False brome Working Group Meeting Notes

January 15, 2003

The first order of business was a report out from the team that sketched out tasks associated with issues identified at the first meeting. The volunteers that worked on this (we need to thank, by the way) were Debbie Johnson, Tom Kaye, Cindy McCain and Nancy Wogen. Tasks fell into 4 categories:

1. Education and Outreach

a. Willamette Weed Management Area education and outreach (Dennis Wise)

1. can use listserve willamette-weed@oda.state.or.us to disseminate information;

2. working on a call line for weeds where callers can request information packets

b. Fact Sheet- Tom Kaye has almost completed this

c. Grant writing

d. BLM Educational Material Development:

1. ID field guide

2. Fact sheets

3. General Westside weeds poster and brochure

e. Outreach

Team Members: Trisha Wymore, Bruce Newhouse, Dennis Wise, Nancy Wogen, Jenny Lippert

2. Prevention/Control/Research

a. Existing control techniques/projects

b. Identify additional needs

c. Use inventory data to prioritize treatment areas

3. Research

a. Seed bank

b. Control Measures effectiveness

c. Habitat requirements- Radosevich lab is modeling risk assessment to predict invasion based on the habitat suitability and species biology

Team Members: Debbie Johnson, Chuck Fairchild, Tom Kaye, Fred Pfund, Alice Smith, Greg Fitzpatrick, Diana Kimberling

4. Inventory

a. Collate existing info using weedmapper

b. basic data/reporting

c. Westside Oregon inventory using remote sensing

Team Members: Cindy McCain, Bruce Newhouse, Wes Messinger, Michael Atkinson, Alice Smith

The group decided on an overarching goal for the group:

To educate and enlist the public and land managers to identify, prevent spread and control false brome, Brachypodium sylvaticum, in western Oregon

Remote Sensing and Weed Mapper Program (Dept. of Rangeland Resources)

The Team from OSU has worked on remote sensing (mapping from aerial photos and a computer-generated logarithm associated with color signature of the species) several weed species. It has worked for Scotch broom, gorse and purple loosestrife on the west side of the Cascades but detected only large patches of yellow starthistle. To get a good map one needs a color contrast. This may be seasonal (i.e. the Lythrum purple flowers didn’t show up but foliage turns reddish in fall and this was mappable) or phonological thing. The species has to be detectable by color alone, not shape or form because the computer can only interpret relative amounts of yellow/red/blue to create a color signature.

Weedmapper www.weedmapper.org

Data standards:

Required

i. spatial polygon

ii. observation date

iii. USDA PLANTS symbol

iv. Source- agency name and project

important

v. accuracy (precision)- GPS, field map, etc

vi. size (if point data)

vii. buffer (if line data , e.g. road survey)

viii. density

ix. recorder

desired

x. location name

xi. unique identifier

xii. revisit?

xiii. treatment

In the program, you can pull up a map of the species you want, zoom in on it, and copy it to print. You can also use existing map to draw your own point and get a lat/long to submit a new sighting. However, you can’t see the data in the database behind the map.

One thing that might be really useful for us is that they have a link to OSU Extension for pamphlets on weed species ID. This might be a perfect place for disseminating our false brome fact sheet.

This team is also interested in risk assessment modeling using computer-based climatic, weather (T, precip) and soil data. There may be another connection here with our research needs group.

Teams met as subgroups and developed prioritites:

Education and Outreach

All projects are pertinent western Oregon-wide, so we didn’t focus a lot on scale. Instead we chose to focus on audience:

Land Managers

Short Term:

Fact sheet- finalize with Tom Kaye. Dennis Wise will try to use BLM Task order with ODA to get the fact sheet printed on write in the rain paper or laminated. Will use Weed Management Area for distribution

Mid-Term:

Weed identification guide- Priority with BLM, Weed Management Area working on this. Any extra effort here would be redundant.
Field Trip- Nancy we were stumped here. Who would be the audience and how would we solicit participants.

General Public

Short Term:

Fact sheet- 3 most common characteristics, simple; check with Scott Sundberg to see if his fact sheets will overlap.

Mid-Term:

1. General weed posters for trailheads and other recreation areas that discuss how recreation contributes to weed spread. Post these on federal/state land and at GI Joes, REI.

Develop presentation (PowerPoint and field trip) for volunteers (SCA students) to present to user groups such as Garden clubs, Equestrians, hiking clubs. This could also be used for land managers

Long-Term:

1. Develop training for inventory volunteers.

2. Develop weed watcher curriculum for schools, Master Gardeners, Master Woodland Managers, OSU Extension

The team did not discuss grant writing at all.

Inventory Team

Brachypodium Inventory Committee 1/15/2003		Atkinson, McCain, Messinger, Newhouse, Smith
Priority	Task	Steps	Target date	Contact

1	Assemble known sites/existing data		6/03	McCain
		GIS locations with available data to be assembled in Weedmapper (OSU Rangeland Resources-Doug Johnson, Marc Laliberte, Andrea Laliberte)	3/03	BRSY group members
		Circulate Weedmapper data recommendations for comments/additions/deletions	4/03	Inventory group
		Finalize data recommendations		Inventory group

	Identify critical information gaps from map	Prioritize areas for surveys-gaps between known sites, fringes, etc.	7/03	Inventory group, Modellers
		Develop strategy for collection of new data		Inventory group, Modellers
		*work through ODA, OSU Extension, OSU, timber company contacts, volunteers, WMA...		Inventory group, Ed/outreach group
		*coordinate with modellers to supply as much info as possible for their needs		Inventory group, Research group

	Extend ground inventory		ongoing

2	Remote sensing inventory	Check feasibility of mapping directly from aerial photos or from remote sensing analysis	5/03	Doug Johnson, Debbie Johnson
		Evaluate initial results/develop strategy if appropriate	7/03	Inventory group
		$?	2004?

Preliminary list of units that may have location information: Willamette NF, Umpqua NF, Rogue River NF, Eugene BLM, Salem BLM, Medford BLM, OSU (McDonald-Dunn Forest), Oregon Dept. of Agriculture, The Nature Conservancy, Army Corps of Engineers, Starker Forests, Weyerhaueser, Buford Park, Lane County, City of Corvallis/Salix Associates, Oregon Native Plant Society

Control and Research Team

Introductions, objectives of meeting, objectives of subcommittee

$ Group members (present on 1/15/03)

Bruce Kelpsas, UAP Timberland

Greg Fitzpatrick

Chuck Fairchild, Eugene BLM

Fred Pfund, Starker Forests, Inc.

Debbie Johnson, OSU College Forests

Tom Kaye, Institute for Applied Ecology

Alice Smith, Willamette National Forest

Diana Kimberling, OSU

$ Major objectives of meeting and subcommittee

< Define short, mid- and long-term goals and objectives.

< Compile information on existing treatment and control measures.

< Identify major research needs, with focus on top-priority (other research needs outlined in last meeting minutes, 11/19/02).

Available control measures:

$Herbicide (primarily glyphosate products, others under evaluation).

$Burning and mowing alone do not appear effective.

$Hand pulling only efficient at very small scales.

$Increase awareness of weed management specialists and others regarding this species.

Research needs (not necessarily in order of priority):

$Document effects on native vegetation

A. examine past studies?

B. Conduct an observational study

$Document impacts to endangered species, make a list of those potentially impacted

$Evaluate impacts in oak savannas, prairies, and woodlands; also riparian forests.

$Thorough inventory on private and public lands to delineate the extent of the problem.

A. Assemble existing information and map it.

B. conduct comprehensive landscape surveys and roadside surveys.

$Continue to identify and evaluate control methods

A. chemical

B. non-chemical

C. bio-control

$Evaluate impacts and interactions of BRSY on and with cattle and wildlife

A. examine forage value of BRSY

B. emphasis on areas west of the Cascades

$Biological interactions of BRSY with wildlife usage, e.g.,

A. Columbia white-tailed deer

B. other deer and elk

C. Voles/small mammals

D. invertebrates

E. herps

F. birds

$Document, evaluate, and model the ability of BRSY to spread and grow in new areas

A. explore risk of spread to areas east of the Cascades

$Examine changes in fire regimes induced by BRSY

A. look at any existing information

B. conduct a controlled experiment or other study

$Conduct a study to examine the effects of BRSY on forest regeneration and tree growth

A. tree seedling establishment, survival and growth

B. established tree growth

$Determine if we have more than one ecotype in Oregon (two are known from Europe, one in shade and one in sun that differ in hairiness).

$Basic biology

A. many questions, including life-history, longevity of plants, ability to spread vegetatively (?), maximum population growth rate, etc.

B. top priority: seed bank dynamics

studies underway or planned: effects of Waipuna on seeds in soil (IAE), long term (up to 4 yr) seed longevity in soil (TNC and IAE)

$Re-sample permanent plots on McDonald-Dunn Forest (OSU) to document spread of species in forests that have been cut since last sample (>10 yr ago).

$Document and model habitat specificity and environmental limits of BRSY.

A. Develop a risk assessment model to predict the spread of the species and identify highly-vulnerable regions or habitats.

$Examine any interactions between BRSY expansion and habitat disturbance (e.g., timber harvest), including importance of abundance of BRSY prior to disturbance.

Priority