s e rved for classes thatneed financial assistance to attend, supported by funding from diverse sources. The primary service area is considered to bea 90-mile radius, or a 11⁄2 hour drive, from its location near Chesterton in Porter County.

The initial program for 4th-6th grade classes aims to provide understanding of ecological principles and the importance of biodiversity through hands-on experience in the outdoors. Teachers and administrators are enthusiastic about how the c u rriculum helps them meet new state science curriculum re q u i rements. There are also art, language arts and social scienceelements. A high school program that involves students in ecological monitoring and stewardship will be expanded in the1999-2000 school year.

The Learning Center has been successful in attracting classes from diverse ethnic and racial communities. This result alsoreflects the diverse membership and the high level of cooperation with local environmental organizations such as the Grand Calumet Task Force and the Minority Health Coalition of Michigan City. The Learning Center has also organized anE n v i ronmental Education Network of agencies and private groups that is providing the means for outreach to educators andthe general public. In May 1999, for example, twenty agencies participated in a re s o u rce fair for teachers, with a secondsuch event scheduled for early in the 1999-2000 school year. Weekend and summer programs are also provided for adultsand special groups including teachers and children. The Learning Center is also made available to other groups, provided at least 25% of their program schedule is devoted to environmental issues.

Chapter 10. Education and Communication

1 1 9

5 . Help the public understand its capability to act to con-serve biodiversity.

6. Motivate the public to act to conserve biodiversity.

The conservation agencies and organizations of theChicago region, in concert with our highly visible botanicg a rdens, zoos, and museums, have the opportunity torealize these objectives and, working together, to eff e c tpositive change. They must integrate current efforts incommunication, marketing, and education and dire c tthem toward these objectives. Local organizations andagencies involved with conserving biodiversity need toprioritize their efforts and devote more re s o u rces to com-municating about local restoration efforts. They can thenc reate comprehensive campaigns and programs that con-nect biodiversity conservation to core values that peoplea l ready hold, applying the knowledge gained thro u g hpublic-opinion re s e a rch and thorough evaluation of thee ffectiveness of various eff o r t s .

People get the information that forms their attitudes andbehaviors from a wide range of sources beyond the com-munication and education programs of conservationo rganizations. Schools, the media, and community lead-ers contributing in important ways to the values held bythe public. They also interpret conservation issues forthe public. Outreach and education to these audiences isc rucial to developing “third-party” endorsements anda ffirmation of actions such as ecological re s t o r a t i o n .

The most successful marketing strategies are those thatcatapult issues into popular culture. Smokey the Bear isa prime example in the conservation arena. Another isthe attention drawn to the devastation of tropical rainf o rests, which has resulted in a remarkably high level ofa w a reness for an issue occurring thousands of miles fro mour shores. If conservation communicators can employthese strategies to the local situation, they have theadvantage of using issues that have a much more dire c timpact on our citizens’ quality of life. By workingt o g e t h e r, utilizing market re s e a rch, devoting morere s o u rces, and adopting innovative approaches, we canengage the public and realize the goals of this plan.

10.1.3 The current state of environ-mental education in schools in the Chicago Wilderness regionSince 1995, the Chicago Wilderness Education andCommunication Team has been working to identify andresolve issues of biodiversity education specific to theregion. They have assessed and addressed the state ofc u r rent biodiversity education efforts in a number ofa reas. Information from this work is summarized below.To date, the majority of re s e a rch about the collective

reach and implementation of biodiversity education hasc e n t e red on in-school programs. There exists a need forthe same type of documentation with out-of-school pro-grams and life long learning eff o r t s .

Biodiversity education does not appear to play a majorrole in the region’s public schools. Surveys from twostates in the Chicago Wilderness region (Sebasto-Smithand Small 1997, Lane et al. 1994) show that, althoughteachers want to integrate environmental education intothe curriculum, a number of barriers exist. A c c o rding tothe surveys, 90% of Illinois teachers and 94% ofWisconsin teachers “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that itis important to integrate environmental concepts intotheir subject or grade level. In addition, 87% of Illinoisteachers and 90% of Wisconsin teachers “agreed” or“ s t rongly agreed” with the statement “a goal of myteaching is to increase students’ level of enviro n m e n t a lre s p o n s i b i l i t y.” However, 65% of Illinois teachers re p o r t-ed they were not infusing environmental education intotheir curriculum and 76% of Wisconsin teachers spendless than 15% of their overall teaching time infusing envi-ronmental concepts.

Why do teachers overwhelmingly say that enviro n m e n-tal education is important but dedicate less than an hourper week to the topic? The top five reasons given byteachers in the two states are listed below:

I l l i n o i s :1 . Not enough re s o u rc e s / f u n d i n g2 . Not enough preparation time3 . Not enough knowledge or backgro u n d4 . Not enough class time5 . Other concepts more important

Wi s c o n s i n :1 . Concepts not related to subject matter2 . Not enough knowledge or backgro u n d3 . Not enough class time4 . O t h e r5 . Not enough preparation time

It is ironic that there are such similarities between thefindings in both states, since there are major diff e rences inhow the two states mandate the integration of enviro n-mental education. Wisconsin has mandated 1) periodicassessment of the environmental literacy of its teachersand students, 2) pre-service training in enviro n m e n t a leducation for teachers, and 3) consideration of enviro n-mental education concepts in the development, imple-mentation, and evaluation of school-district curriculumplans. In contrast, Illinois has a relatively ambiguous andu n e n f o rced mandate for environmental education in itsschools. While these surveys did not cover the status ofbiodiversity education in Indiana, the third state in theChicago Wilderness region, it is noteworthy that a posi-

1 2 0


tion dedicated to integrating environmental educationat the state level was recently left unfunded. In addition,the Indiana Department of Education currently has nomandated environmental education component for theK–12 curriculum.

10.1.4 Cultural diversity and biodiversityR e s e a rch shows that, in addition to children, otherimportant audiences including minorities, low-incomepopulations, and senior citizens are generally being leftout of environmental education (U.S. Enviro n m e n t a lP rotection Agency 1996). An illustration of this void is thefinding by Belden and Russonello (1996) that two in tenAmericans said they had heard of “biodiversity.” Theserespondents were most likely to be men, upper- i n c o m e ,college-educated, and professionals. However, the samesurvey reveals the potential for building support amongb roader audiences. In describing who is most likelybelieve “maintaining biodiversity is very important,”Belden and Russonello state, “Demographically, theyhave lower incomes, live in cities, and are found in higherp roportions among African Americans and Hispanics.”

A summary of 1990 census data for the portion ofChicago Wilderness in northeastern Illinois contains thefollowing. As of that year, 12% of residents were born out-side the United States. In that same year, 20% of all house-holds spoke a language at home other than, or in additionto, English. Perhaps a better measure of the human diver-sity in the region are the proportions of Hispanics (12%),non-Hispanic blacks (19%), and non-Hispanic whites(69%) living in northeastern Illinois in that year. Fore c a s t sp re p a red by the Northeastern Illinois PlanningCommission indicate the population of this same are awill be 22% Hispanic, 23% non-Hispanic black, and 55%non-Hispanic white in the year 2020. As our populationg rows more racially and ethnically diverse over the com-ing decades, the long-term success of Chicago Wi l d e r n e s swill be determined in part by its ability to attract the sup-port of all segments of the population.

These numbers are particularly noteworthy becausetoday the large majority of members of most enviro n-mental organizations are non-Hispanic whites. A c o m b i-nation of factors may account for this disparity, ac i rcumstance that local environmental org a n i z a t i o n sneed to fully understand if their messages are to re a c hall segments of the population. A recent report toC o n g ress by the U.S. Environmental Protection A g e n c yAdvisory Council (1996) offers several reasons for thef a i l u re to reach diverse audiences, including:

• lack of materials, commitment and, org a n i z a t i o n a ls u p p o r t

• uncertainties in knowing how to engage Hispanic andnon-white audiences

• d i fficulties in adapting traditional strategies to non-formal environments within these communities

Further information on the importance of culture in shap-ing attitudes toward the natural environment can begleaned from a 1998 survey of leaders and a cro s s - s e c t i o nof citizens in two sample areas in the region, the Uptownn e i g h b o rhood of Chicago and the Butterfield Cre e kwatershed in southern Cook County. The survey showedthat one’s age, economic status, and place of residence areassociated with attitudes about the environment. Forexample, suburban environmental concerns includedo v e r-development and flooding, while inner-city con-cerns included air pollution, poor water quality, litter,asthma and lead poisoning (Babcock 1998).

The survey also showed that open space evoked power-ful images of home and cultural history for immigrantsas well as native residents. City parks are often used asgathering places for ethnic communities, not to celebraten a t u re per se, but to enable these groups to share in theircommon language and culture. Other findings indicatedthat fishing and gardening were viewed diff e rently byd i ff e rent groups. Motivations for these activities rangedf rom a desire to follow cultural traditions to simple eco-nomic necessity. A key finding for conservationists toconsider was the respondents’ low level of familiaritywith the natural re s o u rces found in the Chicago re g i o n ,especially among immigrant communities.

In a study of nonformal outreach programs, Sayre et al.(1997) interviewed Chicago residents to determine whattypes of programming they might find interesting anddesirable, and why they may not be participating in exist-ing programs. This study found that many of the institu-tions that are charged with educating the public aboutthe environment are not viewed as an educationalre s o u rce by certain population segments. Further, thougha myriad of good programs is available, people inter-viewed were not aware of them. Most important, how-e v e r, was the finding that under-served communities arereceptive to environmental outreach efforts, if aware n e s sof diverse communities is enhanced and input collectedf rom them.

10.1.5 Tools for communicating andteaching about biodiversityWhile evaluating the current state of biodiversity educa-tion in the Chicago region, Chicago Wilderness has alsobegun to create the tools needed to improve both thescope and methods of communication and educatione fforts. Some of these tools, which are described in


1 2 1

“12 natural wonders of the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s ”A collaborative campaign to foster a connection to Chicago region natural are a s

From April 1998-May 1999, Chicago Wi l d e rness conducted a communications campaign called “12 NaturalWonders of the Chicago Wi l d e rness.” Its aim was to increase awareness of natural areas throughout the re g i o n ,t h rough an integrated eff o rt centered around the designation of 12 spectacular yet accessible pre s e rves. The elements

of the campaign included both broad-based and targeted communications. At the core was the nature walks program, ay e a r-long series of 29 guided walks. Led by skilled interpreters from the collaborating partners, the walks involved more than500 people over the course of the campaign.

Materials produced for the campaign included the Natural Wonders pre s e rve guide, (6,000 distributed), poster (4,000) and 1999 calendar (5,000). Designed to introduce biodiversity issues beyond the traditional conservation audiences, thematerials featured spectacular vistas, colorful plants and animals, and clear messages about biodiversity and habitat re s t o r a-tion. Media coverage provided not only continued awareness, but also encouraged a sense of community pride for those des-ignated locations (more than forty print and electronic features were garn e red). Another element of the campaign was theMedia Workshop in December 1998, where journalists were introduced to a multitude of biodiversity issues. Direct outre a c hto 15 community groups surrounding the pre s e rves included slide presentations and participation in events that reached morethan 450 people. In addition, the Chicagoland Environmental Network launched a database of people responding to thecampaign for notice of future events and volunteer opportunities. Combined with additional sources, this provides ChicagoWi l d e rness with nearly 4,000 individuals as a base for building greater awareness and involvement.

The formal evaluation of the campaign (Fore s t e r, 1999) included mail and phone surveys with the various groups re a c h e dt h rough the campaign. This data re v e a l e d :

F rom nature walk par t i c i p a n t s :

• Nearly 40% of survey respondents have re t u rned to the Natural Wonder pre s e rve they visited since their walk.

• As a result of reading the Natural Wonders bro c h u re, 32% of respondents have visited other Natural Wonders described there. Another 66% plan to visit another site, while only 2% were unsure they would.

• The majority of nature walk respondents heard about the walks through media coverage.

• The most noted positive aspect of their walk was the walk leader’s knowledge (each walk had a theme relating to restoration and management).

F rom outreach audiences:

• While a majority of the participants were non-Hispanic white (88%) the percentage of other racial and ethnic g roups was higher here than that of the nature walks re s p o n d e n t s .

• Most participants heard about the presentations and other outreach activities through friends or other people.

• The overwhelming majority felt that the programs increased their knowledge about “biodiversity in the Chicago region” (98%) and “habitat restoration in the Chicago region” (96%).

• 20% of respondents re p o rted they would be interested in volunteering to conserve natural are a s .

F rom media workshop participants and non-attending media who requested workshop packets:

• 90% of survey respondents have since used information learned in the workshop.

• 100% of respondents are interested in attending future media workshops.

• 80% felt that media coverage of conservation issues was inadequate, although half thought such coverage has been incre a s i n g .

1 2 2


g reater detail in Appendix 7, are :

For Educators:• Biodiversity Kit

• Chicago Tr i b u n e Educational Services supplement,“Chicagoland Ecosystem”

• Chicago Wilderness Atlas Education Package

For Individuals, Agencies, Organizations:• Chicago Wilderness: An Atlas of Biodiversity

• Chicago WILDERNESS M a g a z i n e

• Chicago Wilderness “Portable Resources” (video, slides h o w, display)

• Chicagoland Environmental Network (CEN)

• Chicago Wilderness Web Site at www. c h i w i l d . o rg

A p reliminary assessment of the effectiveness of thesetools reveals varied awareness of the materials and awide-range of implementation strategies. Specific needsand solutions are addressed in sections 10.1.6 and 10.2.

10.1.6 Biodiversity education needs inthe Chicago Wilderness regionSince its inception, the Chicago Wilderness Educationand Communication Team has used a matrix to deter-mine specific needs for education about biodiversity inthe Chicago Wilderness region. The matrix plots audi-ences versus the five essential components of education(knowledge, skills, awareness, attitude and participa-tion). Existing environmental education pro g r a m sappear in the matrix cells according to the objectives theymeet. Several conclusions about programming, whichparallel re s e a rch findings in environmental education,have been drawn from the matrix:

• Although there are many programs aimed at school-age children, the approach is by no means compre-hensive and many students are not being re a c h e d .

• Most programs or re s o u rces available for biodiversityeducation for school-age children lack at least one ofthe components of attitude, skill and participationessential to quality education.

• Biodiversity topics pertaining to the Chicago re g i o ndo not appear to be emphasized at local colleges andu n i v e r s i t i e s .

• Although tools exist for biodiversity education, theya re not being used effectively for community-basededucation and are not reaching diverse audiences.

1 0 . 2Goals and actions for

biodiversity education andcommunication

10.2.1 IntroductionThe overall goals for biodiversity education for ChicagoWilderness are to improve the knowledge, aware n e s s ,attitudes, skills, and participation of diverse stakeholdersin the recovery process. This effort re q u i res actions thatcarry audiences through each level, culminating in activeparticipation. The target audiences are diverse, so actionst a i l o red to each are re q u i re d .

Some recommendations for biodiversity re c o v e r y, how-e v e r, cannot wait until educational goals are met. Signifi-cant current challenges re q u i re immediate strategies toi n c rease public awareness and understanding. The per-ception of ecological restoration, in particular, re q u i re su rgent attention. While most local citizens agree with theidea of restoration, there is a lack of understanding of thetechniques re q u i red (Barro and Bright 1998). Commun-ication strategies need to address these perc e p t i o n s — a n dm i s p e rceptions—about restoration techniques.

Agencies and organizations must, there f o re, complementtheir long-term approaches to environmental educationwith actions aimed at achieving more focused, short-term biodiversity communication goals. The followingsections outline both long-term education goals andshort-term communication goals.

10.2.2 Long-term education goals• Goal 1: Ensure that every student graduating from a

school system in the Chicago Wilderness region is“ b i o d i v e r s i t y - l i t e r a t e . ”The most efficient way to educate the next generationabout biodiversity issues is to fully integrate the subjectinto the existing public and private school systems.


✔ Develop a commonly held definition of “biodiver-sity literacy”—what knowledge, skills, attitudes,and experience are essential to help people makeinformed decisions and participate in biodiversityp ro t e c t i o n .

✔ I n c rease the visibility of biodiversity concepts andissues in state education standards to encourageteachers to integrate biodiversity content into otherp ro g r a m s .

1 0 . 2


1 2 3

✔ Give school staff the incentive to devote pre c i o u si n s t ructional time to biodiversity topics by demon-strating to teachers how using biodiversity as a uni-fying theme could improve test score s .

✔ Support state plans that integrate enviro n m e n t a leducation into schools. In particular, work to sup-port the passage of the Environmental EducationLiteracy of Illinois Master Plan.

✔ Develop “best practices” for teacher training, suchas the package being produced for the MightyAcorns youth stewardship education pro g r a m .

• Goal 2: Expand the scope of existing and future programs in biodiversity education to include com-ponents for attitudes, skills, and participation in cur-ricular design.One of the greatest challenges in biodiversity educa-tion is getting students involved in the process of con-servation. To achieve this, programs need to includecomponents for attitude, skills, and participation.


✔ Determine the effectiveness of existing biodiver-sity education programs for achieving “biodiver-sity literacy,” and use successful programs asm o d e l s .

✔ Foster professional development for org a n i z a t i o n sinaugurating biodiversity education, and incre a s ethe number of pre-service and in-service opportu-nities for teachers to strengthen their qualificationsto teach biodiversity.

• Goal 3: Make biodiversity in Chicago Wilderness acomponent of the degree programs of local collegesand universities.Although students at many local institutions of highereducation are peripherally exposed to the biodiversityof the region through courses that visit natural sites,t h e re are few efforts to make the region’s uniquere s o u rces a focus of study. Because of this, we are los-ing an excellent opportunity to inform our most edu-cated citizens.


✔ Survey existing course selections at local universi-ties. Identify courses that effectively and thor-oughly communicate key information about localbiodiversity and work to increase their visibility.

✔ Develop a degree program in restoration ecology at a local university with an accompanying fields t a t i o n .

✔ P romote practicum opportunities by linking uni-versities with professional land managers in there g i o n .

• Goal 4: Expand and improve the use of existing toolsfor biodiversity education, and create new tools asn e e d e d .A number of recent formal studies and informal sur-veys have highlighted the need for better ways ofdeveloping and disseminating tools for biodiversityeducation. Steps to address this challenge are listedb e l o w.


✔ Work toward the better distribution of existingtools by forming a distribution center and investingin publicity about the center.

✔ Assess the effectiveness of tools for reaching theirt a rget audiences.

✔ C reate new tools for groups starting community-based, non-school projects in biodiversity educa-tion. For example, create a biodiversity pro g r a mprimer with a list of potential partners.

✔ P roduce tools and materials in multiple languages.

• Goal 5: Increase the number of communities beingreached with non-school-based programs in biodi-versity education.As described in Section 10.1.4, it is imperative that wep rovide services for biodiversity education to culture sand communities throughout the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s sregion. Reaching this wide range of people re q u i re sthe variety of actions listed below.


✔ Foster neighborhood- and community-based pro-grams aimed at improving the environment andbiodiversity locally to unify diff e rent culturalg roups for concerted community action.

✔ Identify specific leaders in cultural and ethnic com-munities who can inform educators and commu-nicators and serve as partners for collaborativep ro g r a m s .

✔ C reate a diverse base of spokespeople, includingp rofessionals and volunteers, who can serve as“ambassadors” for biodiversity to a wider varietyof communities.

✔ Develop collaborations between Chicago Wi l d e r-ness member organizations and cultural, ethnic,and arts and humanities organizations to foster theexploration of nature through cultural avenues.

1 2 4


✔ I m p rove the infrastru c t u re within conservationagencies and organizations to better support com-munity-based biodiversity pro j e c t s .

✔ Develop links between school-based biodiversityp rograms and community pro j e c t s .

✔ Find new ways of providing urban populationswith opportunities to become aware of and explorethe region’s natural communities (for example, a“biodiversity bus” to bring urban residents to out-lying natural are a s ) .

✔ Devote more effort to re c ruiting citizen scientistsf rom more diverse communities. Build eff e c t i v etools to track the success of re c ruiting techniques,and use the effective techniques to expand thereach of volunteer- re c ruitment pro g r a m s .

✔ Encourage the providers of non-formal educationp rograms to re c ruit and employ professional edu-cators who reflect the diversity of the communitiesthey serve.

• Goal 6: Measure local citizens’understanding of bio-diversity by developing appropriate gauges for long-term effectiveness of education programs.The only way to assess success in reaching Goals 1–5 isto measure the target audiences’ understanding of bio-diversity issues. To accomplish this, re s o u rces shouldbe dedicated to creating appropriate measures andsystematically collecting data.


✔ C reate appropriate gauges and gather baseline dataon targeted communities.

✔ Gather data at set intervals to measure long-termc h a n g e .

✔ Disseminate findings to agencies and org a n i z a t i o n sinvolved in biodiversity education.

10.2.3 Short-term communications goals• Goal 1: Gain a better understanding of the views of a

broader segment of the Chicago-area population onbiodiversity issues such as ecological restoration.The current concerns and viewpoints of diff e rent pop-ulation segments must be understood before commu-nication can be effective. While national marketre s e a rch is valuable to decision-makers and conserva-tion communicators, unique circumstances (such ascounty forest preserve systems) exist in the Chicagoregion, and they may affect our citizens’ values andviews. More local re s e a rch on issues related to biodi-

versity protection is needed, including ecologicalrestoration and knowledge of or access to avenues ofpublic involvement.


✔ Compile existing local market re s e a rch, includingthat gathered through land-acquisition bond cam-paigns, to determine gaps in the understanding ofpublic values and perc e p t i o n s .

✔ Commission professional market re s e a rch locally tobetter inform communications strategies and mes-s a g e s .

✔ Disseminate re s e a rch findings to decision-makersand conservation agencies and org a n i z a t i o n s .

• Goal 2: Increase the public’s understanding of therole of management in natural areas.Many people believe nature should be left alone. Inthe Chicago Wilderness region, however, only aggre s-sive land management can re s t o re the natural pro c e s s-es that allow an ecosystem to “take care of itself.”Communication strategies must emphasize thehuman role in nature as healer and must show thatmanagement is necessary to alleviate the pre s s u re splaced on ecosystems in a large metropolitan are a .Understanding these messages can lead to endorse-ment of ecological restoration, even though its meth-ods (such as prescribed fire) may appear damaging intheir early stages.


✔ Craft a common lexicon that describes re s t o r a t i o ne fforts, and create methods to evaluate and adaptthe messages to grow in eff e c t i v e n e s s .

✔ Foster the delivery of essential message points notonly through conservation agencies and org a n i z a-tions, but also through a broader range of institu-tions and channels.

✔ Engage and educate those who interpret conserva-tion issues for the public, including communityleaders, media, and elected off i c i a l s .

• Goal 3: Improve communication with those immedi-ately affected by management decisions.Neighbors and users of forest preserves and other nat-ural areas should be aware of management decisionsand understand their necessity. In the early stages,habitat restoration is typically not aesthetically pleas-ing. Whether conducting demonstration burns or distributing bro c h u res house-to-house, staff of land-management agencies and stewards need to let peopleknow what’s going to happen and why. They should


1 2 5

✔ Develop innovative campaigns and programs thatposition habitat restoration in mainstream culture(such as museum exhibits, ad campaigns, and re t a i lp ro m o t i o n s ) .

• Goal 5: Improve the credibility and public percep-tion of the people involved in restoration eff o r t s .The perception exists in some communities thatrestoration is the folly of misguided volunteers or out-siders. Better explanations are needed of the role of thep rofessionals and volunteers in restoration projects, aswell as of the volunteers’ experience and training ofand their value to land management agencies.


✔ Seek trusted local spokespeople who re p resent thesound, scientific thinking behind restoration and/or exemplify the role of the local volunteer.

✔ P rovide support for volunteers who interact withthe public, and offer training in public speaking,ecological concepts, interpretation, etc.

✔ Emphasize the public service provided by volun-teers and the leverage of public funds thro u g hdonated time.

✔ E n s u re that decision-makers are aware of the valueof conservation volunteers.

• Goal 6: Improve communication about biodiversitywith key decision-makers such as elected off i c i a l sand their staff, land managers, and planners.These key decision-makers need information aboutlocal biodiversity before issues arise in order to makeinformed decisions. They also need quick access tonew information as issues are being considere d .Communication programs and tools need to addre s stheir needs.


✔ Assess current tools and programs to inform keydecision-makers for content, availability, and eff e c-tiveness in increasing understanding of the impor-tance of local biodiversity.

✔ S u r v e y, as necessary, to assess key decision-makers’knowledge, attitudes, and information needs.

✔ Develop vehicles to keep decision-makers re g u-larly informed, such as tours, literature, up-to-datescientific information, and contacts for furtheri n f o r m a t i o n .

also work with user groups (such as birders, hikers,and canoeists) on issues of common concern.


✔ E n s u re that restoration efforts, particularly in newa reas, include plans for communications to localresidents, and that re s o u rces are available for eff i-cient and appropriate communication eff o r t s .

✔ C reate a communication guide that re s t o r a t i o nagencies can use to help develop these plans,including re s o u rces that already exist and success-ful examples from other agencies.

✔ Conduct direct outreach to organizations in thelocal communities, such as block clubs and re l i-gious groups, that are interested in enviro n m e n t a lw o r k .

✔ Engage advocacy organizations that work on envi-ronmental issues (such as air and water quality orsprawl) and educate them about biodiversity loss.

✔ Seek opportunities to inform journalists andi n c rease media coverage of restoration and landm a n a g e m e n t .

✔ Review current mechanisms for public involve-ment in land-management decisions and makei m p rovements, using models that are successful inother are n a s .

✔ C reate a stru c t u re for collaborating partners notonly to react quickly but also to anticipate issuesthat arise in public foru m s .

• Goal 4: Communicate documented benefits of localrestoration efforts, especially those of most value toh u m a n s .To accept restoration techniques as necessary, peopleneed to know that these efforts are producing thed e s i red results, that habitats are being re s t o re d .Restoration efforts also need to be connected with tan-gible benefits—showing that biodiversity is a neces-s i t y, not a luxury.


✔ Gather data on the results of restoration eff o r t s ,translating the data into easily understood benefits.

✔ C reate communications tools that connect re s t o r a-tion results to core values: the beauty and wonderof nature, our responsibility to future generations,and the desire for a healthy enviro n m e n t .

✔ Include illustrations of restoration results in pro-grams, nature walks, signs, and other communica-tion vehicles.

1 2 6


1 0 . 3C o n c l u s i o n

While the challenges to conservation educators and com-municators are many, they c a n engage the public on bio-diversity by working together, understanding theiraudiences, devoting more re s o u rces, and adopting inno-vative approaches. While the American public is re l a-tively unaware of the loss of biodiversity, we in theChicago region have the tangible demonstration to moti-vate positive change right before our eyes—no citizen in

the metropolitan area is more than twenty minutes fro ma natural area. Communicators can build on the public’sa ffinity for our parks and forest preserves and the uniqueopportunities they provide. While Chicago and urbancenters worldwide struggle with issues such as qualityof life, over-development, pollution, and traffic conges-tion, Chicago Wilderness also has the potential to cre a t ea new model of a metropolitan citizenry that is aware ,a p p reciates its natural ecosystems, and takes action ontheir behalf.

1 0 . 3

1 2 7

Chapter 11

Role of Key Players


Achieving the objectives of this plan re q u i res the team-work of many agencies, institutions, corporations, andindividuals. This chapter identifies key players anddescribes their current roles in preserving biodiversity.Except where stated to the contrary, this plan calls uponall of these key players to continue performing their cur-rent roles and, in a few instances, to take additionalactions. In addition to the roles and actions outlined here ,Chapter 8 includes many recommendations for actionsthat government agencies can pursue to contribute toland and water protection. Also, each of the re c o m m e n-dations in the preceding chapters needs to be addre s s e dby one or more of the key players identified here. Theo rder of presentation that follows is not intended to sug-gest relative importance. Those who own and managesites containing natural communities are obviously cen-tral actors, but so too are those who provide the fund-ing, the expertise, and the volunteer hours re q u i red tomake this plan succeed.

Both governmental and non-governmental org a n i z a t i o n sa re now moving to protect and re s t o re the rich biodiver-sity of the region. One aspect of this is their cooperationin the development of this plan.

11 . 2Role of government agencies

11.2.1 OverviewAs the greater Chicago region developed, governmentsw e re created and modified to provide desired services:police, fire, transportation, zoning, re c reation, pollution

c o n t rol, etc. Only very recently have we realized thatsome conservation needs are not adequately addre s s e dby existing governmental agencies. No one governmen-tal body has responsibility for conserving biodiversity.In addition, the science of conservation biology hase m e rged fairly re c e n t l y, and conservation issues exist onscales that do not neatly coincide with governmentalb o u n d a r i e s .

11.2.2 Local governments

Forest preserve and conservation districtsThese special districts are among the most important ofthe many actors involved in biodiversity recovery in theChicago region, simply because they hold extensivelands containing natural communities. (See Table 11 . 1 . )If this plan is to succeed, these county agencies must con-tinue their selective acquisition efforts and must incre a s ea p p ropriate land management to assure that naturalcommunities are being pre s e r v e d .

While subject to property-tax caps, most Chicago-are acounties have gained or plan to seek voter approval forfunding substantially more land acquisition in the com-ing years. Public support for increased spending on theactive management of natural lands is also criticallyimportant and may re q u i re more extensive public educa-tion. An alternative may be legislative relief from caps forthis type of expenditure .

The Forest Preserve District of Cook County has not yetannounced any re f e rendum. Aland-acquisition plan wasdeveloped in 1994 and was pending approval by theCounty Board as of September 1999.

The Forest Preserve District of DuPage County, in thefall of l997, gained voter approval by re f e rendum tospend $75 million for open-space pre s e r v a t i o n .

11 . 1

11 . 2

1 2 8


Chapter 11. Role of Key Players

1 2 9

The Forest Preserve District of Kane County has spent$23 million over the last five years and plans to pre s e r v eanother 5,000 acres over the next 20 years. On April 13,1999, a re f e rendum for $70 million for land acquisitionpassed by 66%.

The Lake County Forest Preserves’ re f e rendum on A p r i l13, 1999, passed by 66%, providing $35 million to buyland and $20 million for habitat restoration, trails, andother improvements. A v o t e r- a p p roved 1993 re f e re n d u mhad previously provided $20 million for land acquisitionand $10 million for restoration, trails, and impro v e m e n t s .

The McHenry County Conservation District hopes todouble its current inventory of 10,500 acres over the next10 years.

The Forest Preserve District of Will County, on April 13,l999, won 57% voter approval for $70 million to buy 6,500a c re s .

Additional roles of forest preserve and conservation dis-tricts are public education and outdoor re c reation. Theseroles derive from the statutory responsibilities outlined intheir enabling legislation. The districts also serve as pri-mary coordinator of volunteer stewardship and monitor-ing work on the land they own and manage. Pro v i d i n gsuch opportunities for public enjoyment, learning, andinvolvement helps build understanding of the mission ofthe districts and support for public funding to pre s e r v eand re s t o re the districts’ lands.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ In keeping with their central role as land managers,

the forest preserve and conservation districts shouldcontinue to play lead roles in identifying, evaluating,and acquiring unprotected natural communitieswithin their jurisdictions.

✔ Federal and state agencies should support thesee fforts with funding and technical re s o u rces. The mostrecent example of such a partnership was the ChicagoWilderness collaboration that produced the natural-a reas inventory for McHenry County.

✔ F o rest preserves should use all tools available to addland to their holdings. It is also recommended thatexisting natural areas be protected from purc h a s erequests by commercial and other interests or conver-sion to intensive re c reational uses.

Park districtsThe mission of park districts more heavily emphasizesre c reation than does the mission of conservation and for-est preserve districts. However, this does not pre c l u d ethem from making a valuable contribution to the conser-

vation of biodiversity. Many of the 148 park districts inthe Illinois portion of Chicago Wilderness have theopportunity to acquire or manage natural communitiesfalling within their jurisdiction. Such sites are sometimestoo small to meet the acquisition criteria of the local fore s tp reserve or conservation district. The St. Charles ParkDistrict, for example, has adopted policies for pre s e r v-ing and maintaining natural areas and is a leader inrestoring natural areas in their ownership. Pilcher Park,an Illinois Natural A reas Inventory site, sets a goodexample of working with volunteer stewards and withthe state Nature Preserves Commission to manage its finere s o u rce. Many park districts, including the ChicagoPark District, have become involved in restoring wet-lands and in reestablishing native prairies and wood-lands. Lake County Parks and Recreation in Cro w nPoint, Indiana, has been actively acquiring and re s t o r i n gnatural areas. Park districts can and should play theimportant role of educating the public on the importanceof maintaining biodiversity.

Like forest preserve districts, park districts are subject top roperty-tax caps and may have to hold public re f e re n d ain order to finance acquisitions or major projects. Publiceducation by all parties re g a rding the importance of bio-diversity can be vitally important to the success of suchre f e re n d a .

Sanitary districtsThe role of sanitary districts in recovering biodiversity islimited principally to the collection, treatment, and dis-c h a rge of wastewater that meets federal and state stan-d a rds. Some are also responsible for treating storm waterthat reaches their plants through combined sewer sys-tems. Hence they have an interest in storm water man-agement. Treated effluent can have major impacts onaquatic biodiversity depending on both its quality andthe location of the point of discharge. Unfortunately, theregulatory practices determining discharge locationsusually consider only engineering standards such as theavailability of stream flow for dilution rather than theimpact on the ecology of the receiving stream. The stategovernments have regulatory authority for discharg elocations and limits.

Sanitary districts may also own land that supports sig-nificant biodiversity. Such land aff o rds opportunities forpartnering with organizations more directly charg e dwith conservation of biodiversity. The largest landownerof this type is the Metropolitan Water ReclamationDistrict, which encompasses most of Cook County. TheDistrict has effectively used intergovernmental agre e-ments and other cooperative agreements to enhance theuse and maintenance of District lands to support biodi-v e r s i t y. This good practice should be continued ande x p a n d e d .

1 3 0


Sanitary districts also have indirect impact on biodiver-sity when extension of their service areas facilitates moreintense development. While the primary function of san-itary districts is to provide service, they can work activelywith other governmental units that have a more dire c trole in directing development and protecting naturala reas. Such cooperative effort can be important to pro-tecting biodiversity.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Since the concern for maintaining biodiversity is not

one of the purposes for which sanitary districts werec reated, enabling legislation should be amended tospecify the authority and obligation of districts to pro-tect biodiversity.

✔ In the case of private utility companies that pro v i d ewastewater collection and treatment services, andwhose franchises are regulated by the Illinois Com-m e rce Commission, a similar broadening of authoriz-ing legislation would be appro p r i a t e .

Illinois counties and municipalitiesCounty governments regulate land in unincorporateda reas and, in some instances, play important roles instormwater and/or wastewater management. Municipalgovernments regulate the use of land and also have theauthority to annex new land, typically for the purposeof facilitating new development. Anumber of municipal-ities also own and operate their own wastewater tre a t-ment systems and there f o re can extend sewer service aspart of an annexation agre e m e n t .

Illinois, with its heavy emphasis on the property andsales taxes to fund municipal governments, has cre a t e da strong incentive for municipalities to expand into newa reas. Several recent tax-reform initiatives have lookedat the problem of over- reliance on the local property taxand have made recommendations that would lessen theincentives for territorial expansion.

Some municipalities operate their own park systems andt h e re f o re may be the most appropriate bodies to pre s e r v enatural areas within their boundaries. Also, both countyand municipal governments have the authority to pre-p a re and adopt comprehensive plans. These plansshould identify open spaces meriting preservation andspecify who should be responsible for their preservation.

Municipalities can also take direct action in managinglands that they own to support biodiversity and they cana c q u i re and manage additional land. Even in municipal-ities that have separate park districts, they can play animportant role in funding the acquisition and manage-ment of open space, wetlands and other natural areas. Insituations where park districts do not have suff i c i e n t

financial capacity, municipalities can provide assistancet h rough cooperative agreements. This is especially thecase with Illinois home rule communities that are not lim-ited by tax caps. Chapter 8, section 8.3 discusses otherpossible actions by municipalities related to plans, ord i-nances, etc.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Counties and municipalities should amend their com-

p rehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and other re g u-lations to incorporate relevant re c o m m e n d a t i o n scontained in this plan.

✔ When a state infrastru c t u re investment such as a tollroad or major airport is likely to trigger substantial residential, commercial, or industrial development,a ffected governments (including state, county, munic-ipal and other local jurisdictions) should enter intoi n t e rgovernmental agreements designed to pre v e n tadverse environmental impacts, including the loss ofbiodiversity Such agreements were developed as partof the process for considering a proposed expre s s w a yin central Lake County, Illinois.

✔ Municipalities should play an active role in pro t e c-tion and management of biodiversity by managingtheir lands to support native ecological communitiesand consider acquisition of additional land for thesep u r p o s e s .

Northwest Indiana municipalitiesThe municipalities in Indiana, such as the City of Garyand the City of Hammond, have unique roles in pre s e r v-ing and protecting biodiversity. This stems from the larg eimpact of business and industry in northwestern Indiana.These businesses and industries are key elements of localeconomies and, in many instances, owners of enviro n-mentally sensitive land.

To effectively protect biodiversity in northwesternIndiana, partnerships need to be nurtured among thevarious agencies of the federal, state, and county gov-ernments, city departments, and private org a n i z a t i o n sthat own and oversee land requiring preservation andlong-term management. For example, this is importantfor the City of Gary since it contains portions of theIndiana Dunes National Lakeshore as well as severalpieces of dune-and-swale ecosystems that are pro t e c t e dand managed by the Indiana Department of NaturalR e s o u rces and private conservation gro u p s .

These cooperative partnerships may evolve into com-p rehensive and cooperative planning and managementinitiatives among the various agencies, departments, ando rganizations. At present there is no compre h e n s i v e ,c o o rdinated, or cooperative relationship between the var-


1 3 1

ious habitat managers and landowners in the City ofG a r y, such as the City Park Department and the Redevel-opment Commission.

The cities of northwest Indiana may develop guidelinesfor the staffs of economic-development departments andplanning departments urging them to include, wherepossible, habitat preservation in development pro j e c t sthat impact sensitive areas and habitat restoration in pre-viously disturbed areas. While these cities are developingthe capacity to manage natural re s o u rces, state, federal,or private agencies and organizations may assist in pro-viding technical assistance for city-owned naturalre s o u rc e s .

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ In northwest Indiana, city departments should enter

into partnerships aimed at protecting biodiversitywith federal, state, and county agencies and with pri-vate organizations that own and oversee land re q u i r-ing preservation and long-term maintenance.

✔ Indiana cities and their regional planning and devel-opment agencies should develop a process for takinginventory of natural areas and prioritizing areas forp reservation and restoration in conjunction with eco-nomic-development initiatives.

✔ Indiana cities and their partner agencies shoulddevelop plans and allocate funds to preserve land andto manage preserved land consistently.

Special units of governmentThe Chicago Wilderness region is home to a number ofspecialized units of government that can play an espe-cially important role in providing for expanded habitat.The argument is often raised that enabling legislationdoes not specifically identify habitat protection andrestoration as an activity of such districts. Yet variousgovernmental bodies nonetheless can play a major ro l esimply by administratively choosing to do so. Thus, theIllinois Department of Transportation plants prairiesalong its rights of way because it saves maintenance dol-lars over the long run and the program is well re c e i v e dby the public. Grade schools and high schools plantprairie gardens; community colleges re s t o re large naturala reas on their grounds. The Metropolitan Wa t e rReclamation District of Greater Chicago grants long-term, low-cost leases on its important natural areas forhabitat management. None of these public agencies arelegislatively enabled to accomplish these activities, nora re they legislatively precluded from doing so. Theychoose to do so for the community good and, often,because it means lower maintenance and operation costs.

Mosquito abatement districts: Alternative approaches tomosquito control that do not harm other fauna need to beidentified through round-table discussions among themosquito abatement districts and Chicago Wi l d e r n e s sre p re s e n t a t i v e s .

Drainage districts: Drainage techniques that serve agri-c u l t u re while also improving habitat, controlling ero s i o n ,and controlling storm water should be identified andused along channelized streams managed by drainaged i s t r i c t s .

The Fox River Waterway Management Agency: Wa t e r-way-management agencies should implement strategiesto protect and enhance habitat throughout their jurisdic-tions, especially for fish migration and spawning, waterb i rd migration and nesting, restoration, control of exoticspecies, shoreline erosion control, and protection andenhancement of mussel beds.

Illinois Prairie Trail Authority: This authority, re p re-senting the five Illinois collar counties, could play animportant role in coordinating region-wide public access,education, and activities related to natural areas adjoin-ing the collar-county trail network.

Local highway departments: These departments canplay a leading role in habitat restoration and pro t e c t i o nby detaining storm water on site, managing salt use, pur-suing environmentally benign alternatives to salt, andusing native landscaping within rights of way moree x t e n s i v e l y.

Illinois International Port District: The Port Districtincludes Lake Calumet, one of the largest and most im-portant habitats for birds and fish in southeast Chicago.T h e re is a need for a long-range management plan, devel-oped with community involvement, to provide a balancebetween habitat preservation and economic develop-ment. Such a plan should deal with restoring water qual-ity and providing access to Lake Calumet for appro p r i a t ere c reational activities.

11.2.3 State agencies

Illinois Department of Natural ResourcesThe Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) hasplayed a lead role in conserving biodiversity in north-eastern Illinois by establishing and maintaining theIllinois Natural A reas Inventory (INAI), by acquiring andmanaging land, and by providing technical assistance topublic and private agencies and groups interested inre s o u rce conservation. IDNR also administers severalgrant programs to fund biodiversity-related initiatives.This section describes various IDNR pro g r a m s .

1 3 2


The Illinois Natural History Survey (INHS), foundedin 1858, is recognized as the nation’s premier natural his-tory survey. INHS scientists study plants and animalsand how they interact among the variety of ecosystems.Scientists from the Illinois Water Survey and G e o l o g i c a lS u r v e y also study critical factors involved in ecosystemfunction such as hydrological patterns and soil stru c t u re .

As for land protection, IDNR is the third largest non-fed-eral public landowner in the six-county region (see Ta b l e11.1) with over 21,300 acres of state parks, natural are a s ,conservation areas, and re g i s t e red Land and Wa t e rReserves. The Office of Resource Conservation (ORC) andthe Office of Land Management and Education (OLME)a re responsible for identifying and managing theseecosystems. The Surveys, ORC, and OLME are involvedwith watershed management, restoration ecology, long-term monitoring of natural communities, contro l l i n ginvasive species, and fish and wildlife ecology. They fosteri m p roved management of the state’s biological re s o u rc e sand public appreciation of Illinois’s natural heritage.

The O ffice of Water Resources has regulatory re s p o n s i-bilities in stream channels, floodways, and floodplains.

The Illinois Nature Preserves Commission works withlandowners who wish to voluntarily protect high-qualitynatural areas as either Illinois Nature Preserves orR e g i s t e red Illinois Land and Water Reserves. These high-quality natural areas have frequently already been iden-tified on the Illinois Natural A reas Inventory, either asrelatively undisturbed natural plant communities or ashabitat for state-listed endangered or threatened species.

Dedication of these natural areas is a legal pro c e s sw h e reby the owner voluntarily restricts future uses of theland in perpetuity for the purpose of preserving the landin its natural state. The owner retains custody but re l i n-quishes the right to develop the land or make any changesthat negatively affect the natural qualities of the pro p e r t y.Sites dedicated as Illinois Nature Preserves or re g i s t e re das Illinois Land and Water Reserves are protected underthe auspices of the Illinois Natural A reas Preservation A c t .That act states that “areas dedicated as nature pre s e r v e sa re hereby declared to be put to their highest, best, andmost important use for the public benefit.”

After the land is dedicated, it becomes part of a statewidesystem of nature preserves or land-and-water re s e r v e sthat is overseen by the Illinois Nature Pre s e r v e sCommission, a nine-person citizen body appointed bythe Governor. To date, 285 sites totaling 37,778 acres havebeen dedicated as Illinois Nature Preserves, and 33 sitestotaling 14,675 acres have been re g i s t e red as Illinois Landand Water Reserves. Of that total, 106 nature pre s e r v e sand five land-and-water reserves are located in the six-

county region of northeastern Illinois. Nearly half ofthese protected areas are owned by the county forest pre-serve and conservation districts. The Illinois Departmentof Natural Resources, park districts, municipalities, andprivate parties own the re m a i n d e r.

Many high-quality natural areas in northeastern Illinois,h o w e v e r, remain unprotected. A number of the high-quality Chicago lake-plain prairies and wetlands, forexample, have not been formally pro t e c t e d .

The Nature Preserves Commission staff also pro v i d e srecommendations and assistance re g a rding re s t o r a t i o nand management of protected sites. The staff also workscooperatively with landowners, municipalities, and re g-ulatory agencies to prevent or minimize impacts associ-ated with changing land uses on Illinois Natural A re a sInventory sites and protected sites.

The Nature Preserves Commission is an important part-ner in the Volunteer Stewardship Network, providing thelegal basis for volunteers to apply herbicides by indem-nifying those who become licensed through the state.

The Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board is anindependent board of nine members appointed by theg o v e r n o r. The board was created by the IllinoisE n d a n g e red Species Protection Act of 1972 and is dedi-cated to protecting Illinois’s endangered and thre a t e n e dspecies. Following from this mandate is the evaluationand listing of animal and plant species as state-endan-g e red or -threatened. The list is updated and publishedevery five years following a two-year review pro c e s s .

Duties of the board include the following:

• Listing, delisting, or changing the listing status ofspecies of plants and animals

• Advising the Department of Natural Resources on theassistance, protection, conservation, and managementof native endangered and threatened plants and ani-mals and their habitats

• Encouraging and promoting re s e a rch and investiga-tions that determine status of native plants and ani-mals that may be eligible for listing, and pro m o t i n gre s e a rch and management that may enhance the pos-sibility of success of a listed species and ultimatelylead to recovery and delisting

• Informing the public about matters pertaining tot h reatened and endangered species

• Working with other agencies and organizations toconserve threatened and endangered plants and ani-mals and their habitats


1 3 3

IDNR has a long re c o rd of providing financial supportfor land acquisition in northeastern Illinois. The depart-ment administers the state’s Open Space Lands Acquis-ition and Development Program (OSLAD), the N a t u r a lAreas Acquisition and Development Program ( N A A F ) ,C-2000 Ecosystem Program, and the Open Land Tr u s t( O LT ) .

O S L A D has helped local park and forest preserve dis-tricts acquire and develop substantial open spaces.Funded by the Illinois real-estate transfer tax, OSLAD isbudgeted statewide at $17,715,000 for FY 99. In FY 9 8 ,applications from local governments in Cook Countyw e re approved at a level of $3,925,000, while applicantsin the collar counties were awarded $5,466,000. Since itsbeginning in FY 86 through FY 98, OSLAD has pro v i d e d$27,735,000 to Cook County applicants and $31,656,000 tothe collar counties. OSLAD re q u i res a 100% local match.

N A A F was established in 1989 with a portion of the re a l -estate transfer tax. The fund is dedicated for acquisitionand stewardship of natural areas, including habitat fore n d a n g e red and threatened species, high-quality naturalcommunities, wetlands, and other areas with unique orunusual qualities of natural heritage. Lands acquire dremain in state ownership. A p p roximately $2 millioneach year is used for acquisition and steward s h i p .

C - 2 0 0 0 Ecosystem Program funds watershed- andecosystem-based local partnerships that seek to main-tain and enhance natural areas and coordinate conserva-tion efforts with other local interest such as business.Among the projects eligible for grants are those for landacquisition or the purchase of conservation easements forthe purpose of habitat protection or restoration. To t a lgrants for the statewide program are expected to aver-age $3 million per year. Partnerships within northeast-ern Illinois include Chicago Wilderness, the Fox RiverEcosystem Partnership, Lake Calumet EcosystemPartnership, Prairie Parklands Partnership, Thorn Cre e kEcosystem Partnership, Wisconsin-Upper Des PlainesPartnership, and the Upper DuPage River Coalition.

The C-2000 Ecosystems Program has established pilotp rojects in four downstate watersheds designed to “fix”local streams by a variety of methods including betterland management. These will serve as important casestudies for application within the Chicago Wi l d e r n e s sre g i o n .

O LT is Governor Ryan’s landmark initiative to dedicate$160 million over four years to acquire natural areas andopen space and to provide re c reational opportunities forthe citizens of Illinois. The program will allow the IDNRto acquire land; create a grant program for units of localgovernment to acquire land; and enter into management

a g reements with not-for- p rofit organizations on landa c q u i s i t i o n .

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n✔ The State of Illinois should continue its grants pro-

grams for open space with more funds for acquisitiond i rected to northeastern Illinois. Open Lands Trust A c tfunds should primarily protect lands with current orpotential biodiversity values.

✔ The state should continue to acquire high-quality nat-ural areas through the NAAF.

Indiana Department of Natural Resources The mission of the Indiana Department of NaturalR e s o u rces (DNR) is to protect, enhance, preserve, andwisely use natural, cultural, and re c reational re s o u rc e sfor the benefit of Indiana’s citizens. It does so thro u g hpublic information programs to promote awareness andconservation of Indiana’s natural re s o u rces, by acquir-ing public lands with programs such as the IndianaHeritage Trust, and by using a watershed-based multi-disciplinary management approach in its pro g r a m s .

The Division of Nature Preserves is responsible fori n v e n t o r y, protection, dedication, and management ofIndiana’s remaining natural areas. In addition, theIndiana Natural Heritage Data Center, within theDivision of Nature Preserves, collects, manages, and pro-vides data on Indiana biodiversity, including endangere dspecies, natural communities, and conservation lands inthe state.

In the Chicago Wilderness area of northwest Indiana, theDivision conducts field inventories for endangere dspecies and natural communities, manages severaln a t u re preserves, and works with various conservationpartners protecting some of the most diverse naturala reas in the state. Two funding sources allow the Divisionto acquire (or assist in acquiring) natural lands: theIndiana Natural Heritage Protection Campaign and theIndiana Heritage Trust program. The former is a pub-lic/private program to fund conservation that has suc-cessfully protected the best remaining natural are a sa c ross the state. The latter program, which is funded bysale of the environmental license plates, has proven tobe one of the most successful conservation-funding pro-grams ever in Indiana.

Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesThe Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR)has broad responsibility and involvement in managingbiodiversity in Wisconsin. It manages the state ownedwildlife areas (such as the New Munster Wildlife A re a ) ,re c reational areas (like the Bong State Recreational A re a ) ,and state parks (such as Big Foot Beach State Park). In

1 3 4


addition, the Department often works in partnershipwith other public and private agencies and groups toa c q u i re, preserve, and manage unique sites and naturala reas (such as the Chiwaukee Prairie). The Departmentregulates modifications to waterways and wetlands,establishes and enforces effluent standards for industrialand municipal wastewater facilities, and approves mod-ifications to sewer service areas. Wisconsin DNR over-sees local implementation of zoning regulations forfloodplains and shores. Wisconsin DNR maintains theNatural Heritage Inventory in Wisconsin and imple-ments the state law on endangered and thre a t e n e ds p e c i e s .

In May 1995, the Wisconsin DNR issued a report entitledWi s c o n s i n ’s Biodiversity as a Management Issue. This re p o r tp resented the department’s strategy for the conservationof biological diversity. It provided DNR employees withan overview of the issues associated with biodiversityand provided a common point of re f e rence for incorpo-rating the conservation of biodiversity into DNR’s man-agement framework. In June 1995, the Wisconsin DNRpublished a land-use report entitled Common Gro u n d .Common Gro u n d focuses specifically on improving DNRp rograms and policies that relate to making decisionsabout land use. This report reflects the DNR’s desire tohave strong public policies that not only pro t e c tWisconsin’s environment but also enhance the state’seconomy and maintain a high quality of life. In 1996, theWisconsin DNR re o rganized so that program implemen-tation and land management are carried out inGeographic Management Units (GMUs). GMUs re f l e c tthe natural boundaries provided by watersheds and riverbasins. The Wisconsin DNR has formed “partnershipteams” with the public and private sectors to guide plan-ning and implementation within the GMUs. Wi s c o n s i nDNR is currently working on a map of terrestrial ecolog-ical regions based on the National Hierarc h i c a lFramework of Ecological Units.

Illinois Environmental Protection AgencyThe Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) re g-ulates waste discharges to water, air, and land. A m a j o rrole for maintaining biodiversity is oversight of water-quality management planning as mandated by the fed-eral Clean Water Act. In that capacity, IEPA a p p roves thesizing, location, and limits on effluents for sewage-tre a t-ment plants. IEPA also determines the boundaries ofa reas to be served by treatment plants, and it thereby caninfluence patterns of growth and development.

The Agency also administers the national permit pro-gram for stormwater discharges. This program has thepotential to significantly reduce the adverse effects ofstormwater ru n o ff on the biodiversity of streams. Phase

One of the program covers municipal storm-sewer sys-tems that do not receive sanitary sewage and that servepopulations of 100,000 or more, construction activitiesthat disturb five acres or more, and numerous industrialactivities. In the fall of 1999, Phase Two will extend thep rogram to small municipalities and construction activi-ties disturbing one or more acres of land.

In addition to regulating discharges to streams and lakes,I E PA administers state water-quality standards that areset by the Illinois Pollution Control Board to establishconditions that must be maintained in streams and lakes.The standards include limits for various chemicals, top rotect both human health and aquatic life.

I E PA regulation of air pollution and contaminated landalso benefits both aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity. Aspecific aspect of air-pollution control that is importantfor protection and restoration of biodiversity is theissuance of permits to landowners for conducting pre-scribed burns.

I E PA’s Office of Pollution Prevention encourages busi-nesses to prevent pollution before it becomes a pro b l e m .The agency also promotes holistic approaches that elim-inate the sources of waste in products, processes, and rawm a t e r i a l s .

Illinois Department of Tr a n s p o r t a t i o nAs a major landowner, the Illinois Department ofTransportation (IDOT) sets an example when it employsbest management practices in its highway design andmaintenance. To its credit, IDOT has demonstrated awillingness to establish and maintain native landscap-ing along many state roads including some in northeast-ern Illinois.

IDOT also participates in the regional transportationplanning process in northeastern Illinois, including iden-tification and mitigation of environmental impacts oftransportation facility decisions.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n✔ IDOT should incorporate biodiversity principles into

all transportation infrastru c t u re planning and allimplementation decisions.

Illinois State Toll Highway AuthorityPlanning the widening or extension of major toll ro a d sin the Illinois portion of the Chicago Wilderness re g i o nis a part of the official regional transportation-planningp rocess. The authorization to build is made solely by theIllinois General A s s e m b l y, with actual constru c t i o nd i rected by the Illinois State Toll Highway A u t h o r i t y.


1 3 5

One of the most recent major additions to the Chicago-a rea system of expressways and toll roads is the north-south toll road in DuPage County. The enviro n m e n t a limpact statement (EIS) pre p a red for that project identi-fied a number of potential adverse impacts and pro p o s e dremedies. It specifically discussed erosion controls to pro-tect adjacent streams during construction.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n✔ F u t u re toll-road construction projects must assure full

compliance with EIS re c o m m e n d a t i o n s .

Illinois Department of AgricultureThis agency supports farmers who participate in conser-vation programs under federal farm bills and in generalhabitat restoration. The Illinois Department of A g r i-c u l t u re has sought to curb excessive conversion of farm-land to other uses by commenting on proposed actionsinvolving federal or state monies that could cause the lossof farmland. This advisory review is conducted under theauthority of the Illinois Farmland Protection Act, PA 8 2 -945. There is some possibility that this act could be usedto block land acquisition by forest preserve districts orother conservation agencies.

Other Illinois legislation pertaining to farmland pre s e r-vation include: 1) the Agricultural A reas Conservationand Protection Act, PA 8 1 - 1173; 2) Protection of FarmingOperations from Nuisance Suits, PA 82-509; and 3)Illinois Soil and Water Conservation District A c t .

11.2.4 Intergovernmental organizationsIn the Chicago Wilderness region, three interg o v e r n m e n-tal planning agencies cover multiple counties: 1) theNortheastern Illinois Planning Commission, 2) the North-western Indiana Regional Planning Commission, and 3)the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Comm-ission. Given the cross-section of local governments serv-ing on their boards, they are well positioned to facilitatec o o rdinated, intergovernmental planning and to pro v i d etechnical assistance on local environmental matters. Afourth agency, the Chicago A rea Transportation Study( C ATS), is the designated MPO specifically for trans-portation planning for northeastern Illinois.

Northeastern Illinois Planning CommissionThe Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission (NIPC)has a threefold role in preserving biodiversity. First, itdevelops and adopts regional plans, such as the RegionalG reenways Plan, which has been widely accepted andused by local as well as state government. Like theG reenways Plan, the Biodiversity Recovery Plan can set ad i rection for the region and, once adopted by NIPC, canserve as a guide for municipalities, counties, and other

government units. Second, NIPC studies growth anddevelopment patterns, and it pre p a res forecasts for pop-ulation, households, and employment. Also, NIPC mon-itors water quality in streams, lakes, and wetlands, andit promotes good planning and the use of best manage-ment practices for these re s o u rces. Third, NIPC workswith local governments to promote interg o v e r n m e n t a lactivities through means such as interg o v e r n m e n t a la g reements and planning processes for joint are a s .

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning CommissionThe Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Comm-ission (NIRPC) promotes biodiversity through variousactivities of planning, implementation, and policymak-ing. As the federally recognized planning org a n i z a t i o nfor Northwest Indiana, NIRPC recently adopted theVision 2020 Transportation Plan for Northwest Indiana,which incorporates environmental sensitivity, pro m o t e swise use of land, and encourages the use of alternativefuels. NIRPC’s Environmental Management Policy Com-mittee serves as a regional advisor and facilitator for dis-cussion and public education on air quality. It also actsas a point of contact for discussion, coordination, andaction on a wide range of programs and projects for air,land, and water quality. NIRPC is assisting in the pre p a-ration of an inventory and functional assessment of wetlands in the three-county region. It also pre p a red amanagement plan for the Trail Creek watershed. NIRPCserves as staff to the Quality of Life Council, a re g i o n a lroundtable of public and private leaders that pro m o t e ssustainable development in Northwest Indiana. NIRPCis currently reactivating its role in community and eco-nomic development to promote Smart Growth for theregion. NIRPC also provides staff support to two river-basin commissions whose missions include wetland andhabitat re s t o r a t i o n .

Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning CommissionThe Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Comm-ission (SEWRPC) is the official area-wide, compre h e n s i v eplanning agency for southeastern Wisconsin, which com-prises Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Wa l w o r t h ,Washington, and Waukesha Counties. SEWRPC pro v i d e sthe basic information and planning services necessary tosolve problems that transcend the boundaries and fiscalcapabilities of the region’s local units of government.

Since its inception, SEWRPC has placed a high priorityon the identification, protection, and wise use of the nat-ural re s o u rces of the region. In 1997, the commissioncompleted a Regional Natural Areas and Critical SpeciesHabitat Protection and Management Plan for SoutheasternWi s c o n s i n . This plan is the product of almost ten years of

1 3 6


intensive work conducted under the guidance of aTechnical Advisory Committee consisting of individualsparticularly knowledgeable about the natural areas andthe habitats of critical species of the region. Through anextensive inventory, this plan identified all of the high-quality natural areas and habitats of critical speciesremaining in the seven-county region. It formulated re c-ommendations for the protection, wise use, and pro p e rmanagement of those areas and habitats. This report alsop rovides information to promote sound rural and urbandevelopment, avoiding conflicts between developmentp roposals and re s o u rce pro t e c t i o n .

Chicago Area Transportation StudyThe Chicago A rea Transportation Study (CATS) is feder-ally recognized Metropolitan Planning Org a n i z a t i o n(MPO) for transportation planning for the six-countyChicago region. CATS leads the region in producing the long range transportation plan, the 2020 RegionalTransportation Plan (1997) which identified levels ofinvestment for existing transportation facilities and fortransportation system expansion. The Tr a n s p o r t a t i o nPlan calls for priority investments in our existing systemand at the same time includes new expressways, tollroads and transit lines. Each of these projects, if built,could affect a number of wetlands and other naturalc o m m u n i t i e s .

✔ The regional transportation planning process shouldincorporate biodiversity principles into the trans-portation planning and programming pro c e s s .

Municipal associationsLike regional planning commissions, municipal associa-tions facilitate joint action by their member governments.They are usually organized within a single county butcan collaborate across county borders when necessary. Todate, their chief activities related to the environment havebeen in the areas of water supply and solid-waste man-agement. Their support of biodiversity recovery as amunicipal concern would be very helpful to the objec-tives of Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s .

11.2.5 Federal administrative agencies

U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) carriesout a wide array of federal statutes having to do with thephysical, chemical, and biological environment. It hasmajor authority to regulate discharges of pollutants tow a t e r, air, and land. It regulates these discharges eitherd i rectly or by delegating authority to those states thatdemonstrate capacity and willingness. It also has re s p o n-sibility for re s e a rch and technology transfer in re l a t e d

a reas. Many EPA functions affect biodiversity. Examplesinclude review of environmental impact statements pre-p a red by other federal agencies, incentive programs toa d d ress land ru n o ff to surface waters, identification ofhigh-quality wetlands, wetland permit reviews, and wet-land enforcement. The agency also has a small pilot pro-gram encouraging the use of native plants in private landholdings such as corporate campuses.

U.S. Army Corps of EngineersThe Corps of Engineers, under Section 10 of the Riversand Harbors Act, regulates construction in navigablewaters, including major waterways and Lake Michigan.The Corps also has authority under Section 404 of theClean Water Act to issue permits for the deposition ofd redged and fill materials and for excavation in waters ofthe United States, which include most wetlands ands t reams. Wetlands are still vulnerable to deteriorationsince such activities as vegetation removal, ero s i o n ,d e s t ruction of buffers, conversion to impoundments, andthe discharge of storm water into wetlands are not re g u-l a t e d .

The Corps has various authorities allowing them to evaluate, design, and implement solutions to aquatic re-s o u rce problems. Projects re q u i re a local partner or spon-s o r. The authorities include those specifically authorizedby Congress, plus the Continuing Authorities Pro g r a m ,particularly Section 206 (Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration),Section 204 (using dredged material to re s t o re wetlandsor other aquatic systems) as well as others. Studies maybe accomplished through the “Planning Assistance toStates” program, which supplies technical expertise toevaluate, design, and implement solutions to the ongoingloss of biological integrity in and around stre a m s .

The Corps has the authority to grant permits for pro j e c t sthat affect wetlands, provided the impacts are no morethan minimal. Mitigation of project impacts is considere das part of the overall evaluation of a project. The ChicagoDistrict has developed some innovative practices thathave greatly aided the region’s ability to improve andre s t o re degraded habitat. Mitigation banks, in-lieu feep rograms, and the use of enforcement and noncompli-ance resolutions to improve impacted habitat are n o t e w o r t h y. While re s o u rces have been somewhat con-strained in the last few years, the Corps continues to lookfor ways to maximize its effectiveness and to developpartnerships with many of the diverse groups involvedin wetlands.

U.S. Department of Agriculture: U S D A Forest Service“Caring for the land and serving the people” is the mis-sion of the USDA F o rest Service. The Forest Service,


1 3 7

t h rough partnerships with state and local natural-re s o u rce agencies, works in Northeastern Illinois to man-age forests, prairies, and related natural re s o u rces forlong-term sustainability and for improved quality of lifefor all citizens. The Chicago area is home to three USDAF o rest Service offices: the Midewin National Ta l l g r a s sPrairie in Wilmington, the North Central Researc hStation in Evanston, and the Northeastern A rea State andPrivate Forestry office in Evanston.

The Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie is part of theNational Forest System. A d m i n i s t e red by the Fore s tService in close cooperation with the Illinois Departmentof Natural Resources, Midewin is the largest piece of pro-tected open space in northeastern Illinois. Although pub-lic access to Midewin is currently restricted because of theArmy’s ongoing cleanup of the former Joliet A r s e n a l ,Midewin’s mission is to conserve and enhance nativepopulations of plants and animals, provide opportunitiesfor re s e a rch and environmental education, support con-tinuing agricultural uses in some areas, and provide avariety of re c reation opportunities. Prairie re s t o r a t i o nand new re s e a rch have already begun at Midewin, andopportunities for the public to visit and work on the sitewill grow over the coming years.

North Central Research Station in Evanston conductssocial-science re s e a rch aimed at managing forest envi-ronments for urban populations. Northeastern A rea Stateand Private Forestry provides financial and technicalassistance for managing forest ecosystems in populateda reas. This assistance includes conservation education,woodland restoration, and management of trees in park-lands and streets, as well as management of exotic pestssuch as the Asian longhorned beetle and gypsy moth.

Natural Resources Conservation ServiceThe Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) isthe federal agency that works with private landownersand communities to achieve their conservation goalst h rough a voluntary approach to land steward s h i p .NRCS emphasizes voluntary, science-based assistance,partnerships, and cooperative problem solving at thecommunity level. NRCS employees are skilled in manyscientific and technical specialties, including soil science,soil conservation, watershed planning, hydro l o g y, andwetland science. Assistance is provided through a net-work of local field off i c e s .

NRCS can support aspects of the Biodiversity RecoveryPlan through its efforts in community assistance andwatershed planning. Using the watershed-planningp rocess, community members can determine local prior-ities for re s o u rces and can develop a plan of action thata d d resses the needs of both the community residents andtheir environment. In addition to general technical assis-

tance, NRCS provides technical leadership for the manyp rovisions of the 1996 Farm Bill, including the We t l a n dReserve Program, Wildlife Habitat Incentives Pro g r a m ,and Conservation Reserve Program. These programs canbe used in the protection and restoration of biodiversityin the Chicago Wilderness are a .

U.S. Department of Interior: U.S. Fish andWildlife Service, National Park ServiceThe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service operates an EcologicalServices field office in northeastern Illinois that imple-ments the Endangered Species Act, including listing,re c o v e r y, and consultation. The Service offers consulta-tion to other federal agencies on their permits, licenses,and funded projects. It provides technical and monetarysupport to private and public landowners for habitatrestoration. It also investigates effects of enviro n m e n t a lcontaminants on fish and wildlife, participates inregional conservation planning, and provides educationand outreach to schools and the general public on biodi-versity conservation.

The Service also operates the 93 million-acre NationalWildlife Refuge system, which provides habitat for mig-ratory birds, endangered species, and other fish andwildlife. The Service could play a major role in the Chic-ago Wilderness region as a federal landowner, assistingin the acquisition of large parcels necessary to create habi-tat complexes identified in this plan and restoring habitatfor area-sensitive species.

Also within the Department of Interior, the National ParkService maintains the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshoreand conducts scientific studies.

U.S. Department of Tr a n s p o r t a t i o nThe U.S. Department of Transportation provides over $1billion annually to the Chicago Wilderness region for avariety of programs relating to transportation. The cur-rent federal transportation-funding act is called TEA-21,the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. Whilethe bulk of TEA-21 funding locally goes toward main-taining our existing systems of highways and mass tran-sit, funding is also used for acquisition of bicycle- andfoot-trail rights of way, historic preservation, beautifica-tion programs, landscaping (e.g. natural landscaping) oftransportation rights of way, and environmental mitiga-tion. Each of these can help meet some of the biodiversityobjectives of Chicago Wi l d e r n e s s .

TEA-21 re q u i res a planning process and a fundingp rocess for improving and expanding transportation sys-tems. These processes can provide a mechanism to pro-mote biodiversity re c o v e r y, both through the design ofnew and improved transportation systems and thro u g h

1 3 8


their consideration of actions to avoid or mitigate envi-ronmental damage.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n✔ Transportation designers and planners should care-

fully follow the TEA-21 process, taking advantage ofits programs related to biodiversity in the ChicagoWilderness re g i o n .

U.S. Department of EnergyTwo Department of Energy (DOE) National Laboratorieshave extensive land holdings in northeastern Illinois:A rgonne National Laboratory and Fermi NationalAccelerator Laboratory (Fermilab). DOE has devotedre s o u rces to establishing and maintaining native specieson both pro p e r t i e s .

A rgonne is a 1500-acre re s e a rch facility in DuPage Countythat is surrounded by the Waterfall Glen Forest Pre s e r v e .The approximately 700 acres of undeveloped land atA rgonne include woodland, wetland, and prairie habitats.A rgonne has ecological re s e a rch capabilities in the areas ofm y c o r rhizal fungi and soil ecology, carbon sequestration,p h y t o remediation (using plants to concentrate and bre a kdown pollutants), and ecological assessment.

Fermilab has one of DOE’s seven National Enviro n-mental Research Parks (NERPs), re p resenting the tall-grass prairie region for the country. The NERP is anoutdoor laboratory, containing over 1000 acres of re c o n-s t ructed prairie, natural and constructed wetlands, agri-cultural land, and open water. Since its dedication in1989, re s e a rchers from universities and from other DOEsites (including A rgonne) have used the park to conductm o re than 40 projects, including investigations of suc-cession, soil stru c t u re, and microbial communities, evo-lution of plant defenses, and pre d a t o r- p rey dynamics, aswell as surveys of vertebrates and invertebrates.

11 . 3Role of private sector

11.3.1 Non-governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n sThe non-governmental organizations of the Chicagoregion that focus on conservation have demonstrated theflexibility and creativity to contribute to conservation ata high level. With a wide range of missions, they engagein various programs to preserve biodiversity, includingd i rect work on protected natural areas, community-basedo rganizing and education, and advocacy. In addition,

they fill in the cracks, clear bottlenecks, and otherwise c reatively and adeptly make a diff e rence. The large num-ber of organizations contributing to biodiversity conser-vation in the region precludes including full discussion oftheir roles in this plan. This in no way implies that theseo rganizations are any less vital to the achievement of thisplan than the other actors described in this chapter.Appendix 8 provides an overview of the variety of non-governmental organizations in the region, their missionsand significant accomplishments.

The region’s museums, zoos, arboreta, and botanic gar-dens contribute profoundly to the evolving “conserva-tion culture” of the region. Hundreds of thousands ofpeople annually attend their exhibits and educationalevents. Their large re s e a rch staffs, on the cutting edge ofconservation around the globe, bring a focus of solid sci-ence to the many challenging questions facing conserva-tionists here .

Many conservation organizations are run largely ore n t i rely by volunteers active in their communities on ab road range of issues of conservation, enviro n m e n t a leducation, and open space. Some of these org a n i z a t i o n sown and manage local lands for habitat. Many are activein land-use planning and community development.

Some larger organizations with staff play major roles inacquisition of natural lands, conservation science, policyand planning, and volunteer re c ruitment. They often col-laborate with public agencies in highly cost-eff e c t i v ep a r t n e r s h i p s .

Public participation is often key to the effective function-ing of government agencies in a democratic society.P reserve users, neighbors, and other taxpayers have ahealthy and growing interest in wise management ofconservation lands. Not-for- p rofit conservation gro u p shave a long and valuable history of advocacy and otherforms of public participation that can improve theresponsiveness and focus of all types of institutions. Justas volunteer programs have contributed mightily inhealth, education, and youth sports, volunteer pro g r a m sin conservation and environmental education have ag rowing importance. These programs owe their eff e c-tiveness to partnerships between governmental and non-governmental org a n i z a t i o n s .

Non-governmental organizations have also been impor-tant in building coalitions and have played importantroles in development of Chicago Wilderness itself,Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, the Vo l u n t e e rS t e w a rdship Network, and a wide variety of other con-servation successes in the re g i o n .

11 . 3


1 3 9

11.3.2 Business and industryCommercial Club of Chicago: H i s t o r i c a l l y, the private,f o r- p rofit sector has played an important role in open-space preservation in the Chicago region. The mostwidely known examples include A a ron MontgomeryWa rd’s defense in the 1890s of Grant Park as “fore v e ropen clear and free” and architect Daniel Burnham’s P l a nof Chicago, p roduced in l909. It is noteworthy that thesponsorship of this “Burnham Plan” came from theC o m m e rcial Club of Chicago, an organization re p re s e n t-ing the leaders of most major corporations and pro f e s-sions in the Chicago region. The introduction to the l970reprint (Commercial Club of Chicago 1970) includes thefollowing passage by architectural historian Wi l b e r tH a s b rouck, A I A :

Two vitally important results of the plan are the develop-ment of the lakefront and the extension of the Forest Pre s e r v eSystem of Cook County. Burnham often is given credit forinitiating the forest preserves which ring metro p o l i t a nChicago with a green belt…but this basic system had beenestablished before the plan came into being. The concept ofthe Forest Preserve System was formulated by arc h i t e c tDwight Heald Perkins, who served his apprenticeship inB u r n h a m ’s office during the Columbian Exposition. WhatBurnham did do was to encourage the extension and con-tinuation of the forest districts. There is no question thatwithout the plan, the forest preserves as we know them todaywould not exist.

In 1999, the same Commercial Club of Chicago publisheda sequel to the Burnham Plan, which includes a stro n gendorsement of Chicago Wilderness (Johnson 1999).

Northwest Indiana Forum: This group, the leading org a-nization of businesses in northwestern Indiana, hasplayed an important role in promoting open-spacep reservation. It did so by helping to negotiate the settle-ment of pollution claims by the US EPA against certainlocal industries. This settlement directed corporate con-tributions toward the preservation of enviro n m e n t a l l yimportant sites rather than the payment of fines.

H o m e b u i l d e r s : C h i c a g o - a rea homebuilders are in aunique position to promote the conservation of biodi-versity by means of good site design and the pre s e r v a t i o nof open spaces such as wetlands contained on a buildingsite. Some have done so, but many have found it diff i-cult to find qualified organizations willing to receive andp roperly manage small open spaces. This issue re q u i re sfurther analysis by Chicago Wilderness members beforerecommending solutions.

Natural landscaping: Many businesses are also land-owners. In the U.S., approximately 20 million acres oflawn are cultivated, covering more land than any singlec rop. Natural landscaping—using native plants and

plant communities in landscaping—is an opportunity toreestablish diverse native plants, thereby inviting theb i rds and butterflies back home. Using native plants pro-motes biodiversity and stewardship of our natural her-itage. One approach to promoting biodiversity on privatelands is “naturalizing” the land using restoration tech-niques such as planting and prescribed fire. A n o t h e ra p p roach is using native plants in more formal land-scapes in place of turf grasses.

Several corporations in the Chicago region have chosen to use natural landscaping on their own pro p e r t i e s .Examples include Sears corporate headquarters in Hoff-man Estates, the AT&T corporate campus in Lisle, theLucent Technologies campus in Naperville, and severalright-of-way sites belonging to Commonwealth Edison.

Among the major reasons for natural landscaping is costsaving. Appendix 9 compares costs of the two basicoptions for landscape design and management. The firstoption is to plant and maintain hybrid turf grasses andother non-native ornamental plants and trees. Theseplants are now established throughout the non-agricul-tural portions of the region, especially in most parks andresidential areas and in most commercial and institu-tional sites. NIPC (1997c) estimates that over a ten-yearperiod, installation and maintenance of Kentucky bluegrass cost $59,400 per acre. The second option is to usenative plants, and in some cases to re s t o re hydro l o g y,which in turn will support more animals, birds and othernative species. The NIPC study estimates that over a tenyear period, installation and maintenance of either buf-falo grass or prairie grasses and forbs cost under $10,000per acre .

It is important to note that natural landscaping comple-ments the ecological restoration taking place across theChicago Wilderness. In natural landscaping, the pro p-erty owner is concerned primarily with selecting fro mthe palate of native plants and is generally not intere s t e din restoring the hydrology or soils on the site. Nonethe-less, replacing the monoculture of lawns with nativeplants enhances habitat for birds and insects and alsop rovides important public education for broader re s t o r a-tion pro j e c t s .

11.3.3 Farmland ownersAll of the highest quality streams in the ChicagoWilderness region are in primarily agricultural are a s ,which suggests that most farming in the Chicago re g i o nis more compatible with preservation of stream qualitythan is most suburban development. Croplands inter-mixed with pasture and woodlands can result in a habi-tat suitable for certain native bird species, such asmeadowlarks, as well as a variety of mammals.

1 4 0


Agricultural areas offer the most feasible opportunityfor large-scale expansion of natural areas, although primefarmland should be kept in production where at all pos-sible. In evaluating land for its preservation potential, soilmaps can be especially helpful, especially to find hydricsoils whose drainage has been altered by drain tiles.

Various techniques to preserve farmland have been devel-oped and applied nationally. In the Chicago area, taxassessments can reflect agricultural land values if theowner agrees not to develop the land for ten years. Kane,M c H e n r y, and Will Counties in northeastern Illinois havedefined prime agricultural areas and sought, with mixedsuccess, to keep them from being developed. One toolavailable to counties is agricultural zoning, but theirauthority to zone is preempted once a nearby municipal-ity annexes the land. Few municipalities have identifiedfarmlands to be preserved in their comprehensive plans.

One farming practice that can affect biodiversity is thesetting aside of certain lands for conservation purposes,using subsidies available under the U.S. Department ofA g r i c u l t u re Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).C u r re n t l y, 7,348 acres of farmland have been set asideunder ten-year contracts in the collar counties of Illinois.C R P has already been shown to help stabilize or eveni n c rease previously declining bird populations, includingthose of Henslow’s sparro w, Grasshopper sparro w, andmeadowlark. The more recently established Conserv-ation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) includesstate matching funds for contracts ranging from 15-yearto permanent easements. However, in the Illinois por-tion of Chicago Wilderness, CREP is only available forfloodplains and wetlands in the Lower Fox River Va l l e y.

Farmers can also help preserve natural communities bymaintaining vegetative filter strips of at least 25 feet adja-cent to streams and by keeping livestock waste out ofs t reams. Also, farmers owning wetlands and wood lotscontaining important native communities can help pre-serve them by establishing adjacent buffer areas. The fed-eral and state Departments of A g r i c u l t u re should useeducational programs to encourage the application ofbest management practices to such are a s .

11.3.4 Private owners of large, low-d e n s i t y, non-agricultural propertiesMany privately owned, non-farm properties scattere dt h roughout the region contain extensive open spaces thatsupport or could support natural communities or at leasta variety of native species. Prime examples are theMorton A r b o retum, the Marshall Field estate in LakeC o u n t y, Illinois, and the Max McGraw Wildlife Centerin East Dundee. Some newer private housing subdivi-

sions are incorporating open space and natural areas intotheir design, such as the Prairie Crossing developmentin Grayslake and the Coffee Creek development inChesterton. Other examples include golf courses, corpo-rate headquarters such as the Sears property in Hoff m a nEstates, Tel Labs in Bolingbrook, and private re s i d e n c e son lots of five or more acres. Some, like those mentionedabove, are already using native landscaping or managingnatural communities within their properties. Theiraccomplishments should be made more widely knownso that other property managers can learn to developsimilar strategies. Section 11.3.2 discusses natural land-scaping; Appendix 9 details the cost savings it off e r s .

Any private landowner whose property contains orb u ffers remnant natural communities can grant pro t e c-tive easements or take other measures to help assure thep reservation of biodiversity. Chapter 8 discusses theactions available to private owners.

11.3.5 Residential property ownersResidential properties can play a role in Chicago Wi l d-erness by providing habitat. Small yards in urban settings have limitations but they can play an eff e c t i v erole in enhancing bird habitat especially during themigratory season, diversifying the native species com-position of urban trees and shrubs, and providing locale n v i ronmental education opportunities. For those withl a rger lots, homeowners can provide a broader base ofrestoration activities with natural landscaping which cre-ates micro-habitats for birds and insects. Natural land-scaping slows ru n o ff and increases water absorption, ah y d rological impact with benefits to stream and riverbiodiversity and gro u n d w a t e r-fed wetlands.

Lots which adjoin forest preserves or nature pre s e r v e smay contain native soil organisms, seed and plant stockand may be migration corridors for amphibians, re p t i l e s ,insects and other fauna. Simple restoration techniques inthese situations may allow a yard to blossom into usablehabitat in a very short period of time.

Lots which adjoin, share or include detention ponds canplay a role in enhancing the water quality and biodiver-sity of our region’s streams and rivers by creating wet-land edges, planting deep-rooted plants on the bermsand higher ground, and if designed as “dry ponds,” sup-porting their re t rofitting into wet pond/wetland habitats.

L a rger lots can play an important role in regional habitatenhancement. Aside from the suggestions describedabove, larger residential acreages can create more diverserestorations. An increasing number of private re s t o r a-tions have sustained 100-200 native plant species. Larg e rlots can re s t o re natural hydrological functions (e.g., total


1 4 1

absorption of rainwater in most storm events). They canalso participate in cooperative long term natural re s o u rc emanagement efforts with nearby forest preserves andnatural area management agencies. For a list of tech-niques for committing private property to local enviro n-mental management initiatives, see Section 8.2.

Benefits to biodiversity are both direct and indire c t .D i rect benefits include providing habitat for org a n i s m sthat rely on native plants for food and shelter such as but-terflies and migrating birds. Indirect benefits includeeducating people about native ecosystems and gainingtheir interest and support for protecting and re s t o r i n gtheir natural heritage. Further benefit can be pro v i d e dby owners of land close to natural areas by pro v i d i n gnative habitat that has the effect of expanding the size ofthe protected are a .

11 . 4Role of volunteers

11.4.1 Importance of volunteersVolunteerism has a rich history in American tradition.Volunteer firefighters and paramedics continue to playessential roles in many areas even today. Legions of volunteers provide vital assistance in hospitals, muse-ums, botanical gardens, and other institutions across thec o u n t r y.

In the Chicago region, volunteers have played vital ro l e sin preserving biodiversity. Many of the member org a n i-zations of Chicago Wilderness involve volunteers in awide variety of activities, ranging from hands-on re s t o r a-tion through teaching to advocacy. Volunteers often doimportant work that otherwise would not get done.C rucial management can sometimes be omitted ordelayed because there are simply not enough staffre s o u rces available. Volunteers are motivated by know-ing that species populations will die out without theirhelp. Over the years, restoration volunteers have devel-oped techniques and a culture that makes this work bothe ffective and fun for thousands of people. Many volun-teers have developed considerable expertise. Theseskilled volunteers are an important part of the conserva-tion team of many agencies. There is room for participa-tion by many thousands more volunteers through thevarious programs of Chicago Wilderness member org a-n i z a t i o n s .

Volunteers provide a major re s o u rce as docents, guides,monitors, and workers. Volunteers physically clean ups t reams, monitor lakes and streams, maintain bird counts,support scientific studies by gathering data, and re s t o re

native ecosystems on public land. Restoring ecosystemsincludes controlling exotic species, removing brush, con-ducting prescribed burns, and gathering, processing, andplanting seeds. Considering the magnitude of the needto manage publicly owned land for biodiversity, a sub-stantial increase in volunteer activity appears to be theonly practical option. In fact, one measure of the successof this plan will be the extent to which volunteers areinvolved in implementing its re c o m m e n d a t i o n s .

C h i c a g o - a rea forest preserve and conservation districtshave long recognized how volunteers can help them tocarry out their mission. The Illinois Association ofConservation and Forest Preserve Districts has encour-aged member districts to emphasize public participationin natural-re s o u rce management by providing opportu-nities for volunteering. The recommendations emphasizethat the districts should provide volunteer and serviceg roups with staff support. Volunteers can be an impor-tant means of achieving the fundamental goals and pur-poses of conservation organizations. They are a valuableextension of paid staff and can have a powerful pre s e n c ebecause of their numbers, distribution, and willingness tobe active after business hours and on weekends.

Volunteer programs are strongest and most eff e c t i v ewhen they encourage volunteers to be deeply involvedand to have a sense of real connection to the places theywork. The full potential of volunteers is not simply asl a b o rers, but as self-motivated, creative owners involvedin planning, organizing, implementing, and evaluatingp rojects. Empowering volunteers to apply their energ yand creativity under the guidance of land-owning org a-nizations offers immense potential. They are stewards ofpublic land, acting on behalf of the public in the publici n t e re s t .

11.4.2 Strengthening volunteer programs for protection and restoration of biodiversityVolunteers should be invited to be partners in planningand implementing land management. This stre n g t h e n sthe ties between volunteers and the host org a n i z a t i o nand ensures consistency and continuity. Time donated byvolunteers should result in accomplishing importantadditional tasks, not performing work otherwise expect-ed of staff. Thus, the host organization should use vol-unteer help in defining and building the volunteerp rogram itself.

R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s✔ Land-managing agencies should invite volunteers

to be partners both in planning and in implementingland management.

11 . 4

1 4 2


• Specific actions for host organizations

✔ Develop a strategy for involving volunteers. Ident-ify functions and tasks to be accomplished by vol-u n t e e r s .

✔ P rovide opportunity for personal satisfaction inaccomplishing tasks that are needed for re s t o r a t i o n .People serve as volunteers because they find satis-faction in the work. Successful volunteer pro g r a m sbuild on this fact to accomplish the purposes of theo rg a n i z a t i o n .

✔ Remove barriers. Make it easy and inviting for vol-unteers to contribute time and energ y. If re q u i re-ments and/or qualifications are necessary, pro v i d eways for volunteers to earn them through trainingor certification based on tests of ability or knowl-e d g e .

✔ P rovide an organized context for volunteer activi-ties. At a minimum, provide a stable set of gro u n drules to accommodate volunteer efforts and involvevolunteer leaders in developing them.

✔ Encourage volunteers to adopt or take “owner-ship” for specific functions or places.

✔ Identify a specific person within the host org a n i z a-tion as the central contact for volunteers.

✔ P rovide recognition for volunteers re g u l a r l y.

✔ P rovide support for a volunteer newsletter andrelated communications that offer education andinformation on volunteer opportunities.

✔ P rovide tools or other necessary re s o u rces wherep o s s i b l e .

✔ P rovide opportunities for face-to-face contactbetween volunteer leaders and organization staff .

✔ P rovide support with heavy equipment operatedby staff if needed and possible.

✔ Develop long-term site plans for restoration andp rotection and annual work plans for activities tocomplete them. Include volunteers in the planningp rocess and identify their role clearly.

✔ Have experienced volunteer leaders, trained andcertified by the landowning agency, provide on-sitesupervision of most volunteer activities.

• Training and certification

✔ Develop criteria for various functions and tasks andfacilitate training to ensure expertise in them.

✔ Certification is appropriate for some activities,including applying herbicide on public land and

participating in prescribed burns. In such cases itis important to establish clear re q u i rements and themeans of meeting them such as training or testingat convenient times and places.

• Volunteer leaders

✔ Leadership among volunteers develops as peoplegain experience and knowledge. Those willing toaccept and provide leadership should be encour-aged to do so and should be given added re s p o n s i-bility and re c o g n i t i o n .

✔ The Volunteer Stewardship Network (see below)should be supported and recognized as a valuableasset in developing leadership, expertise, and over-all membership in conservation pro g r a m s .

11.4.3 Citizen scientists and theVolunteer Stewardship NetworkAn important type of volunteer is the citizen scientist,who enjoys learning scientific aspects of the local ecology.Such individuals may become involved in education,monitoring, re s e a rch, or various stewardship activities.They re p resent a major re s o u rce and are often core mem-bers of volunteer pro g r a m s .

The Volunteer Stewardship Network is an unincorpo-rated organization of self-motivated site stewards andcitizen scientist/ecologists who have worked with manyland managers to lead ecosystem protection and re s t o r a-tion. These volunteers, who serve as leaders for thou-sands of other volunteers in our region, work to maintaincommunication among their groups and to build collec-tive expertise. As volunteers become more invested inthe success of natural-areas management and assumeleadership roles within the network, they both stre n g t h-en the network and increase the number and quality ofv o l u n t e e r s .

The Illinois EcoWatch Network is a volunteer ecosystemmonitoring program coordinated through the IllinoisDepartment of Natural Resources, Division of Energ yand Environmental Assessment. EcoWatch volunteersa re trained as Citizen Scientists to monitor stre a m s ,f o rests/woodlands, prairies, wetlands, and urban gre e nspaces using biological indicators. EcoWatch arose fro mre s e a rch indicating a need for monitoring data collectedat a large number of sites using systematic and consistentmethods. EcoWatch monitoring programs were designedby state scientists who are responsible for analyzing thedata collected, with input from the broader scientificc o m m u n i t y.


1 4 3

11 . 5

11.4.4 Examples of successful volunteer programsOne example of a successful volunteer-driven program isthe Mighty Acorns. This educational program involvesmany adult volunteers, working through twelve partneragencies, who work with schools to introduce grade-school children to natural areas and to adopt a field sitethat they visit three times each year during diff e rent sea-sons. Working in groups of five to seven per adult vol-u n t e e r, the children participate in restoration work suchas removing weeds and brush or gathering and plantingseeds. This hands-on approach with ample instru c t i o nbrings children into contact with nature in a way thatmost have not experienced.

Other very successful local volunteer programs includethe Butterfly Monitoring Network, the Orchid RecoveryP roject, the Bird Conservation Network, EcoWatch, theI n t e r religious Sustainability Project, and many gro u p sengaged in on-the-ground ecological restoration in everycounty in northeastern Illinois as well as several coun-ties in Indiana.

11 . 5Conflict resolution and

intergovernmental cooperation: recommending

a comprehensive process for managing growth

One of the thorniest issues in the management of publiclands is how to satisfy competing user groups. Thosewho enjoy active outdoor re c reation such as horsebackriding, biking, and field sports often find themselvescompeting with those who wish to see fragile naturala reas left undisturbed. Transportation planning often pitsthe need for transportation facilities against land-useplans and the need to protect natural re s o u rces. Sincegovernmental agencies have an obligation to serve allreasonable interests, the resolution of disputes over usecan become an arduous process. Various conflict-re s o l u-

tion processes have been developed, but, at all geo-graphic scales from region-wide transportation planningto site design, the best outcomes usually involve cre a t i v eplanning and compromise among all interested parties.Apurpose of this plan is to heighten local officials’ under-standing of biodiversity and its dependence on place.O fficials must know how to value local habitats and eco-logical functions so that they can be fully considered indealing with controversies and competing pre s s u re s .

Governments, too, frequently compete for land. A n n e x-ation disputes and disagreements over proposed uses ofland are common. One frequent course of action has beento develop intergovernmental boundary agreements wellin advance of actual land development. The municipali-ties in the corridors for the proposed extensions of thenorth-south toll road in Lake and Will Counties haverecently negotiated non-binding interg o v e r n m e n t a la g reements on the future uses of land, including the des-ignation of permanent open spaces. The municipalities inthe vicinity of the proposed third airport in Will Countyhave done the same. The effectiveness of these agre e-ments has yet to be tested, as none of these projects hasyet received final approval for constru c t i o n .

To further the goals of this plan and to establish a smartand equitable approach to resolving conflicts, we re c o m-mend a coordinated, intergovernmental, re g i o n - w i d e ,c o m p rehensive process for managing growth. A p p e n d i x10 contains a recommended set of pro c e d u res for estab-lishing and carrying out such a process. To make this re c-ommendation tangible, the Appendix uses an example ofplanning a transportation corridor (the example pre-sented is for a major arterial corridor, such as StrategicRegional Arterial, where complex, interg o v e r n m e n t a lissues call for such a process). This example illustrates theactions, pro c e d u res, and considerations that should beincluded to ensure careful weighing of a full set of val-ues and outcomes before making decisions. The re c o m-mendations in the example apply to re s i d e n t i a l - a re aplanning, planning for economic development, andopen-space planning.

aquatic communities: status, needs, and goals · 2013-10-02 · 1981, karr et al. 1986, iepa1 9 9 6...

Documents