nakusp management area (ipma) operational 2013 · 2016-04-29 · nakusp ipma operational framework...

Nakusp

Invasive Plant Management Area (IPMA)

Operational Framework

2013 – 2018

Prepared by: Juliet Craig, R.P.Bio., P.Ag.1

Prepared for: Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee2

August 1, 2013

1 Silverwing Ecological Consulting, 915 Vernon Street, Nelson, BC [email protected] 2 Suite 19, 622 Front Street, Nelson, BC [email protected]

Nakusp IPMA Operational Framework August 2013 i

Acknowledgements

The Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee (CKIPC) would like to acknowledge the Ministry

of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations who provided funding for this project. I

gratefully acknowledge the expertise and guidance from Crystal Klym (CKIPC) and Jennifer

Vogel (CKIPC) in developing this plan. Special thanks to Kathleen McGuinness, Touchstone GIS

Services, for creating maps. I appreciate the South Okanagan Similkameen Invasive Plant

Society (SOSIPS) and the East Kootenay Invasive Plant Council (EKIPC) for providing examples of

their operational plans.

CKIPC is extremely grateful to the following representatives of key organizations for their

collaborative approach and participation in the development of this framework:

‐ Catherine MacRae, Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations

‐ Chris Price, BC Parks

‐ Crystal Klym, Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee

‐ Frances Swan, on behalf of Interfor and Nakusp Community Forest

‐ Natalie Stafl, Columbia Shuswap Invasive Species Society

‐ Terry Anderson, Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations

Nakusp IPMA Operational Framework August 2013 ii

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 1

1.1 Purpose of this Framework ____________________________________________________ 1

1.2 Collaborative Approach to Invasive Plant Management __________________________ 1

1.3 Role of the Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee __________________________ 1

2.0 Nakusp IPMA ____________________________________________________________ 2

2.1 Geographic Boundaries ________________________________________________________ 2

2.2 Impacts of Invasive Plants _____________________________________________________ 2

2.3 Key Organizations and Land Managers _________________________________________ 4

2.4 Invasive Species Recorded in IPMA ____________________________________________ 4

2.5 History of Invasive Species Management _______________________________________ 4

3.0 Priorities for Invasive Species Management ________________________________ 5

3.1 Criteria for Prioritizing Invasive Species and Management Activities ______________ 6

3.2 Priority Species _______________________________________________________________ 7

3.3 Planning, Prevention and Best Management Practices ___________________________ 9

3.4 Early Detection, Rapid Response (EDRR) Protocol ______________________________ 9

3.5 Inventory Recommendations _________________________________________________ 10

3.6 Treatment Recommendations ________________________________________________ 11

3.7 Efficacy Monitoring Recommendations ________________________________________ 12

3.8 Data Management Recommendations _________________________________________ 12

3.9 Outreach Recommendations _________________________________________________ 12

4.0 Evaluating Success ______________________________________________________ 13

References _________________________________________________________________ 15

Appendix A: Land Managers and other Key Partners for Collaboration __________ 16

Appendix B: Invasive Species Documented in Nakusp IPMA _____________________ 17

Appendix C: Treatment History in Nakusp IPMA _______________________________ 19

Appendix D: Latin names for Weeds to Watch For _____________________________ 20

Appendix E: Useful Resources ________________________________________________ 21

Appendix F: Treatment Considerations _______________________________________ 23

Appendix G: Area (ha) of each Eradication species by jurisdiction. _____________ 24

Nakusp IPMA Operational Framework August 2013 iii

Appendix H: Target Audiences for Engagement & Outreach ____________________ 25

Appendix I: Maps of Containment Lines ______________________________________ 26

ListofTables

Table 1: Area (ha) of each Eradication/ Annual Control species by jurisdiction. ........................................ 24

ListofFigures

Figure 1: Map of the Nakusp Invasive Plant Management Area (IPMA). ..................................................... 3

Figure 2: Diagram showing management strategies most useful during each phase of the invasion

process. Taken from H2ON Website (2013). ................................................................................................ 6

Nakusp IPMA Operational Framework August 2013 1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of this Framework

Effectively managing invasive plant species is a critical element of maintaining ecosystem and economic health in the Central Kootenay. Since invasive species know no boundaries, a cooperative and collaborative approach is essential to ensure that invasive plant management activities are not hindered by geographic, jurisdictional and political boundaries. Land managers adopting a cooperative approach can more efficiently utilize limited funds and personnel and can collaboratively achieve mutual objectives.

This framework provides direction to resource managers on invasive plant species of highest management priority for control, inventory, and monitoring. It was developed through an open, collaborative process through which land managers provided guidance and input. This framework reflects local priorities for invasive plant management within a five‐year time frame.

The scope of this framework is terrestrial and riparian invasive plant species that have the potential to impact the ecological, economic or social well‐being of the region.

The purpose of this framework is to:

1) Enhance existing efforts and create new opportunities for protecting natural resources, communities, and ecosystems from invasive plants; and

2) Ensure that invasive plant management activities are coordinated and cost‐effective.

1.2 Collaborative Approach to Invasive Plant Management

This framework was developed through a collaborative effort of many stakeholders. A draft was prepared by the consultant and presented to a multi‐stakeholder group at a workshop in Nakusp on July 16, 2013, and by email to those organizations listed in Appendix A. The group reviewed the priority species, provided input on containment lines, and identified gaps in inventory, treatments and monitoring.

This framework is intended to provide higher level guidance on priority species and management approaches in the Nakusp IPMA. It can be used by land managers as the basis of their own workplan, considering other factors such as their agency’s mandate, land management objectives, budget and capacity.

1.3 Role of the Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee

This framework was coordinated by the Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee (CKIPC). CKIPC is a non‐profit society that was formed in 2005 by concerned local citizens, land managers and government and non‐government agencies who share a common concern about the increase of non‐native invasive plants in the region. CKIPC is not a landowner and has no authority or obligation to control invasive plant species. Rather, the role of CKIPC is to facilitate delivery of invasive plant management activities in the region by coordinating land managers and land occupiers, supporting a comprehensive inventory of invasive plants in the region, and promoting best management practices.


Land management agencies may provide resources to CKIPC to act on their behalf in delivering on‐the‐ground activities (planning, inventory, monitoring, or treatments) on their jurisdiction.

This project supports the goals outlined in CKIPC’s strategic plan (Wikeem 2007) which are to:

1. Prevent the introduction, establishment and spread of invasive plants;

2. Manage existing invasive plant populations and reduce their impacts on biodiversity and natural resource values; and

3. Provide a framework and capacity for long‐term invasive plant management.

2.0 Nakusp IPMA

2.1 Geographic Boundaries

The CKIPC region has been divided into six Invasive Plant Management Areas (IPMAs). The Nakusp IPMA extends from Octopus Creek (south of Fauquier) in the south to the RDCK boundary in the west and north, and Nakusp to the east (see Figure 1). The area contains numerous jurisdictions including the Village of Nakusp, and numerous utility corridors, forest tenures, and conservation properties, parks and protected areas (see Appendix A).

2.2 Impacts of Invasive Plants

Invasive plants are recognized to have a variety of impacts, transforming agriculture and ecoystems. Detrimental impacts on the agricultural, range and forest industries include harbouring insects and diseases of crops, reducing crop quality and market opportunities, and decreasing farm income and grazing opportunities. In forestry, invasive plants compete with seedlings for light, nutrients, and water, reducing forest yield. Some invasive plant species are extremely flammable and can disrupt natural fire cycles, causing an increased fuel bed load and frequency of fire.

Invasive plants impact recreational activities by damaging habitat, impacting fish and wildlife, obstructing trails and reducing aesthetics. Property values can become depressed with severe invasive plant infestations. Invasive plants affect rights‐of‐way and transportation corridors when their rapid establishment and growth (up to 30 cm per day for some species) decrease access to equipment and structures, reduce sightlines for drivers and animals, and increase the risk of accidents and collisions.

The spread of invasive alien species is now recognized as one of the greatest threats to the ecological and economic well‐being of the planet (Global Invasive Species Programme 2000). In BC, it is estimated that 25% of our endangered species, 31% of our threatened species, and 16% of our species of special concern are negatively impacted by invasive alien species (Voller and McNay 2007). Without efforts to contain their spread, invasive plants will generally increase their distribution area exponentially, making the task of eventual control financially insurmountable.

Given these potential impacts, the Nakusp and surrounding area have significant economic and social interests at risk. Economic activities in this IPMA include agriculture such as beef, dairy, cattle, sheep and ostrich farming, and fruit, grape and vegetable farming. Other economic and social interests include forestry operations and recreational activities which are reliant on healthy and resilient ecosystems and forests.


Figure 1: Map of the Nakusp Invasive Plant Management Area (IPMA).


This IPMA has significant and diverse ecological values. A variety of habitats are important for species at risk such as the Townsend’s big‐eared bat, western toad, great blue heron, grizzly bear and painted turtle. The area encompasses the following biogeoclimatic zones: ICHmw2, ICHvk1, ICHwk1, ICHdw1, ESSFdc1, ESSFvc, ESSFwc1, ESSFwc4, and IMAun.

The Nakusp area is vulnerable to the introduction of invasive plants through linear corridors and disturbances that include utility corridors, forestry roads, transportation roads, and water ways from virtually every direction.

2.3 Key Organizations and Land Managers

With diverse land use and ownership as well as active on‐the‐ground invasive plant management activities, this area requires a collaborative and coordinated approach to management. Key partners in this IPMA include First Nation, provincial and local government agencies, municipalities, utility companies, conservation and stewardship groups, regional invasive plant committees, private landowners, forest licensees, and industry. A detailed listing of applicable agencies and organizations can be found in Appendix A.

This plan provides the framework for agencies to develop work plans for their own land that are consistent with the goals and objectives of other agencies. Each agency is responsible for prevention, containment, and/or control within their jurisdiction and in accordance with their mandates, legal obligations and procedures described in their Pest Management Plans, Range Use Plans, or Forest Stewardship Plans.

2.4 Invasive Species Recorded in IPMA

Based on the Invasive Alien Plant Program application (IAPP), there are 38 invasive plant species recorded in this IPMA (See Appendix B). The most common species (i.e. highest number of sites recorded in IAPP) are spotted knapweed, hawkweeds, oxeye daisy, common tansy, meadow knapweed, sulphur cinquefoil, Canada thistle and St. John’s wort. Some species that are of high concern have relatively few sites, including purple loosestrife, Himalayan blackberry, policeman’s helmet, nodding thistle, knotweeds and yellow flag‐iris.

2.5 History of Invasive Species Management

Historically, the Edgewood/Fauquier area was coordinated by the Inonoaklin Livestock Association (ILA) who received funding from the Ministry of Transportation as well as an Agriculture grant to provide treatments on their jurisdictions. The focus of the program was to protect agricultural land from invasive plants and the Edgewood area and associated roads and highways were treated regularly. This section summarizes invasive plant inventories, treatments and research in this area. Since the ILA program existed before the Invasive Alien Plant Program (IAPP) database, their treatments are not included in this summary.

An Invasive Plant Strategy for TFL 23 (Nielsen, 2007) was prepared in 2007 to address invasive plant reporting and inventory requirements as part of Pope & Talbot’s Stewardship Plan. An associated TFL 23 Invasive Plants Field Guide booklet was also prepared as part of that strategy which has photos and information about priority species.

Extensive inventories of Crown land were carried out in 2006 through the Ministry of Forests (Craig, 2006). Inventory and treatments were carried out in the Village of Nakusp in 2007 as part of the Job Opportunities Program (Rode, 2009).


2.5.1 Previous Invasive Plant Inventories

Invasive plant information is often included in vegetation surveys and broad inventories (e.g. forest surveys). Inventories and surveys specific to invasive plants in this IPMA include the following:

o 2011‐2012 CKIPC operational inventory on lands owned and/or managed by MFLNRO and MOTI (data in IAPP)

o 2012 ISCBC Take Action crew on lands owned and/or managed by MFLNRO and MOTI(data in IAPP)

o 2010 CKIPC and Invasive Plant Council of BC Hot Spots invasive plant inventories on lands owned and/or managed by BC Hydro, FortisBC Gas, FortisBC Inc., and Ministry of Transportation (data in IAPP)

o 2009 Job Opportunities Program (JOP) inventory on Village of Nakusp land (data in IAPP)

o 2007 Pope and Talbot inventory of TFL 23 (data in IAPP?)

o 2006 Ministry of Forests and Range Central Kootenay Inventory (data in IAPP)

o 2000 Ministry of Forests Scotch broom inventory (data in IAPP)

2.5.2 Research History

No permanent or temporary research sites are located in this IPMA. According to IAPP, there are three “primary bioagent” release sites, sites where a biological control agent that is relatively new in BC has been released for research purposes. These sites include one St. John’s wort (from 1964) and two Scotch broom sites (from 2008).

2.5.3 Treatment History

The Inonoaklin Livestock Association historically had an active treatment program, in partnership with the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and utility companies. This program is no longer active. According to IAPP, there have been no chemical treatments for this IPMA in the past 7 years. The only chemical treatment records in IAPP are for three spotted knapweed sites that were sprayed with Tordon on Needles Road and Inonoaklin FSR by the Ministry of Forests and Range in 2005.

Mechanical treatments (digging, hand‐pulling, clipping) have occurred on 12 invasive plant species in the past five years (see Appendix C). In the past six years, between 1 and 11 sites have been mechanically treated annually. Note that data is from IAPP only.

According to IAPP records, biological control has occurred on seven invasive plant species in this IPMA (see Appendix C). The first release recorded in IAPP was on St. John’s wort in 1964. Note that data is from IAPP only.

3.0PrioritiesforInvasiveSpeciesManagementCKIPC promotes partnerships, behaviours, policies, tools and operations that prevent the introduction and spread of invasive species and facilitate collaborative management. These include collaboratively prioritizing species, following prevention and best management practices, ensuring early detection and rapid response (EDRR) of new invaders, conducting inventories to acquire enough information to make sound management decisions, coordinating treatment activities and monitoring efficacy, and ensuring that data is easily available.


We recognize that a species‐specific approach is limited in that it does not necessarily consider the entire ecosystem as a whole. Often invasive plant management is an element of restoration where other factors are considered (such as prescribed burning, re‐vegetation, better land management practices, wildlife habitat, rare plants, etc.). In such cases, potentially all invasive plant species pose a threat and may be targeted for treatment, regardless of their priority. Land managers are encouraged to consider their own land management objectives when prioritizing invasive plant activities, and to consider this regional prioritization a tool to facilitate a coordinated approach.

3.1 Criteria for Prioritizing Invasive Species and Management Activities

Given limited resources for invasive plant management, it is necessary to prioritize activities to achieve the “biggest bang for the buck”. The management strategy for a specific species is based on a number of factors including the phase of invasion (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2011; see Figure 2). Before a species arrives, the prevention phase includes activities such as distributing a “prevention watchlist” of species of concern, preventing intentional plantings or nursery sales, cleaning vehicles, equipment and machinery of seeds and plant parts, and implementing other best management practices. During the introduction phase, the species has a very limited distribution. Early detection, rapid response (EDRR) efforts are likely to eradicate the species before their population expands. As the population expands during the colonization phase, eradication is no longer likely and efforts are focused on containing and controlling the expanding population before it becomes naturalized. Once the population reaches the naturalization phase, plants are often too widespread or costly to control and restoration activities are focused on small, high‐priority sites.

Figure 2: Diagram showing management strategies most useful during each phase of the invasion process. Taken

from H2ON Website3 (2013).

3 http://h2oncoast.wordpress.com/category/invasive‐species/page/2/


Based on this concept, the following principles have guided CKIPC’s prioritization of species:

o Principle 1: Prevention and early intervention provide the most cost‐effective means of invasive plant management.

o Principle 2: Eradication of widely established invasive plants on a regional‐scale is not a reasonable expectation.

o Principle 3: Prevention of spread of some invasive plant species is possible through a coordinated effort and establishment of containment lines.

o Principle 4: Invasive plant treatments are most effective when they occur in the context of long‐term management which includes post‐treatment restoration or remediation activities.

o Principle 5: Coordinated planning and implementation with key stakeholders provides the greatest likelihood of long‐term success.

Each invasive plant species has been prioritized for treatment in this IPMA based on the following factors:

Risks from not managing the species (ranking tool and professional judgment);

Current and potential distribution in the IPMA (IAPP mapping);

Effectiveness of available treatment strategies; and

Effectiveness and availability of biocontrol agents.

3.2 Priority Species

The species priority list (see Table 1) is founded on the general CKIPC plant priority list (CKIPC 2011). Prioritization is based on our best knowledge of these species and their impacts in the Central Kootenay. Plants were categorized into the following five categories (see Table 1):

EDRR WATCHLIST: These species are not currently known in this IPMA and may or may not be known to occur in the CKIPC region. The goal for these species is immediate eradication if they are detected. EDRR reporting and action protocols for these species are outlined in Section 3.4. These sites are extremely high priority for treatment.

ERADICATION or ANNUAL CONTROL: These species are known in IPMA but with very limited distribution. Some of these species may have been present for a relatively long period so monitoring for spread is the management objective. Other species are relatively new to the IPMA so eradication is the objective.

CONTAINMENT: These species are abundant (with no expectation of eradication) in certain portions of IPMA but have limited distribution in other portions. Management efforts are delineated by containment lines which may be based on geographic (i.e. a specific region) or jurisdictional boundaries (e.g. private gardens only). Some of these species have biocontrol (BC)agents available which may be useful within the containment line.


Table 1: Categories for invasive plant species in the Nakusp IPMA – 2013.

This table is updated annually – contact CKIPC for most current version. See Appendices B and D for Latin names.

EDRR WATCHLIST ‐ Not currently known in this IPMA (and may also not be known in the CKIPC region*). Follow EDRR

reporting and action protocols. Bolded species are EDRR for the province. ‐ Black henbane* ‐ Black knapweed* ‐ Buffalobur* ‐ Caraway* ‐ Coltsfoot ‐ Common bugloss* ‐ Common crupina* ‐ Common reed* ‐ Dyer’s woad* ‐ Field bindweed ‐ Field scabious ‐ Flowering rush* ‐ Garlic mustard*

‐ Giant hogweed‐ Gorse* ‐ Greater celandine ‐ Greater knapweed ‐ Hoary cress ‐ Japanese butterbur ‐ Leafy spurge ‐ Longspine sandbur* ‐ Marsh plume thistle* ‐ Mouse‐ear hawkweed ‐ Nodding thistle* ‐ Perennial pepperweed* ‐ Plumeless thistle*

‐ Puncturevine*‐ Rush skeletonweed ‐ Russian knapweed* ‐ Scotch thistle ‐ Squarrose knapweed* ‐ Syrian beancaper* ‐ Tansy ragwort ‐ Teasel ‐ Velvet leaf* ‐ Wild Four O’Clock* ‐ Wood sage* ‐ Yellow bedstraw ‐ Yellow starthistle*

ERADICATION or ANNUAL CONTROL – Species known in IPMA but with very limited distribution. Enter inventory data, report and treat or monitor annually. Containment species OUTSIDE lines:

‐ Black locust outside Nakusp ‐ Common tansy at high

elevations ‐ Himalayan blackberry outside

Nakusp ‐ Hoary alyssum outside

Nakusp

‐ Meadow/brown knapweed north or east of Nakusp

‐ Purple loosestrife outside Fauquier

‐ Scentless chamomile outside Edgewood

‐ Scotch broom outside Nakusp

These species anywhere:‐ Baby’s breath ‐ Blueweed ‐ Knotweeds ‐ Policeman’s helmet ‐ Scotch broom ‐ Yellow flag‐iris

CONTAINMENT – Enter inventory data, report and treat all sites outside containment lines. Some of these species have biocontrol (BC) available which can be used within the containment line.

‐ Black locust (contain to Nakusp)

‐ Common tansy (contain to valley bottoms)

‐ Himalayan blackberry (contain to Nakusp)

‐ Hoary alyssum (contain to Nakusp)

‐ Meadow/brown knapweed (contain to Nakusp south)

‐ Purple loosestrife (contain to Fauquier)

‐ Scentless chamomile (contain to Edgewood)

‐ Scotch broom (contain to Nakusp)

ESTABLISHED (BIOCONTROL OR SITE‐SPECIFIC APPROACH) – Widespread species that are beyond landscape‐level control or have relatively low impact. May have biocontrol (BC) available. Treat based on specific land management objectives.

‐ Bull thistle (BC) ‐ Burdock ‐ Canada thistle (BC) ‐ Chicory ‐ Common toadflax ‐ Curled dock

‐ Dalmatian toadflax (BC)‐ Diffuse knapweed (BC) ‐ Hound’s tongue (BC) ‐ Orange hawkweed ‐ Oxeye daisy

‐ Spotted knapweed (BC)‐ St. John’s Wort (BC) ‐ Sulphur cinquefoil ‐ Wild carrot ‐ Yellow hawkweeds

INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION – There is a lack of information on the distribution, impacts and potential for spread and/or control of the following species. Some of these species may appear in other categories (since their distribution is relatively well understood) but they also appear in this category because further information is still required.

‐ Chicory ‐ Common tansy

‐ Curled dock‐ Himalayan blackberry

‐ Policeman’s helmet ‐ Wild carrot ‐ Yellow/common toadflax


ESTABLISHED (BIOCONTROL OR SITE‐SPECIFIC APPROACH): These are widespread species that are beyond landscape‐level control and/or have relatively low impact. Land managers may choose to treat these species at high priority sites (e.g. wildlife habitat, corridors of spread, adjacent to agricultural land, restoration goals, etc.) based on specific land management objectives. Some of these species have biological control agents available.

INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION: There is insufficient information for these species on their distribution, impacts, potential for spread and/or feasibility of control. Further information is required.

3.3 Planning, Prevention and Best Management Practices

Preventing the introduction and spread of invasive species can be achieved through best management practices such as minimizing soil disturbance, cleaning equipment and machinery, and re‐vegetating disturbed soil. It is beyond the scope of this framework to outline all best management practices (BMPs). Please see Appendix E for “Useful Resources” for more information.

There are a number of factors to consider when planning invasive plant management programs. They include the biology of the plant species, site‐level considerations, proximity to species at risk and their habitats, proximity to water and wells, and goals of treatment. See Appendix F for more factors to consider in developing an invasive plant management strategy.

A region of this IPMA that particularly requires collaborative planning is the western portion which borders the North Okanagan Regional District as well as the northern portion which borders the Columbia Shuswap Regional District. These are also high priority sites for treatment to prevent new invaders from the Okanagan and Columbia regions from entering the Kootenays. Collaborative planning annual for these portions would be extremely beneficial.

3.4 Early Detection, Rapid Response (EDRR) Protocol

Early Detection and Rapid Response (EDRR) refers to the processes undertaken to find and eradicate a new incursion or infestation of an invasive species in the early stages of establishment when the new invasive species remains relatively easy to control. Species categorized as EDRR WATCHLIST are not currently known in this IPMA (Table 1). Detection of these species should be reported to CKIPC within 48 hours. EDRR steps include:

1. Spotter reports the sighting to CKIPC within 48 hours. CKIPC immediately reports sightings of provincial EDRR species to the Provincial IP Specialist.

2. CKIPC representative visits the site to confirm the identification of the species, record GPS coordinates, take photos, and collect a voucher. If the species cannot be identified, voucher specimens and photos will be submitted to the Provincial EDRR specialist for confirmation. Information will also be shared with the Provincial Invasive Plant Specialist. The affected land owner will be informed of this process immediately.

3. Once the species has been positively identified, information will be shared with the land owner, the spotter, and the Provincial IP Specialist.

4. CKIPC will enter the site into IAPP.

5. If the species is new to BC, the Provincial Invasive Plant Specialist will trigger the Provincial EDRR Response Plan (IMISWG 2010). CKIPC will remain coordinated with the response action.


6. If the species is considered EDRR for the IPMA but not for BC, CKIPC will contact the land owner to further inventory the area to determine the full extent of the species, and to develop a strategy for eradication. If possible, all root and seed material will be bagged immediately until further treatments can be conducted.

7. CKIPC Coordinator will issue an Alert on the species for the IPMA through the CKIPC network.

Early Detection Rapid Response WATCHLIST species

Report to the CKIPC Coordinator within 48 hours at:

[email protected]

250‐352‐1160

3.5 Inventory Recommendations

Inventories and surveys4 provide fundamental information for assessing and prioritizing invasive plant management efforts. Information from inventories can be used to answer a number of questions including the full extent of a target species, whether treatments have been effective, and how quickly a species is spreading. CKIPC promotes the use of standardized inventory methodology and data forms that are based on the provincial Invasive Alien Plant Program (IAPP)5 standards. These protocols are described in “Invasive Plant Inventory Standards for CKIPC Region” (CKIPC in progress). Further or continued inventory is required for some species to determine their full extent and to develop better management approaches. Priorities for inventory include:

All species on EDRR Watchlist;

All species under ERADICATION/ANNUAL CONTROL (including CONTAINMENT species outside containment lines); and

All species with INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION.

Border areas between invasive plant committee areas are high priority for annual surveys to detect new invasive species. The following areas are a priority in this IPMA:

Highway 6 from Cherryville to Fauquier;

Highway 6 from Fauquier to Nakusp; and

Highway 23 from Galena Bay to Nakusp.

Areas with information gaps are high priority for inventory in the next five years. These include:

Nakusp

Forest Service Roads that have not been inventoried in the past five years

4 In this plan, inventory and survey are used interchangeably. Technically, “…an inventory is a cataloguing of all invasive plants of concern within a management area, whereas a survey is an individual observation or a sampling of a representative portion of a larger landscape” such as a road survey. (BC Ministry of Forests and Range 2010) 5 Invasive Alien Plant Program application http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/plants/application.htm


Whatshan FSR and area

BC Parks6 (MacDonald Creek, Burton Historical Park, Inonoaklin, Eagle Creek)

Areas with high disturbance where new invaders may occur include:

Areas with active forest harvesting, particularly log dumps and landings

Illegal dump sites

Records of areas where inventories were conducted but no invasive plants were found are important for planning. Maintain records and provide copies to CKIPC of inventory locations annually.

3.6 Treatment Recommendations

Treatment priority is based on the category of the invasive species (see Table 1). A summary of the amount of land (ha) by species by jurisdiction is provided in Appendix G for the Eradication/ Annual Control species.

TreatmentPriority1: High risk species that are on the EDRR WATCHLIST or in ERADICATION/ANNUAL CONTROL and have high potential to spread.

Invasive plants that have not been previously detected or are found in small, isolated spots within the IPMA will receive first priority.

Attempts will be made to eradicate new infestations and to determine their source.

Where possible, control measures will be implemented to prevent re‐infestation.

These plant species/sites should be treated every year. There are few known sites. New occurrences of these species should be reported to CKIPC immediately.

TreatmentPriority2:High risk CONTAINMENT species outside containment lines.

Containment lines serve to prevent established populations of invasive plants from spreading into new areas.

Isolated populations of invasive plants outside the containment lines will be treated as a higher priority than established populations within the containment lines. See Appendix H for maps of proposed CONTAINMENT species.

These plant species/sites should be treated every year. There are few known sites. New occurrences of these species should be reported to CKIPC immediately.

TreatmentPriority3:Moderate risk species (CONTAINMENT species within containment lines) or ESTABLISHED species on or near sites of high value or with high potential to spread.

Sites will be considered based on land use value including topographical features, livestock use, ecological and wildlife habitat values, spread vectors (e.g. waterways, utility corridors, road systems, trails), and adjacent areas at risk.

6 Summit Lake Provincial Park is within the Slocan Valley IPMA


Infestations along trails receiving high seasonal use, habitats for species at risk, and areas near hay production are examples of locations that may be a high priority for treatment.

There are many factors to consider before, during and after treatments. See Appendix F for treatment considerations.

3.7 Efficacy Monitoring Recommendations

The effectiveness of treatment depends on many factors including time of year, type of treatment, climate conditions, geographic location, and number of passes. Monitoring treatment efficacy contributes to a better understanding of which treatments are most effective in the Kootenays and allows for adaptive management within and between seasons. In IAPP, there are standardized forms for monitoring chemical, mechanical and biocontrol treatment efficacy. Entering this data into IAPP allows land managers to easily share this information and assists with long term planning and management.

Monitor 10% of all sites post‐treatment.

Enter monitoring information into IAPP.

3.8 Data Management Recommendations

Sharing invasive plant inventory, treatment and monitoring data facilitates a collaborative and long‐term approach to management. Entry of this information into the IAPP database allows land managers to determine which species are on or near their jurisdiction, what activities have occurred, and the efficacy of completed treatments. Where possible, all data (including inventory, treatments and monitoring) will be entered into the IAPP database. Where this is not feasible, agencies are strongly encouraged to enter the following minimum critical data, in order of priority (See Table 1):

1. Immediately report and then enter EDRR WATCHLIST species;

2. Enter ERADICATION species and CONTAINMENT species outside containment lines;

3. Enter INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION species; then

4. Enter CONTAINMENT species inside containment lines and ESTABLISHED species.

Provincial government, in partnership with regional committees, can provide courses on IAPP data entry. Land managers can also provide CKIPC with funds to enter data on their behalf. For more information contact CKIPC or visit www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/plants/application.htm.

3.9 Outreach Recommendations

Landowner contact and public outreach is a critical element of preventing the introduction and spread of invasive species and promoting best management practices. For example, outreach activities can prevent invasive horticultural species from being planted, provide the tools for a farmer to develop an invasive plant management plan for his agricultural land, or promote EDRR by a naturalist group.

1. Engage all stakeholders and land managers in invasive plant management in the IPMA including local government, First Nations, utility companies, forest licensees, government agencies, and non‐profit societies.


2. Employ social marketing techniques where possible and link to current social marketing projects of the Invasive Species Council of BC (ISCBC), such as “Clean, Drain, Dry” and “Garden Wise”.

3. Notify land managers annually of any new species in the IPMA.

4. Prioritize outreach efforts on private landowners whose properties contain ERADICATION species or CONTAINMENT species outside containment lines.

5. Focus outreach efforts to the horticultural industry and gardeners on invasive plant species. Link to the “Grow Me Instead” ISCBC publication.

6. Focus outreach efforts on agriculturalists to assist them with developing and implementing invasive plant management on their properties.

7. Host CKIPC display booth, and promote community groups to use display booth, at community events.

8. Provide “door to door” support to private landowners with invasive plant issues.

9. Provide training workshops to garden and park‐related staff, including Communities In Bloom volunteers and Public Works staff.

10. Issue “Invasive Plant Profiles” for EDRR WATCHLIST and ERADICATION species, particularly to people likely to report them, such as naturalists, foresters, forest technicians, ranchers, botanists, and recreationalists.

11. Continue school and community outreach programs to engage youth in invasive plant issues and promote positive behaviour.

12. Promote responsible disposal of garden waste. Report illegal dump sites since they often contain invasive plant species.

13. Collaborate with the Columbia Shuswap Invasive Species Society (CSISS) and the North Okanagan Regional District to coordinate activities along border areas.

14. Engage local media and local government to distribute key messages.

15. Continue to work with the RDCK to promote a private landowner programs similar to the CSRD and RDKB, such as private landowner education, cost‐sharing programs, and distribution of information.

16. Work with the RDCK and Village of Nakusp to distribute information (such as with tax notices or on website).

17. Link on‐line information between CKIPC and organizations whenever possible.

4.0EvaluatingSuccess

Tracking progress is a key element of the success of this framework and of invasive plant management activities in general. Recommendations for monitoring progress include:

1. Assess species priorities annually and update Table 1.

2. Measure success of eradication and containment efforts every five years.


3. Assess level of outreach activities and their success annually.

4. Review inventory requirements and gaps every five years.

5. Summarize data management activities and requirements annually.

6. Measure the degree of engagement of land managers annually and identify gaps.

7. Solicit input annually and meet in‐person every two to three years to update priorities and coordinate activities.


References

BC Inter‐Ministry Invasive Species Working Group. 2010. Invasive Plant Early Detection and Rapid

Response Plan for British Columbia. December 2010.

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/invasive‐species/Publications/EDRR_Plan_Draft.pdf

Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee (CKIPC). In progress. Invasive Plant Inventory Standards

for CKIPC Region.

Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee (CKIPC). 2011. Draft Invasive Plant Priority List for Central

Kootenay as of May 2011.

Craig, J. 2006. Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Surveys 2006: Summary Report. Prepared for Ministry

of Forests and Range, Kamloops, BC.

Global Invasive Species Programme. 2000. Global Strategy of Invasive Alien Species.

http://www.cites.org/common/com/AC/16/E16‐Inf‐12.pdf

Nielsen, J. 2007. TFL 23 Invasive Plant Strategy. Prepared for Pope & Talbot Ltd., Arrow Lakes Timer

Division.

Rode, M. 2009. Work Completion: Invasive Plant Management for the Village of Nakusp, JOP Project

5101003.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. Managing Invasive Plants.

http://www.fws.gov/invasives/volunteersTrainingModule/invasives/invasions.html

Voller, J. and R.S. McNay. 2007. Problem Analysis: Effects of Invasive Species on Species at Risk in

British Columbia. FORREX Series 20.

Wikeem, B. 2007. Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Management Strategy.

http://www.kootenayweeds.com/pdf/CKIPC%20Stragetic%20Plan_Complete.pdf


Appendix A: Land Managers and other Key Partners for Collaboration

Agency Contact Person

Provincial Government

BC Parks (Arrow Lakes, McDonald Creek, Eagle Creek, Inonoaklin, Burton Historical Park)

Chris Price, Mike Gall

Min. Forests, Lands and Nat. Resource Ops. Catherine MacRae (Invasive Plant Specialist); Terry Anderson (Habitat Protection); Werner Baliko (District); Melissa Rode & Kathy Smith (Nakusp field office)

Min. of Transportation and Infrastructure Donna Olsen, Bruce Lintott, Katie Ward

BC Timber Sales? ?

First Nations

Ktunaxa Nation Council Ray Warden

Local Government

Village of Nakusp Karen Hamling

Regional District of Central Kootenay Nicole Ward (staff), Leah Main (Director); Paul Peterson (Director)

North Okanagan Regional District John Friesen

Columbia Shuswap Regional District Hamish Kassa

Utility, Forestry and Other Companies

BC Hydro Rhonda Kariz

Columbia Power Corporation ?

Interfor Nakusp Frances Swan

YRB Maintenance ?

Naksup and Area Community Forest Frances Swan

West Kootenay Woodlot Association Tom Bradley

Private Land

The Nature Conservancy Dave Wickstrom

The Nature Trust Rob Neil

The Land Conservancy ?

Other Key Partners

Arrow Lakes Grape Growers Jerry Botti

Arrow Lakes Stewardship Society Hans Dummerauf

Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee Crystal Klym, Jen Vogel

Columbia Shuswap Invasive Species Society Natalie Stafl

Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program Irene Manley

Inonoaklin Livestock Association Ruth and Logan Bumpus

Kootenay Conservation Partnership Claire de la Salle

Nakusp and Area Trails Society Barb Chwaka

Valhalla Wilderness Society ?


Appendix B: Invasive Species Documented in Nakusp IPMA

Invasive species documented (in IAPP) in Nakusp IPMA, based on extract from September, 2012. Note

that in many cases, the area (ha) represents the area surveyed and not necessarily the area of

infestation of the species.

Species # Sites # Ha Comments

Baby’s breath (Gypsophila paniculata)

8 2.14 Sites at Edgewood (near regional park) and Nakusp (at waterfront).

Blueweed (Echium vulgare)

15 .71 Concentrated in Nakusp area with outlying sites in Whatshan

Brown knapweed (Centaurea jacea)

19 9.28

Burdock (Arctium minus)

2 .0035 Sites recorded in IAPP in Nakusp and at Arrow Park log dump. Many more sites but not usually recorded.

Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense)

48 83.1 Throughout region

Common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare)

83 10.45

Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica)

10 7.5

Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa)

14 .0053 Many of these sites historic biocontrol with no area recorded so area not accurate. Sites scattered throughout southern portion of IPMA.

Hawkweed spp. (Hieracium spp.)

These were listed under yellow hawkweeds as most in IAPP are likely yellow

Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus)

5 .1155 Nakusp and Burton

Hoary alyssum (Berteroa incana)

14 .244 Scattered patches throughout region, particularly in Nakusp area

Knapweed spp. (Centaurea spp.)

9 5.77 TFL 23. Likely spotted or meadow knapweed.

Knotweeds (Fallopia spp.)

7 .25 Including giant, Bohemian and Japanese knotweeds.

Meadow knapweed (Centaurea debeuxii)

76 40.6 Nakusp, Burton, Fauquier, Ocotopus Creek, Edgewood, Whatshan and isolated patches near Beaton

Nodding thistle (Carduus nutans)

1 Historic site at Fiva Creek. Biocontrol release site. No area of infestation recorded.

Orange hawkweed (Hieracium aurantiacum)

15 98.5 Throughout region

Oxeye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare)

101 135 Throughout region

Policeman’s helmet (Impatiens glandulifera)

1 .006 Private land in Edgewood

Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria)

3 .03 Fauquier

Scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforata)

11 7.29 Primarily in Edgewood but patches in Whatshan, Burton and Octopus Creek

Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius)

29 14.7 Concentrated in Nakusp with some outlying patches in Arrow Park, Fauquier and Halfwy river.

Queen Anne’s Lace/ Wild carrot (Daucus carota)

Particularly abundant in Burton area but throughout region. Species was not in the IAPP database when 2006 inventories conducted so sites were not entered.


Species

Spotted knapweed (Centaurea biebersteinii)

160 140 Throughout region

St. John’s Wort (Hypericum perforatum)

48 26.5 Scattered patches throughout region

Sulphur cinquefoil (Potentilla recta)

50 101.5 Throughout region. Particularly abundant in Whatshan area

Yellow hawkweeds (Hieracium spp.)

142 81.2 (hawkweed spp. = 51 sites; 37.1 ha)(common = 1 site; 1 ha)(King devil = 26 sites; .54 ha)(meadow = 8 sites; 10.09 ha)(queen devil = 10 sites; .289 ha)(smooth = 3 sites; .07 ha)(tall = 3 sites; .13 ha)(wall = 2 sites; .01 ha)(yellow devil = 36 sites; 32.05 ha)(yellow = 2 sites; .01 ha)

Yellow flag‐iris (Iris pseudacorus)

2 .004 Nakusp


Appendix C: Treatment History in Nakusp IPMA

Table 2: Biological control releases (until 2012) in Nakusp IPMA (based on IAPP records).

Invasive Plant Species Bioagent # Releases

Dalmatian toadflax Mecinus janthinus 1

Diffuse knapweed Agapeta zoegana 3

Cyphocleonus achates 5

Larinus obtusus 6

Nodding thistle Rhinocyllus conicus 1

Purple loosestrife Gallerucella calmariensis 6

Scotch broom Unknown (research) 2

Spotted knapweed Agapeta zoegana 37

Cyphocleonus achates 24

Larinus minutus 5

Larinus obtusus 27

St. John’s Wort Unknown (research) 1

TOTAL 118

Table 3: Number of mechanical control treatment sites in the Nakusp IPMA by species in last 6 years (based on IAPP records). Species 2007 2008 2009* 2010 2011 2012

Baby’s breath 3

Blueweed 4 3 1 4

Burdock

Common tansy 4 3

Dalmatian toadflax 1

Himalayan blackberry 1 1

Hoary alyssum 1

Purple loosestrife 1

Scentless chamomile

Scotch broom 1 1 1 2

Spotted knapweed 1

Sulphur cinquefoil 1

TOTAL 2 2 9 9 1 11

* IPCBC Hot Spots crew conducted numerous treatments.


AppendixD:LatinnamesforWeedstoWatchForCommon name Latin name

Black henbane* Hyoscyamus niger

Black knapweed* Centaurea nigra

Black locust Robinia pseudoacacia

Buffalobur* Solanum rostratum

Caraway Carum carvi

Chilean tarweed Madia sativa

Coltsfoot* Tussilago farfara

Common bugloss* Anchusa officinalis

Common crupina* Crupina vulgaris

Common reed* Phragmites australis subsp. australis

Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens

Cypress spurge* Euphorbia cyprissiae

Dyer’s woad* Isatis tinctoria

Fiddleneck Amsinckia intermedia

Field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis

Field scabious Knautia arvensis

Flowering rush* Butomus umbellatus

Garlic mustard* Alliaria petiolata

Giant hogweed Heracleum mantegazzianum

Gorse* Ulex europaeus

Greater celandine Chelidonium majus

Greater knapweed Centaurea scabiosa

Hoary cress Cardaria draba

Hound’s tongue Cynoglossum officinale

Japanese butterbur Petasites japonicas var. giganteus

Longspine sandbur* Cenchrus longispinus

Marsh plume thistle* Cirsium palustre

Mouse‐ear hawkweed Hieracium pilosella

Perennial pepperweed* Lepidium latifolium

Puncturevine* Tribulus terrestris

Rush skeletonweed Chondrilla juncea

Russian knapweed* Acroptilon repens

Russian olive Elaeagnus angustifolia

Sea buckthorn Hippophae rhamnoides

Squarrose knapweed* Centaurea virgata ssp. squarrosa

Syrian bean‐caper* Zygophyllum fabago

Tansy ragwort Senecio jacobaea

Velvet leaf* Abutilon theophrasti

Wild Four O’Clock* Mirabilis nyctaginea

Wood sage* Salvia nemorosa

Yellow bedstraw Galium verum

Yellow starthistle* Centaurea solstitialis


Appendix E: Useful Resources

Central Kootenay Invasive Plant Committee

Website includes weeds to watch for, Invasive Plant Profiles, CKIPC strategy (2007) and reports

www.kootenayweeds.com Invasive Species Council of BC “Targeted Invasive Plant Solutions (T.I.P.S.)”

Best management practices that are species‐specific or on activities such as seed mixtures, transportation corridors, aquatic recreation or forestry operations.

http://www.bcinvasives.ca/resources/outreach‐materials/invasive‐plants‐tips http://www.bcinvasives.ca/resources/outreach‐materials/activities‐tips

Invasive Species Council of BC – other resources

Grow Me Instead booklet on alternative horticultural species

Best Management Practices for Roadside booklet

Best Management Practices for Parks and Protected Areas booklet

http://www.bcinvasives.ca/resources/outreach‐materials/booklets‐brochures‐and‐presentations WeedsBC

Information on over 80 invasive plant species including identification and control techniques.

http://www.weedsbc.ca/ BC Invasive Plant Core Ranking Process

An online tool for ranking the priority of invasive plants for management

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/invasive‐species/calculatorIndex.htm Invasive Alien Plant Program Application

Database that includes invasive plant inventory, treatment and monitoring information, map display, and training modules for standardized operations

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/plants/application.htm Species at Risk locations

Conservation Data Centre: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/ims.htm

BC Species and Ecosystem Explorer: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/toolintro.html

Columbia River Basin Biodiversity Atlas: http://biodiversityatlas.org/ Invasive Plant Legislation

IPCBC A Legislative Guidebook to Invasive Plant Management in BC: http://www.bcinvasives.ca/resources/outreach‐materials/technical‐reports

BC Weed Control Act: http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96487_01

Forest and Range Practices Act Invasive Plant Regulation: http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/18_18_2004


Community Charter Act Environment and Wildlife Regulation: http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/41_144_2004

RDCK Bylaw for free Noxious Weed disposal:

http://www.rdck.bc.ca/publications/pdf/2013‐05_Bylaw2174_Final‐Consolidated.pdf

BC Ministry of Forests and Range (MFR) Pest Management Plan:

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/Publications/invasive_plants/PMPs/PMP%20402‐0649%2010‐

15%20FINAL.pdf


Appendix F: Treatment Considerations

The control method used at a particular site is determined by the land owner and/or qualified contractor, and depends on many factors (See Appendix E – Useful Resources for more information on some of these topics):

Location, including the remoteness of a site and proximity to riparian zones;

Invasive plant species;

Stage of invasive plant life cycle (rosette vs. seed‐set);

Current and proposed land use;

Availability of a Pest Management Plan or Pesticide Use Permit (where applicable);

Topography;

Availability of biocontrol agents;

Non‐target vegetation impacts;

Treatment objective (eradication, containment or control);

Species at risk in area; and

Wells and water‐bodies in area.

CKIPC’s ideal treatment recommendation for Priority 1 and 2 species (when funding is sufficient and an integrated treatment approach is implemented) is a three or more pass system as outlined below;

1. First Pass: Treatment occurs on known sites when plants are at the rosette stage. 2. Second Pass: Treatment occurs when plants have bolted and a few are about to bloom. 3. Third Pass: Treatment objective is to prevent any missed plants from treatments 1 and 2 from

producing viable seed. When resources are limited, CKIPCs ideal minimal treatment approach for Priority 1 and 2 species is a two pass system as outlined below:

1. First Pass: Treatment has been delayed until most plants are at the bolt stage and a few are ready to bloom.

2. Second Pass: Treatment objective is to prevent any missed plants from producing viable seed.

NOTE: It is important to hire a qualified contractor and to conduct all treatments in compliance with applicable legislation.


Appendix G: Area (ha) of each Eradication species by jurisdiction.

Table 1: Area (ha) of each Eradication/ Annual Control species by jurisdiction. Does not include containment

species outside containment lines, which also should be treated annually.

Species MFR MOTI Muni‐cipal

Private Unk Total (ha)

Baby’s breath 2.08 .05 2.13

Blueweed .041 .526 .095 .05 .712

Knotweeds .0304 .021 .2 .251

Policeman’s helmet .006 .006

Scotch broom .0082 5.55 .09 .5 8.5 14.6

Yellow flag‐iris .003 .001 .004

TOTAL .0492 6.1 2.37 .633 8.7 17.8


Appendix H: Target Audiences for Engagement & Outreach Note that agencies and organizations that own or manage land are listed in Appendix A.

Pathway Organization Comments

Agriculture/ Forestry Mushroom buyers

Horticulture Plant nurseries and garden centres Kootenay Native Plant Society Landscaping companies Garden clubs (is there one here?) Permaculture and medicinal plant workshops (organizations?)

Stewardship Nakusp Conservation Association BC Parks Facility Operators

Trails and Recreation Arrow Lakes Ridge Riders (ATV) Trail Ride Co. in Crescent Bay Nakusp Rod and Gun Club

Large property owners

Fauquier golf courses Other golf courses?

Horticulture and land management

Soil disturbance Building companies

Tourism and property Chamber of Commerce Inland ferries Welcome Wagon

Distribute brochures through these sources

Rights of Way Shaw Cable Telus

Potentially should be in “Land Managers” category – see Appendix A

Community events for display booth

Nakusp Fall Fair Nakusp Saturday Market Burton Community Days Toadfest (FWCP event) River’s Day event (Arrow Lakes Stewardship Society) Senior’s Fair


Appendix I: Maps of Containment Lines


Containment line for hoary alyssum in the Nakusp IPMA. Contain to Nakusp.


Containment line for meadow/brown knapweed in the Nakusp IPMA. Contain to Naksup/Edgewood/Whatshan.


Containment line for scentless chamomile in the Nakusp IPMA. Contain to Edgewood.


Containment line for Scotch broom in the Nakusp IPMA. Contain to Nakusp.


Containment line for Himalayan blackberry in the Nakusp IPMA. Contain to Nakusp.

nakusp management area (ipma) operational 2013 · 2016-04-29 · nakusp ipma operational framework...

Documents