Confederated Tribes of (2013)

Confederated Tribes of

Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians

Terrestrial and Aquatic Invasive Species

Management Plan

Prepared by:

Confederated Tribes of

Coos, Lower Umpqua, & Siuslaw Indians

Department of Natural Resources

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Scope of the Invasive Species Monitoring Plan

2.0 Authorities and Programs

2.1 Federal

2.2 State

2.3 Regional

3.0 Problems and Concerns

3.1 Invasive Species Impacts

3.2 Effects of Climate Change

3.3 Management Priorities

Transport Vectors

Priority Species

4.0 Management Objectives and Actions

4.1 Coordination

4.2 Prevention

4.3 Monitoring

4.4 Early Detection Rapid Response

4.5 Control and Management

4.6 Research and Risk Assessment

4.7 Education and Outreach

5.0 Program Monitoring and Evaluation

6.0 Citations

Appendices

A. Rapid Assessment Surveys of Tribal Property

B. Decontamination Protocols

C. Native Plant Transplanting.

2

1.0 Introduction

The Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw (CTCLUSI) hold widespread

and discontinuous properties covering a diverse range of habitat types, including estuarine, marine,

coastal lake, riparian, forest and urban lots (Figure 1). These remnants of the tribes’ ancestral

territory consist of 405 acres, spread over 3 counties with parcels ranging for 0.02 to 140 acres.

The diverse nature of these properties provides an opportunity to intensively monitor discrete areas

for invasive species. Presidential Executive Order 13112 defines invasive species as non-native

plant, animal or microbial species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or

environmental harm to human health. Invasive species can directly impact tribal peoples by

displacing culturally relevant species, such as those used as traditional foods, medicines and tools

as well as altering spiritually significant locations in negative ways. Impacts from invasive species

are on the rise. Although the CTCLUSI holds a relatively small percentage of land compared to

the state overall, the nature of the properties makes them conducive as sentinels for the early

detection of high priority invasive species if actively monitored.

1.1 Scope of Invasive Specie Management Plan

This document addresses actions regarding prevention, early detection and rapid response

(EDRR), control and management, restoration and rehabilitation, partnerships with other agencies

and education and outreach. The management actions outlined in this document are targeted

primarily at invasive plants/weeds but will not ignore invasive invertebrates and invertebrates.

The effects of climate change and its effect on native ecosystems and invasive species will also be

considered.

3

Figure 1.

4

2.0 Authorities and Programs

Relevant programs that currently address the invasive species problem at the federal, regional, and

state level are described briefly in the following paragraphs with emphasis on those that have been

active in Oregon and are necessary to facilitate the implementation of this plan.

2.1 Federal

At the federal level, no single agency has authority over the management of invasive species.

Rather, multiple agencies have developed invasive species programs, largely in reaction to severe

invasive species issues. Effective invasive species management in the United States will require

federal agencies to expand existing efforts to deter nonindigenous species introductions through

the oversight of international and interstate trade and commerce and associated transport vectors

such as commercial shipping and the trade of organisms via mail order and the Internet

Federal programs dealing with nonindigenous species that existed prior to the passage of

NANPCA (Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990) are largely

related to interstate and international transport of known pest plants and animals and the protection

of valuable horticultural, aquacultural, or endangered species. These laws include:

The Lacey Act of 1900 (and amendments): The Lacey Act establishes a permitting

process administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service regulating the importation

and transport of vertebrates, mollusks, and crustacea that are "injurious to human

beings, to the interests of agriculture, horticulture, forestry, or to wildlife or the

wildlife resources of the United States.” The Secretary of the Interior maintains the

Injurious Species List

The Federal Seed Act of 1939 (and amendments): This act prohibits the importation of seeds of

unknown type and origin by ensuring the purity and proper labeling of seed imports.

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (and amendments): The Endangered Species Act can be

used to authorize the eradication or control of AIS in the case that a listed species is threatened by

the invader's presence or spread.

The Plant Protection Act of 2000 (amending the Noxious Weed Act of 1974). The Plant

Protection Act gives the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health

5

Inspection Service (APHIS) the authority to prohibit the import and interstate transport of species

included on the Noxious Weed List developed by the USDA. In cooperation with state

agricultural departments, APHIS annually designates priority agricultural pest species for annual

intensive monitoring efforts.

The most recent invasive species initiative developed at the federal level came in February of 1999

with Executive Order 13112. This order establishes the National Invasive Species Council, a

federal interagency organization charged with the biennial development of a National Invasive

Species Management Plan.

Federal Programs and Activities

In addition to the regulations outlined in the above legislation, several government agencies

have recognized the severity of the invasive species problem, and have adopted the management

and control of invasive species as priority programs areas.

The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the only agency of the U.S. Government whose primary

responsibility is the conservation of the nation’s fish, wildlife, and plants. The USFWS has

traditionally been the lead in dealing with invasive species at the federal level and provides

technical assistance to states in developing invasive species control plans. The USFWS

administers grants that can be used for invasive species management through the Wildlife

Restoration Program.

The US Geological Survey (USGS)

The USGS Invasive Species program has the goal of developing new strategies for the prevention,

early detection, and prompt eradication of new invaders. The USGS further identifies information

management and documentation of invasions as a priority for the agency. The USGS has

developed and maintains an extensive, spatially referenced database of nonindigenous species,

which is accessible via the Internet (http://biology.usgs.gov/invasive). Within the USGS five year

6

program plan (fiscal years 2005-2009) the Pacific Northwest is briefly noted as being invaded by “

Eurasian water milfoil, hydrilla, smooth cordgrass, English ivy, and dozens of non-native fish”.

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA)

The USDA works with state agricultural agencies to monitor for agricultural pests and noxious

weeds. Individual state monitoring programs are directed by a state survey committee, which is

made up of representatives from state agencies and scientific institutions. Each year, the state

survey committee reviews an Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) recommended

list of potential pests for survey (the Noxious Weed List), and chooses one or more for annual

surveillance efforts. Target species may include weeds, plant diseases, insects, and other

invertebrates. APHIS also cooperates with the US customs Service to limit the import of specified

plant pests and their hosts into the country.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – document 2005 (Developing Aquatic

Invasive Species Rapid Response Management Plans). The document contains federal insecticide,

fungicide and rodenticide act (FIFRA), the principal law that authorizes EPA to regulate the

manufacture, distribution, sale, and use of pesticides in the United States. Region 10: the Pacific

Northwest invasive species program primarily focuses on aquatic invasive species.

NOAA National Sea Grant Office (NSGO) – Oregon State University

The National Sea Grant College Program was established in 1966 to foster research, outreach,

and education for the promotion of sustainable development of coastal regions. The Program

has played an active role in research on invasive species issues in the United States through

projects such as the National Aquatic Nuisance Species Clearinghouse, the Zebra Mussel

Training Initiative, and a competitive grant program for invasive species research and

outreach projects

2.2 State

The following is an overview of the current roles of Oregon agencies and organizations involved

in invasive species management.

7

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)

Control of invasive species is considered a key conservation issue of statewide concern by the

Oregon Conservation Strategy (citation: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2006. Oregon

Conservation Strategy. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Salem, Oregon). ODFW

coordinates with the Dept of Ag and the Invasive Species Council.

The Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Program was established by the 2009 Oregon Legislature

in an effort to keep Oregon’s lakes, rivers and streams free of destructive invasive species. ODFW

and the Oregon State Marine Board are charged with managing boat inspection stations and

education and outreach efforts. The program is funded by boaters who purchase a $7 permit.

The ODFW’s 10 most unwanted invaders are Zebra/Quagga mussels, Northern Snakehead, Asian

Carp, Chinese Mitten Crab, NZMS, Rusty Crayfish, Oriental Weatherfish, Feral Swine, Non native

turtles and the American Bullfrog.

Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA)

The Noxious Weed Control Program exists within the Plant Division of the Department of

Agriculture. The program operates to fulfill part of the Department's mission to protect Oregon's

agricultural industry and natural resources by preventing and limiting the spread and impact of

invasive exotic plant species (noxious weeds) which displace and compete with native and

desirable domestic plant species. Home of the State of Oregon official noxious weed list

maintained by the Oregon State Weed Board (OSWB) and Noxious Weed Control Program.

Weeds in this list are classified into A and B designations depending on the severity of the impacts

or threat.

Oregon Invasive Species Council (OISC)

The OISC was created by the Oregon legislature (ORS 561.685). The council began official

business on January 1, 2002. The council’s main functions are to create a system for reporting

sightings and referring those sightings to the appropriate agencies, educational activities to

increase awareness and develop a statewide plan (Oregon Invasive Species Action Plan, 2005 most

recent) for dealing with invasive species.

8

OISC coordinates a comprehensive effort to keep invasive species out of Oregon and to eliminate,

reduce, or mitigate the impacts of invasive species already established in Oregon. OISC maintains

a hotline for reporting invasive species and a list serve for sending out invasive species updates,

meetings and events. The OISC also lists the current 100 most dangerous invaders to Oregon.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ)

In 2001, the Oregon legislature enacted a law to regulate ballast water releases. ORS 783.640:

“(1) Owners or operators of vessels regulated under ORS 783.630 to 783.640 must report ballast

water management information to the Department of Environmental Quality at least 24 hours prior

to entering the waters of this state.”

2.3 Regional

Portland State University

Native Plant Society of Oregon

Pacific Biodiversity Institute

Nature Conservancy

Northwest Weed Management Partnership (source of Integrated Pest Management Guide)

3.0 Problem and Concerns

The following section highlights some of the major impacts of past introductions, identifies

priority pathways by which these species may have been imported, and identifies established and

threatening species of greatest concern to the Tribe. The discussion and identification of the major

problems and concerns outlined below have served as the foundation for the development of

detailed Management Objectives and Actions outlined in Section 4.

3.1 Invasive Species Impacts

Current impacts from invasive species generally include:

Reduced diversity of native plants and animals

Impairment of recreational uses such as swimming and boating.

9

Degradation of water quality.

Degradation of wildlife habitat.

Increased threats to public health and safety.

Diminished property values.

Declines in native species populations.

Loss of coastal infrastructure due to habits of fouling and boring

Local and complete extinction of rare and endangered species.

Invasive species reduce biodiversity and displace native plants and wildlife, often reduce land

values, impeded water flow, reduce water availability and increase soil erosion, fire hazards and

some are toxic to animals and humans. Economic impacts of invasive species in the U.S. are

estimated at $143 billion/year (Pimentel et al. 2005). A report by the Oregon Department of

Agriculture (2000) puts Oregon’s economic losses from selected noxious weeds at $125

million/year. Rapid assessment surveys of tribal properties conducted in 2008 showed significant

infestations with well-known and established invasive species, with the largest numbers within

disturbed areas.

3.2 Effects of Climate Change

According to the Oregon Climate Assessment Report (2010) Oregon may experience a range of

problems associated with climate change. Severe storms are expected to become more frequent but

with reduced snow buildup in the mountains, sea level rise, drought, heat waves, increased forest

fires and invasive species. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency warns that in response to

temperature increases, the habitat ranges of many North American species are moving northward

in latitude and upward in elevation. In Oregon, warmer streams and rivers would harm salmon and

other native species and non-native species could replace them. There is recent evidence that

Pacific coast abalone populations are suffering from range reductions potentially caused by climate

change (Rogers-Bennett. 2007). The cultural practices of Oregon’s tribes could be affected with

the loss of iconic species, as could the businesses and recreation practices of those who rely on the

state’s native species.

10

Traditional knowledge is important when analyzing the impacts of invasive species within

ecosystems. Tribal members can provide insight into a landscape’s state prior to colonization of

invasive species. Having knowledge of the pre-invasive species habitat composition can be a

useful management tool for the early detection of invasive species and restoration efforts.

Ecosystem adaptation and change in the wake of climate change has yet to be fully understood and

can not be reliably predicted. Despite the unknown precise effects of climate change, invasive

species already present to the south should be given extra attention due to their potential to move

northward as temperatures increase. A changing climate does not imply a radically different set of

management options, but will likely necessitate changes in the timing or intensity of control

efforts. Weeding or pesticide applications may need to be moved earlier in the spring to account

for shorter winters and earlier spring events. The most effective approach to limiting the spread of

invasive species is to prevent the introduction of invasive species and adopt an early detection and

rapid response (EDRR) management strategy (Section 4.4).

3.3 Management Priorities

Transport Vectors

It is important for tribal members and employees to be aware of routine activities that may increase

the chance of spreading invasive species. Potential transport vectors specific to tribal activity

includes natural resource monitoring gear, lawn care and earth moving equipment and the

transplanting of wild collected native plants to new areas. Awareness of potential IS vectors

supports IS prevention objectives. Decontamination protocols are included in Appendix B and C.

Priority Species (Or Species Groups)

The species described below were designated as high priorities based on the following priority

species designation criteria.

1) Severity of the problem posed to Oregon by the introduced species.

2) Existing capabilities for management (species for which management options are currently

available are given higher priority).

3) Associated costs and benefits of management.

11

Species were selected based on a review of the most current lists of nonindigenous species in

Oregon. The CTCLUSI Department of Natural Resources will periodically update the list of

priority species based on new information generated through implementation of this plan.

Established Species (includes ODA B designation)

The following species are established or present in Oregon and are considered highest priorities for

management on tribal property. Most have been noted as present on or near tribal property during

preliminary baseline surveys to determine the presence or absence of invasive species.

Gorse (Ulex europaeus) Noted as present in modest amounts on 3 CTCLUSI properties. A

single large plant was discovered at the Tribal Hall location and manually removed in 2011.

Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius)

Widespread and abundant on many of the CTCLUSI properties, especially at the Administration

and Tribal Hall locations.

French Broom (Genista monspessulana)

Noted as present at CTCLUSI Tribal Hall location

Armenian Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus)

Formerly confused with Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor)

Butterfly Bush (Buddleja davidii)

A landscaping plant that has escaped from cultivation. This plant crowds out native species.

Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria)

A wetland invader imported from Europe in the early 1800s for its beautiful purple flowers and

medicinal value. The plant is extremely difficult to eradicate although some biological control

agents are effective in suppressing the plants. It is noted as present on the Umpqua River near

Dean Creek.

English and Irish Ivy (Hedera helix and H. hibernica)

12

Landscaping plants that have escaped to native habitats where they create large monocultures. Ivy

is often seen climbing and covering trees.

Yellow Flag Iris (Iris pseudocorus)

A rhizomatous emersed wetland forb with very showy yellow iris flowers introduced in the early

1900’s as an ornamental. It is noted as present in the Umpqua River near Dean Creek where it has

formed dense thickets. The plant is poisonous if ingested.

Cotoneaster (Cotoneaster ssp.)

Evergreen shrubs, prostrate to erect, to ten feet tall, depending on species; many-branched from

ground level, the branches are laden with clusters of quarter-inch, white, rose-like flowers in

summer followed by red berries in autumn and winter. Introduced from China as an ornamental,

cotoneasters have escaped garden cultivation. Birds eat the red berries, which can persist on the

plants well into winter. Cotoneasters displace native plants by their rapid growth, competition for

light, abundant seed production, and an effective seed-dispersal strategy. Noted as present on

several CTCLUSI properties.

New Zealand Mud Snail (Potamopyrgus antipodarum)

Native to New Zealand but long established in Australia and Europe, this species was discovered

in North America in 1987 in the Snake River in south-central Idaho. Population levels can exceed

100,000 snails per square meter (NCSE 1999). Modes of transportation may include hitchhiking

on recreational equipment and other equipment used in water, in the guts of harvested fish, on

waterfowl and other aquatic birds. NZMS degrade habitat due to their high reproductive capacity

and the subsequent impacts on invertebrate food sources. Fish receive little, if any nutritive value

from eating the snail and the snails can survive passing completely through the digestive tract.

Observed as present in the Coos and Umpqua rivers by CTCLUSI staff.

Saltmeadow Cordgrass (Spartina patens)

This species has the potential of colonizing the Hatch tract Tribal property on the Siuslaw River.

Spartina patens is found on Cox Island in the Siuslaw River and is known to have existed on Cox

Island since the 1930s. It is the only known colony of this species in Oregon. It is currently under

13

management by The Nature Conservancy. A 2010 survey of the Hatch tract by Portland State

University, with assistance and observation by a CTCLUSI staff member, noted the current

absence of Saltmeadow Cordgrass. Construction of a new bridge replacement over the North Fork

of the Siuslaw River caused some disturbance and removal of native plants that may provide an

opportunity for Saltmeadow Cordgrass colonization.

Threatening Species (Includes ODA A designation)

The species listed below have not yet been documented in Oregon, but are considered as viable

threats on Tribal property.

Zebra Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha): Introduction of the zebra mussel into the Great

Lakes and the resulting impacts such as fouling, alteration of community structure, and

competition with rare species led to an increased awareness of the invasive species problem at the

national level, and the passage of the National Invasive Species Prevention and Control Act. Since

its introduction in 1988, the zebra mussel has spread throughout many of the major drainage basins

of the Midwest and Northeast, including the Mississippi River down to the Gulf of Mexico

(USGS, 2011). The zebra mussel has yet to be documented in Oregon, but has recently been found

in California.

Chinese Mitten Crab (Eriocheir sinensis): The Chinese mitten crab has undergone explosive

growth along the California coast since its discovery in San Francisco Bay in 1992. A highly

valued food item throughout China, it is unclear if this species was intentionally introduced, or was

released in ballast water originating in the Yellow Sea or Europe (Wynn et al., 2000). Threats

from this species include clogging of fish collection devices, fish-ways and hydropower intakes;

damage to levees and other coastal structures that result from its burrowing habits; and alteration

of the native community structure through predation (Washington Sea Grant, 2001). The dramatic

ability of this species to grow in great numbers as shown in central California indicates the need to

prevent the introduction of this species to Oregon waters and to develop a response protocol in the

event that it is discovered here.

4.0 Management Objectives and Actions

4.1 Coordination:

14

Invasive species management requires the coordination of state, federal and private organizations

and requires an understanding of the views and roles of each stakeholder with ongoing

cooperation, communication and dialogue.

4.2 Prevention

Preventing the introduction of invasive species in the most cost-effective means to avert or reduce

the risk of harmful infestations of invasive species. Investment in prevention avoids the long-term

economic, environmental and social costs associated with invasive species infestations. Currently,

little is known regarding the specific role transport vectors play in IS introduction and spread in

Oregon and the region. Careful study of species introduction through these vectors, followed by

efforts to communicate with related industry representatives, will be a critical first step in reducing

IS transport.

15

4.3 Monitoring

The distribution of IS in Oregon is poorly understood. Continued designation of priorities for

management (both species and pathways) will require ongoing invasive species monitoring efforts.

For all CTCLUSI property sites, invasive plants will be identified and quantified by stem counts or

colony size. Invasive animals (invertebrates and vertebrates) will be quantified by counting visible

individuals or by estimation if numbers are large (swarms). Unrecognized species will be

photographed and representative samples collected for later identification with reference materials

or the advice of an expert. The locations of all invasive species will be recorded using a GPS unit

(Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx). For invasive plants that form larger colonies, a polygon of the colony

will be mapped using GPS. Field personnel will perform reconnaissance-level, pedestrian surveys

to identify occurrences of invasive species with extra attention to recently disturbed sites and

construction areas that are favored by invasive species. Any individual or small grouping of

invasive plants identified during the course of the monitoring process will be removed by hand and

disposed of offsite. Larger colonies will be scheduled for removal as available personnel and time

allows. Larger colonies of invasive plants will be controlled with manual removal methods when

possible or using approved herbicides in strict accordance with State regulations for handling and

application. Application of herbicides will be performed only by State-certified pesticide

applicators. Site monitoring will be done annually.

16

CTCLUSI Properties with Dominant Invasive Species noted

Site Name

Total

acres

County

Description

Priority

Dominant

Problematic

Invasives

Alishanee

1.43

Coos

Urban vacant

lot

Low

Gorse, Brooms

annual mowing/

herbicides

Coos

Buildings/

vacant lots/

wooded

Medium

Brooms,

Blackberry, Ivy

annual monitoring,

manual removal of

invasives

Lane

Casino/

dunes/

wooded/

riparian

Medium

Gorse, Brooms

mowing and manual

removal

High

Brooms, Ivy

manual and mowing

removal, native

plantings

Medium

Brooms,

Cotoneaster

Tribal Hall

Hatch

10.26

99.20

Coos Head

43.10

Coos

Buildings/

wooded

Fulton/Tribal

Admin

13.08

Coos

Buildings/

wooded

Flanagan/

Wulatch

3.32

Coos

Unmaintained

Medium

cemetery

Connecticut/

Qaxas

3.50

Coos

Maintained

housing

Low

Control effort

Management Comments

Native plants are becoming

well established and will help

prevent recolonization

Active development with

associated natural area

justifies high removal and

control effort

Native plants are becoming

well established and will help

prevent recolonization

Brooms

annual monitoring,

manual removal

Brooms

Cotoneaster

annual monitoring,

manual removal

Native plants are becoming

well established and will help

prevent recolonization

Very few plants to remove,

minimal effort required

Dominant

Problematic

Invasives

Site Name

Total

acres

County

Description

Priority

Fisher/KCBY

2.24

Coos

Building/

estuary

Low

Brooms,

Blackberry, Ivy

Munsel Lake

140.00

Lane

Lake/ wooded

Low

Pond plants

annual monitoring

Control effort

annual monitoring,

manual removal of

invasives

Eason

18.80

Coos

Wooded

Low

Brooms

annual monitoring,

manual removal of

invasives

Kentuck

Slough

0.02

Coos

Slough

Low

Reed Canary

Grass

annual monitoring

Sixes River

1.25

Curry

River/

riparian

Low

Reed Canary

Grass

annual monitoring

Blackberry

annual monitoring,

manual removal of

invasives

Miluk Village

Brainard

Gregory

Point/ Chief's

Island

1.69

38.79

Coos

Estuary

Low

Management Comments

Preserve. The few present

nonnative pond plants are not

considered a threat to the lake

Preserve

Lane

Wooded/

riparian

High

Blackberry

multiple mowings/

possible herbicide use

Coos

Wooded/

rocky island

Low

No significant

invasives

annual monitoring

Preserve

Aggressive blackberries will

limit use of area if not actively

controlled

Preserve/minimal

management

Table 1.

18

4.4 Early Detection Rapid Response

When invasive species elude preventative actions, early detection is the next line of defense. Early

detection consists of monitoring for invasive species. When invasive species are detected, it is

essential to respond rapidly before they become established, spread and cause harm. A delay in

response can lead to higher costs of control and management. The objective of rapid response is

containment or eradication of the target species. Identify funding and personnel resources for the

eradication of new introductions to previously uninfested areas. Once established, invasive species

may be impossible to completely eradicate. Removal of any introduced species will require a

coordinated protocol for immediate response and eradication of the species of concern.

4.5 Control and Management

Control of established populations of IS continues to be costly and labor intensive in most if not

all cases. Limiting the spread of priority IS will require continued development of cost-effective

control technologies.

4.6 Research

As invasive species populations change in size and new invaders are introduced to Oregon,

priorities for management will change as will research needs. Effective IS management will

require that research priorities are revaluated periodically, and that these priorities are recognized

and addressed by scientists and managers in the region.

4.7 Education and Outreach

Continued education of resource managers, tribal members and the general population regarding

threats from IS and as a preventative measure will be necessary to limit the introduction and spread

of invasive species to Oregon. The greater the awareness on the identity of targeted high priority

species, the greater the chance a targeted species is recognized at an early stage of invasion with a

corresponding higher chance of rapid response success. The CTCLUSI website will include a list

of invasive species, properties and control methods to educate the CTCLUSI tribal membership

and employees.

5.0 Program Monitoring and Evaluation

The evaluation process of the CTCLUSI Invasive species monitoring plan will provide a means of

monitoring progress, evaluating needs and problems, coordinating effort and pursuing the goal of

prevention and management of introductions, population growth and dispersal of invasive species.

Mid-course corrections will be made when and if necessary. Annual reports presenting an analysis

of the monitoring results and a summary of the remedial actions performed will be presented in the

following manner.

Introduction:

A review of the goals and objectives for invasive species monitoring.

A summary of any remedial measures that occurred over the preceding year.

Methods:

A brief description of the field methodology employed to collect data

Results:

Map occurrences of all invasive species identified

A summary of the results of the invasive species monitoring and a report on any control

measures taken.

Assessment and Management Recommendations

Assessment of Threat: A summary discussing the distribution and density of identified

species within the project area. This analysis will consider species abundance, identification of

possible vectors for species introduction and whether or not that vector is controllable.

Management of Invasive Species: The methods employed for invasive species control

carried out during the preceding year will be discussed, as will the results of any herbicide

application on any identified and treated colonies. Tabular results of invasive species occurrences

and control by location including GPS coordinates will be produced for each tribal property with

site photographs annotated with site location and number.

20

6.0 Citations

Hellmann, J. J., J. E. Byers, et al. (2008). "Five potential consequences of climate change for

invasive species." Conservation Biology 22(3): 534-543.

The National Council for Science and the Environment (NCSE) 1999, Harmful Nonnative Species:

Issues for Congress VIII, Washington D.C.

Oregon Climate Change Research Institute (2010), Oregon Climate Assessment Report, K.D.

Dello and P.W. Mote (eds). College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State

University, Corvallis, OR

Oregon Department of Agriculture. 2000. “Economic analysis of containment programs, damages,

and production losses from noxious weeds in Oregon.”

http://www.oregon.gov/ODA/PLANT/docs/pdf/weed_body_a.pdf

Pimentel, D., R. Zuniga, and D. Morrison. 2005. “ Update on the environmental and economic

costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States.” Ecological Economics 52, pp.

273-288.

Rogers-Bennett, Laura. 2007. Is Climate Change Contributing to Range

Reductions and Localized Extinctions in Northern (Haliotis kamtschatkan) and Flat (Haliotis

walallensis) Abalones? Bulletin of Marine Science, 81(2): 283–296.

USGS (2011) Nonindigenous aquatic species database. United States Geological Survey,

Gainsville, Florida, USA. Available at http://nas.er.usgs.gov

Washington SeaGrant. 2001. Aquatic Invasive Species: A Guide

Organisms of the Pacific Northwest: WSG-MR 00-02. 8 pp.

Wynn, S., L. Hess, and C. Liston. 1999. The Invasion of the Chinese Mitten Crab And its

Effect on Fish Protection Facilities. J. Pederson (ed.). Marine Bioinvasions: Proceedings

of the First National Conference. MIT Sea Grant 00-2. p. 423.

21

Appendix A

Rapid Assessment Surveys of Tribal Property (Example)

In 2008, environmental site inspections were conducted on tribal properties. The site inspections

included a rapid assessment of the presence and magnitude of known invasive species with

notation and collection of unfamiliar species for later identification. Where feasible, tracts were

inspected on foot with individual plants and patch edges of invasive species marked on printed

topographic maps. This rapid assessment lacks the resolution, and was not intended, for

management purposes. The exercise was useful to familiarize staff with the sites and the

challenges of invasive species management. A single example is included here. All sites are

scheduled to be resurveyed in 2014 with photo points of each property.

Tract Name: Alishanee

County: Coos

BIA Tract Number: 149T1116

Acres: 1.43

Invasive Species:

French Broom (Genista monspessulana)

Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius)

Armenian (Himalayan) Blackberry

(Rubus armeniacus)

Gorse (Ulex europaeus)

Bull Thistle (Cirsium vulgare)

Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare)

Knotweed (Fallopia spp.)

Cherry Laurel (Prunus laurocerasus)

Notes: This tract is a vacant lot

surrounded by commercial buildings. The

Gorse is browning from a 2008 herbicide

application but many plants are still

living. This tract will likely be developed

in the future with complete removal of all

surface material. The recommendation is

for mowing to reduce seed production

and spreading of Gorse to adjoining properties.

22

Appendix B

Decontamination Protocols

Treating Equipment with Hot Water:

Before moving to a different body of water, a hot water decontamination of boots and sampling

equipment is recommended to prevent spread of NZMS, rock snot and other aquatic invasive

species and diseases. Compact propane units are to be kept in DNR vehicles for the onsite

generation of hot water. Wading gear has been implicated in the spread of New Zealand

mudsnails as well as other aquatic invasive species such as Didymo (the diatom Didymosphenia

geminata) and fish and amphibian diseases.

• Wear appropriate personal protection equipment to prevent burns to self and others.

• Avoid or protect parts of equipment that might be damaged by hot water.

• Ensure that the water is at least 140° F (60° C) at the discharge side of whatever’s being treated.

• Flush for at least 10 sec. for all equipment except felt soles and nets; 5 min for felt-soled boots

and nets at 140° F (60° C).

• After treatment, ensure equipment drains and dries before re-stowing equipment

Boat, Boat Engine and Trailer decontamination:

Wash and remove debris before moving to a different body of water.

Boat Trailers:

1. Flush all interior and exterior surfaces of trailers, wheels, and tires until clean. Interior surfaces

are the inside of the trailer’s metal tube framing.

Boat Hulls: Exterior and Interior

1. Remove gear as needed (e.g. deck mat, dip nets, net anchors, boat anchor and line, ropes) to

provide access to all areas of the boat to allow for effective cleaning.

23

2. Wash down the boat working from bow to stern, and top to bottom. Flush all nooks and

crannies to get at all areas where aquatic species may have gotten into. Wash all boat-related gear.

3. Wash all bilge areas where accessible using hot water, working from bow to stern. However,

do not flush the bilge of the jet sled with hot water because of the fuel tank located there.

4. Raise bow of boat for effective draining of water and muck that gets into bilge. Work all of the

bilge water, sediment, and muck out of drain on transom.

5. Flush all interior and exterior thru-hull pipes and screens. These may be located on the bottom

of the hull, on the transom, or inside the hull (e.g. Skookum’s strainers for washdown pumps and

engine cooling system). Try backflushing bilge pumps by introducing water into the bilge pump

discharge port (on transom or hull exterior) and check to see if water flows through the bilge pump

and into the bilge.

Boat Engines: Propeller and Jet Pump

Boat engines pump ambient water through them for cooling and can pick up and harbor unwanted

material – which may be transported to another waterbody. While most boat engines have finemesh screens (~2 mm) that can prevent debris from getting into the engine, sand and mud particles

may pass through. Jet-pump engines operating in shallow waters often move sediment and fine

debris through the cooling passages, so more effort is needed for cleaning jet-pump engines. The

external parts of engines can also collect weeds or other debris, especially propellers and other

parts submerged in the water. Clean external parts of engines to remove all visible debris. Clean

internal parts of engines by flushing with water.

Earth moving and lawn equipment decontamination

To prevent the spread of invasive species weed seeds and soil borne diseases all earth moving

construction equipment and lawn maintenance equipment should be thoroughly cleaned between

sites. Methods will vary depending on the type of equipment to be cleaned, but all dust, mud and

visible plant material should be removed and the equipment washed as thoroughly as practical.

24

Appendix C

Native Plant Transplanting

Wapato (Sagittaria latifolia) was an important traditional food source for many tribal peoples

where it occurred in abundance. Unfortunately, Wapato is now scarce or nonexistent in much of

its historic range, especially within the territory of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Tribes.

There is an interest to expand the existing remnant populations of Wapato using locally collected

wild plants.

Currently, the most accessible populations of Wapato are on the Umpqua River, Oregon near

Brandy Bar. Unfortunately, this site is also heavily infested with the highly invasive New Zealand

Mud snail (Potamopyrgus antipodarum). Wild collected specimens of Wapato from the Umpqua

River intended for transplantation must be quarantined, cleaned and inspected to reduce the risk of

spreading the invasive snails.

Collection of Wapato is in the Fall (late October-early November) by digging up the mature edible

tubers. During the collection of tubers, it is essential to avoid contact with surface mud to avoid

the transfer of snails. Snails are only on or near the surface of the mud and not present at the depth

the tubers are found. Tubers should be transferred directly to a container without placing first on

the substrate surface as this may cause the transfer of snails.

Rinse the tubers thoroughly in the field and rinsed again before storage in an outdoor container of

saturated soil covered with standing water for several weeks or months. Tubers will begin to

show signs of growth in late December to early January and should be transplanted prior to this

time to avoid damaging growing tissue and for easier final handling, cleaning and inspection.

Growing sheaths on the sprouts can hold soil and possibly tiny snails which makes cleaning much

more difficult.

Due to the highly invasive nature of the NZMS, alternative sources of Wapato are being sought,

such as native plant nurseries or wild populations free of contaminating invasive species.

Wapato Decontamination Protocol

Harvest tubers (Oct-Nov) crudely rinse in field, avoid tuber contact with surface mud.

Rinse again in lab or home to remove all visible soil, dispose of rinse water away from bodies of

water.

Store outdoors or refrigerate in wet soil for 4-6 weeks (quarantine period)

Remove tubers from storage and wash off soil for final inspection and potential planting (Dec-Jan)

25

Final magnified visual inspection and final wash with rinse bottle of any remaining soil (save rinse

water), concentrating on sprout sheaths if present for retained soil.

Examine rinse water for snails or snail shells at 8x magnification with stereo scope.

If no living snails or snail shells are present, tubers are considered clean and acceptable for

transplanting.

26