|
Wildlife, Animals, and Plants
|
|
KUCHLER TYPE
KUCHLER TYPE: Northern cordgrass prairie
KUCHLER-TYPE-NUMBER :
K073
PHYSIOGNOMY :
Medium to tall, usually dense grassland occurring in the intertidal zone
of coastal waters [29].
OCCURRENCE :
Northern cordgrass prairie, as defined by Kuchler [29], occurs along the
Atlantic coast from Maine to northeastern Florida. The type is best
developed in the more northern parts of its occurrence; with decreasing
latitude it intergrades with southern cordgrass prairie although this
progression is interrupted by mangrove (Rhizophora spp. and Avicennia
spp.) and sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense) saltmarshes in Florida
[8,29,46,47,48].
STATES :
CT DE FL GA ME MD MA NH NJ NY RI SC VA
COMPILED BY AND DATE :
Janet Sullivan, June 1994
LAST REVISED BY AND DATE :
NO-ENTRY
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION :
Sullivan, Janet. 1994. Northern cordgrass prairie. In: Remainder of Citation
Kuchler Type Index
FEIS Home
KUCHLER TYPE DESCRIPTION
PHYSIOGRAPHY :
The surface of the northern cordgrass prairie is uniform and gently
sloping. It is usually elevated toward the inner and older portions of
the marsh. Marsh creeks form as natural breaks in alluvial deposits, or
as inward dissection of marine sediments. Natural levees can develop
along marsh creeks [15,32,36].
CLIMATE :
Northern cordgrass prairie occurs in a range of climates from hot
continental to subtropical [29,60].
SOILS :
Tidal saltmarsh soils are hydric, very poorly drained silts, mucks, and
peats. Peaty soils are more common along the northern Atlantic coast
than further south [45,48]. There are several types of peat formations,
each with distinctive characteristics. Generally, surface materials
consist of coarse, fibrous, yellowish-brown peat which has gradually
accumulated over black clays, mud flats, or loose sand [45]. Sands tend
to be deposited near the mouths of embayments; clays and silts are
deposited toward the head of tidal creeks and meanders [36]. Soil
salinity is variable depending on tidal inundation rate, rainfall, tidal
creeks and drainage slope, soil texture, vegetation, depth to water
table, and fresh water inflow [8].
VEGETATION :
Classification: The northern cordgrass prairie, as described by Kuchler
[29], appears to correspond to the grass-dominated vegetation zones of
tidal saltmarshes from Maine to northeastern Florida. The term northern
cordgrass prairie is not used in the literature; where this author is
confident that the community under discussion in the literature
corresponds exactly to that described by Kuchler, the term northern
cordgrass prairie will be employed; more general statements about
saltmarshes or specific statements about particular types of communities
not explicitly corresponding to northern cordgrass prairie will be
reported as described or used in the literature. Some of the
generalizations that can be made about northern cordgrass prairie apply
to or are based on southern cordgrass prairie, which is composed of
similar vegetation and develops under related (but not identical)
ecological conditions.
Chapman [8] recognized three subgroups of coastal marshes for the
eastern United States: the Bay of Fundy subgroup, the New England
subgroup, and the Coastal Plain subgroup, which includes marshes on the
Gulf coast. Northern cordgrass prairie probably corresponds to the New
England and Coastal Plain subgroups. Shaw and Fredine [45] described 20
wetland types, two of which (16: coastal salt meadows, and 18:
regularly flooded saltmarshes) appear to closely correspond to northern
cordgrass prairie, and two of which (15: coastal saltflats and 17:
irregularly flooded saltmarshes) contain some of the elements of the
northern cordgrass prairie. De la Cruz [15] described the differences
between Atlantic and Gulf coast marshes. These differences are largely
due to the differences in hydrology and dominant sedimentation
processes. Gulf coast saltmarshes are extremely flat, dependent on
alluvial sediments, less saline, and have less well defined vegetation
zones than Atlantic coast saltmarshes. Atlantic coast marshes are more
dependent on tidal action, develop more distinct vegetation zones, and
develop peatier soils than do Gulf coast saltmarshes [15].
The wetland classification scheme proposed by Cowardin and others [11]
has been in widespread use since its publication. Northern cordgrass
prairie corresponds most closely to estuarine persistent emergent
wetland which occurs in three tidal zones: irregularly exposed,
regularly flooded, and irregularly flooded. The irregularly flooded
zone is dominated by saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina patens), and/or
dwarf smooth cordgrass (S. alterniflora), and/or saltgrass (Distichlis
spicata), the three dominants listed by Kuchler for northern cordgrass
prairie [11]. In the literature, this zone is most often referred to as
high salt marsh (which describes its position relative to the tides).
The regularly flooded zone is dominated by tall smooth cordgrass, and is
generally referred to as low saltmarsh.
The high saltmarsh occurs in a complex mosaic with several other
communities such as salt shrub, low saltmarsh, and salt panne [43].
Salt shrub communities occur at the upland side of high saltmarsh; salt
pannes are depressions that occur within the high saltmarsh that are
extremely saline, and either unvegetated or sparsely vegetated.
Northern cordgrass prairie appears to encompass both high and low
saltmarsh, and vegetative elements of northern cordgrass prairie also
occur in other communities.
Vegetation: Tidal saltmarshes are dominated by only a few genera, and
many species occur in monotypic stands or patches [1]. High saltmarsh
consists of a mosaic of patches of single graminoid species [32,43].
The most common species in the high saltmarsh are saltmeadow cordgrass
and dwarf smooth cordgrass. The dwarf form grows 6 to 32 inches [17-80
cm] tall, and the tall form (which is found only in the low saltmarsh)
ranges up to 10 feet (3 m) in height [32]. There is an ongoing debate
as to whether the differences in height growth between tall and dwarf
smooth cordgrass are due to genetic or to environmental causes [32].
Also common are large areas of saltgrass and saltmeadow rush (Juncus
gerardi). Characteristic species of the upper slope of the high marsh,
where it grades into less saline environments are saltmeadow rush,
switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), common reed (Phragmites australis),
sea-lavender (Limonium carolinianum), and slender salt marsh aster
(Aster tenuifolius) [32,36,43]. Marine algas form dense mats on surface
sediments. Other plants, which occur in low numbers, can include
glassworts (Salicornia spp.), saltmarsh sand-spurry (Spergularia
marina), and lesser sea-blite (Suaeda maritima) [43]. On infrequently
inundated flats or pannes, strict halophytes such as perennial glasswort
(Salicornia virginica), sea-blite (Suaeda linearis), and saltgrass are
dominant [10]. Black rush (J. roemeriana) occurs from New Jersey south
to the Gulf coastal marshes, increasing in abundance with decreasing
latitude. Saltmeadow rush decreases in abundance with decreasing
latitude, apparently replaced by black rush [8].
New England and Coastal Plain saltmarshes are dominated by tall smooth
cordgrass in the lower marsh. In New England, saltmeadow cordgrass,
saltgrass, saltmeadow rush, and dwarf smooth cordgrass dominate the
upper marsh. There is a distinct boundary between low marsh and high
marsh at the elevation of mean high tide. The upper boundary of the
high marsh is determined by the elevation of exceptional high tide. On
the Coastal Plain, saltmeadow cordgrass, saltgrass, glassworts, and
black rush dominate the upper marsh [32,36,49].
WILDLIFE :
Atlantic coast saltmarshes are used for nesting by American black duck
(Anas rubripes), blue-winged teal (A. discors), laughing gull (Larus
atricilla), Forster's tern (Sterna forsteri), willet (Catoptrophorus
semipalmatus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), marsh wren
(Cistothorus palustris), eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna),
sharp-tailed sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus), and seaside sparrow (A.
maritimus). Other birds found in saltmarshes include ring-necked
pheasant (Phasianus colchicus), common snipe (Gallinago gallinago),
clapper rail (Rallus longirostris), and other rails (Rallus spp.).
Saltmarshes are important stopover areas for migrating snow goose (Chen
caerulescens), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), shorebirds, and
wading birds [32,43,47,48]. Wading birds including herons and egrets
(Ardeidae) and glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus) feed and nest in and
adjacent to tidal saltmarshes [49]. New Jersey saltmarshes are prime
wintering grounds for American black duck, snow goose, greater and
lesser scaup (Aythya marila and A. affinis), brant (Branta bernicla),
Canada goose (B. canadensis), and mallard (Anas platyrhychos). Northern
pintail (A. acuta) and canvasback (Aythya valisineria) overwinter in the
Hackensack Meadowlands [48,49].
Furbearing mammals inhabiting saltmarshes include muskrat (Ondatra
zibethicus) and nutria (Myocastor coypus), both of which are more
abundant in slightly brackish marshes than in more saline areas, and
masked shrew (Sorex cinereus) [36,46,48]. Mammals feeding in
saltmarshes but denning elsewhere include beaver (Castor canadensis),
red fox (Vulpes vulpes), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), mink
(Mustela vison), northern river otter (Lutra canadensis), raccoon
(Procyon lotor), long-tailed weasel (M. frenata), and skunks (Spilogale
and Mephitis spp.). White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and mule
deer (O. hemionus) feed in saltmarshes [45]. Rodents inhabiting high
saltmarsh in New England include meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus),
meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius), white-footed mouse (Peromyscus
leucopus), and house mouse (Mus musculus) [36].
Reptiles inhabiting saltmarshes include diamond-backed terrapin
(Malaclemys terrapin) [48] and American alligator (Alligator
mississippiensis) [45].
Invertebrates include fiddler crabs, northern horse mussel, other
mussels, coffee-bean snail, oysters, and clams [2,43]. Insects include
saltmarsh mosquitoes and greenhead flies [43].
ECOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS :
Ecosystem Development and Succession: Tidal marsh formations are
essentially dynamic; there is a progression from bare sand or mud flat
through a range of plant communities to the upper edge of the marsh
where dryland communities develop [9]. Tidal marshes typically develop
behind barrier islands or beaches or along tidal rivers [48]. Where
water is slowed and sediments drop out, sand- and mudflats are created.
Plants (usually smooth cordgrass) colonize these flats; the presence of
the plants further slows the water, and the plants trap and hold
sediments, creating a slow rise in elevation [2,33,48]. This slow rise
in elevation leads to succession to more upland community compositions
[32]. Marshes grow both in a seaward direction due to sedimentation,
and landward when rising sea level increases salinity and inundation in
upland areas [36].
The long-term stability of a saltmarsh is determined by the relative
rates of sedimentation and coastal submersion [32]. In many areas salt
marshes are gradually advancing into low-lying uplands or into nontidal
wetlands; this has been largely attributed to the global rise in sea
level. Rising sea level can result in a loss of saltmarsh acreage
where marshes become permanently flooded [48]. In the northeastern
United States, marsh accretion rates are high enough to balance current
rates of sea level rise, and marshes are in a relatively stable
condition [36].
On the southern coasts (particularly in the Carolinas and Georgia), the
local variety of saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina patens var. monogyna)
grows up through a layer of sand deposited by storm waves, quickly
stabilizing overwash deposits and preventing sand from being piled into
dunes. This creates barrier profiles that are low and flat. The
northern variety of saltmeadow cordgrass (S. p. var. patens), which
occurs north from New Jersey, is killed by sand deposition which allows
sand surfaces to be piled into dunes. The result is a higher, more
irregular profile in the northern barriers [25].
Hydrology: Ocean tides are the dominant hydrologic feature of northern
cordgrass prairie. On the Atlantic coast, tides are semidiurnal, with
two high tides and two low tides per day [15,48]. Estuarine wetlands
are influenced by both tides and inland hydrology. These occur where a
river meets the ocean and encompass a range of salinities, from fresh to
brackish to saline [8,32,48].
Structure: Vegetation distribution is determined by the complex
interaction of many factors that include tides, elevation (a matter of
inches), salinity, freshwater influx, sedimentation rates, current
velocity and direction, and soil fertility [25,32,36]. The most seaward
terrestrial plant population is usually tall smooth cordgrass [25]. In
Connecticut, tall smooth cordgrass is a fairly accurate indicator of the
landward extent of mean high tide. Diversity of plant species increases
in a landward direction [48]. Dwarf smooth cordgrass forms extensive
stands just above the low marsh. Within these stands are salt pannes:
shallow depressions of high salinity that are sparsely vegetated or
occasionally colonized by dwarf smooth cordgrass, glassworts, and marsh
fleabane (Pluchea odorata) [43,48]. Above the dwarf smooth cordgrass
zone, common reed, saltmeadow cordgrass, and saltgrass predominate.
Common reed forms pure or mixed stands, saltmeadow cordgrass forms
nearly pure stands, and saltgrass is commonly intermixed with other
species. At slightly higher elevations, saltmeadow rush bands form,
often mixed with marsh-elder (Iva frutescens). At the upland edge of
the northern cordgrass prairie occur switchgrass, common reed, sea
myrtle (Baccharis halimifolia), marsh-elder, wax myrtle (Myrica
cerifera), and eastern red-cedar (Juniperus virginiana) [48].
In brackish marshes smooth cordgrass, saltmeadow cordgrass,
narrow-leaved cattail (Typha angustifolia), big cordgrass (Spartina
cynosuroides), common reed, and rose mallow are major dominance types.
Smooth cordgrass and saltmeadow cordgrass are often intermixed with
patches of big cordgrass and common reed. Big cordgrass becomes more
important with decreasing salinity, and where marsh waters are nearly
fresh marshes are dominated by big cordgrass and freshwater species
[48]. Literature on the vegetation structure of tidal salt marshes has
been reviewed by Adams [1], Mitsch and Gosselink [32], Niering and
Warren [35], Nixon [26], and Redfield [40].
Productivity: Tidal salt marshes are highly productive ecosystems. A
large portion of this productivity is attributed to halophytic grasses;
however, most of the annual primary productivity of a saltmarsh is
attributed to phytoplankton and algae [42]. Net primary productivity
has been estimated/calculated for a number of marsh species at a number
of locations; some of the abovementioned reviews include tables of
productivity by species. A bibliography of coastal marsh productivity
is available [53]. Saltmarsh productivity is exported to other systems
(primarily marine and estuarine) in the form of detritus. Numerous
detritus consumers form the bases of food webs that depend on tidal
saltmarsh productivity [2].
Plant-Animal Interactions: Consumers living in tidal saltmarshes are
either grazers or alga-detritus feeders. Few comprehensive studies of
the animals, particularly invertebrates, have been conducted in
saltmarshes [32]. Some interesting relationships have been reported,
however. Through their burrowing activities, fiddler crabs increase
soil drainage, decomposition of belowground debris, and the oxygen
content of the soil, all of which benefit smooth cordgrass. Ribbed
mussels attach to smooth cordgrass in the low salt marsh and buffer it
from physical disturbance. They also deposit nitrogen-rich feces at the
growing bases of smooth cordgrass plants [6].
KUCHLER TYPE VALUE AND USE
KUCHLER TYPE: Northern cordgrass prairie
FORESTRY VALUES :
NO-ENTRY
RANGE VALUES :
Tidal marshes have been diked (to reduce water flow) for development of
grazing lands [39]. Grazing is more important on cordgrass prairie on
the Gulf coast than on the Atlantic coast [46]. Aboveground plant
productivity has been reported for saltmeadow cordgrass, smooth
cordgrass, saltgrass, and black rush [32].
WILDLIFE VALUES :
Productivity: The net primary productivity of tidal saltmarshes is the
highest of any of the world's ecosystems [33]. The high productivity of
tidal saltmarshes is important to numerous species of wildlife. Some
species are completely dependent on the marsh, and some use marshes only
for breeding, feeding, nesting, rearing of young, and/or resting during
migration. Tidal saltmarshes are important producers of shrimp, crabs,
oysters, and clams. At least 40 species of fish spawn in estuaries, and
at least 136 species use them as nursery grounds. Northern cordgrass
prairie is important year-round bird habitat, and provides breeding
grounds, overwintering areas, and feeding grounds for many species of
migratory waterfowl and other birds [13,47,48,32]. Specific
relationships of animals and salt marsh plants are discussed
[6,13,32,36,40,44].
Aquaculture of oysters, shrimp, and fish has been practiced in
saltmarshes elsewhere in the world; research on these uses for
saltmarshes in the eastern United States is underway [39].
OTHER VALUES :
Tidal saltmarshes maintain water quality: They remove and retain
nutrients from water, transform some chemical and organic wastes, and
reduce water sediment loads. Tidal saltmarshes are considered important
shoreline stabilizers due to the wave dampening effect. A fringe of
saltmarsh grasses as narrow as 8 feet (2.4 m) can reduce wave energy by
over 50 percent [48]. Saltmarsh grasses reduce erosion by forming dense
mats of roots and rhizomes in the substrate. Along the Atlantic coast,
planting of smooth cordgrass has been particularly effective in reducing
shoreline erosion [32,48]. Tidal saltmarshes are valued for recreation
and esthetics as well, although this was not always the case. Interest
in saltmarshes was primarily a by-product of the more general interest
in ecosystems that arose in the 1960's [32,45,48].
Extensive areas of northern cordgrass prairie have been diked to reduce
water flow for salt hay (largely saltmeadow cordgrass) production [49].
Salt hay is primarily used for animal bedding, mulching, and topping
(dryland) haystacks to keep out moisture. It is not used much for
animal feed [36]. Marsh grasses have been used for roof thatch [39].
The large capacity of saltmarshes for absorbing nutrients has led to the
use of marshes as systems for wastewater processing. Interest in this
use has even led to the construction of artificial marshes for the
primary purpose of wastewater treatment [30,39,54]. Research on the
consequences of this use is ongoing [54].
MANAGEMENT CONCERNS :
Management of tidal marshes has included drastic changes in physiography
and hydrology. Marshes have been drained and filled for a variety of
purposes including agriculture, mosquito control, industrial and
residential development, and transportation (including construction of
channels for access to oil and gas fields) [7,42]. Many tidal
saltmarshes are protected by legislation or belong to state or national
preserves [47].
In the mid 1970's, it was estimated that estuarine-emergent wetlands
(tidal saltmarshes) covered 3.9 million acres in the conterminous United
States, which is probably less than 46 percent of the total acreage
before European settlement [45,47]. Concern over the destruction of
thousands of acres of tidal saltmarshes led to the institution of a
number of wetlands protection laws, and has founded (and funded) much
research on tidal salt marsh ecology. Tidal saltmarshes, once viewed as
wasteland or mosquito breeding grounds, are now more widely recognized
for their positive values and are the focus of many conservation
activities [47].
Construction of ditches for mosquito control lowers the water table in
saltmarshes and results in invasion of lower marshes by high marsh
plants, and a substantial reduction in the numbers of invertebrates
[42]. Diking and draining of tidal saltmarshes for grazing development
is detrimental to soils, net primary productivity, and macroinvertebrate
populations. It results in changes in plant successional trends and
reduces detritus production [41]. In Connecticut, a cordgrass-dominated
marsh was tidally restricted in 1946 and consequently converted mostly
to narrow-leaved cattail. With the reintroduction of tidal flooding in
1978, much of the marsh is now dominated by smooth cordgrass [4]. In
many areas, due to drainage and channelization projects, common reed has
displaced tall smooth cordgrass from low marshes [48].
The sedge wren (Cistothorus platensis) and savannah sparrow (Passerculus
sandwichensis), both of which are listed as threatened in New Jersey, are
dependent on brackish marshes [49].
Research to explore tidal saltmarsh development using dredging spoils is
underway. In Georgia, seven marsh plant species were planted on dredged
material at three elevations to determine the planting guidelines [27].
Recommendations for management of tidal saltmarshes, including wetlands
creation and restoration, have been discussed and described in the
literature [19,30,39,42,47,59].
KUCHLER TYPE FIRE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
KUCHLER TYPE: Northern cordgrass prairie
FUELS, FLAMMABILITY, AND FIRE OCCURRENCE :
Northern cordgrass prairie is an herbaceous community in which standing
or moving water is present most of the year, and usually at least part
of each day. The chance of fire in any given year is low due to
moisture conditions [14,26]. However, severe drought causing a drop in
the water table can produce conditions suitable for fire [26]. Marshes
in general have a modal fire-free interval on the order of 30 to 100
years, with a minimum fire-free interval of approximately 5 years. This
is the approximate amount of time needed for vegetation to achieve high
enough density to carry fire. In Mississippi, a saltmarsh dominated by
rushes required several-year intervals for sufficient fuel buildup to
support uniform combustion across the marsh [16]. Black rush-dominated
communities are resistant to fire more often than every 3 to 4 years due
to lack of fuels [22].
Some marshes have no history of fire [26]. Naturally caused fires are
generally rare in northern cordgrass prairie [50]. In Florida, salt
marshes (included here are sawgrass marshes, Kuchler type K092) readily
burn. When adequate fuel protrudes above the water surface and weather
conditions are conducive to fire spread, fires are propagated whether
there is aboveground water or not. Most Florida saltmarsh fires are
thought to be lightning caused, but some are attributed to humans (arson
or accident) [8]. Cases of spontaneous combustion during severe
droughts [62] and lightning-ignited fires [31] have been reported.
FIRE EFFECTS ON SITE :
Marsh fires change the physico-chemical properties of soils by oxidizing
the standing vegetative cover, and, depending on soil moisture, by
igniting organic matter on the marsh floor and immediately below the
surface [18]. The removal of shading vegetative cover results in
increased temperatures at the marsh surface [22,23,24]. The effects of
heat on the subsurface are more pronounced during ebb tides,
particularly during tidal regimes that result in only infrequent
flooding (as occurs in winter along the Gulf coast) [24].
Nitrogen, an essential nutrient often limiting to plant growth in marsh
soils, is volatilized by fire [18], but marsh fires also release
nutrients (phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, potassium, and chloride ions)
via ash deposition [24]. Amounts of these nutrients were higher in
shallow soil samples of burned saltmeadow cordgrass communities than
those from unburned communities [14]. The length of time this pulse of
nutrients affects the marsh depends on local hydrology and weather.
There is a gradual decrease in ionic concentrations in Louisiana marsh
soils after fire, attributed to the effects of tidal flushing, rainfall,
and plant uptake of ions [24]. Soil pH increased immediately following
a prescribed fire in a saltmeadow cordgrass-saltgrass community, but in
49 days had declined to a point slightly lower than that prior to the
fire [23]. Hoffpauir [24] reported that soil acidity decreases as a
result of ash deposits; however, Davison and Bratton [14] reported no
difference in soil pH between burned and unburned saltmeadow cordgrass
communities. When marsh fires consume litter, accretion of sediments
may be slowed. Severe fire that consumes marsh peats may lead to
reversion of the marsh to more hydric systems [38].
It has been suggested that removing marsh litter by burning may reduce
levels of toxic allelochemicals in marsh soils [55].
Black rush produces large amounts of belowground biomass which serves to
consolidate marsh surfaces. Replacement of black rush by other species
due to prescribed fires can result in unconsolidated marsh surfaces with
numerous potholes [22].
FIRE EFFECTS ON VEGETATION :
The effect of fire on marsh vegetation depends on a number of factors
including community composition, season of burning, water level, and
postfire rainfall and hydrology. Marsh species are killed by hot,
dry-season fires due to destruction of shallow roots. Less intense
fires remove aboveground material only; many marsh species sprout
vigorously from rhizomes and roots after top-kill [26]. According to
Trabaud [50] most marsh species are, in a sense, preadapted to survive
top-kill by fire; although their ability to reproduce by rhizomes has
not developed in response to fire, when exposed to fire they are readily
able to survive by sprouting [50].
In Georgia, the vegetation of a burned saltmarsh attained 100 percent
cover in the first postfire year [14]. Also in Georgia, smooth
cordgrass marshes prescribed burned in March were characterized by
regrowth consisting of smaller plants with a higher stem density than on
unburned plots [51]. In a Mississippi study to quantify nutrient
mobilization following fire, it was reported that vegetation growth (on
both black rush-dominated plots and big cordgrass-dominated plots) was
stimulated by fire [18].
Cordgrass (Spartina spp.) roots are nearer the surface than those of
bulrushes (Scirpus spp.). Fires burning in heavy fuels kill more
cordgrass roots than bulrush roots and may result in a reversal of
dominance between saltmeadow cordgrass and Olney threesquare (S.
olneyi) or saltmarsh bulrush (S. robustus). Typically, bulrushes sprout
after fire within about 1 week; saltmeadow cordgrass may take 2 weeks or
more to sprout. The dominance reversal is temporary, however. In 2 or
3 years saltmeadow cordgrass, which has a higher density potential,
regains dominance over bulrushes. By causing standing water, rainfall
after fire can reduce or eliminate regrowth, and will either encourage
cockspurs (Echinochloa spp.) and spikerushes (Eleocharis spp.), or can
result in a mud flat devoid of vegetation [24].
Winter fires kill the aboveground portions of black rush, the culms of
which retain living tissue over the winter (other grasses are completely
dormant aboveground, and therefore do not lose living tissue during
winter fires). Other species grow faster than black rush after fire and
may therefore replace it. In big cordgrass communities, prescribed fire
favors other species at the expense of big cordgrass because of the slow
initial growth rate of big cordgrass after fire and the relatively
greater increases in net primary productivity of other species after
fire (i.e., switchgrass) [22].
Prescribed fire in brackish marshes in Maryland where nutria are present
appeared to retard deterioration of marsh vegetation. Vegetation
density on control plots decreased between 1974 and 1979; vegetation
density on burned plots decreased also, but at a slower rate.
Vegetation on these plots consisted of Olney threesquare, common reed,
and switchgrass, with some big cordgrass, saltgrass, common spikerush
(Eleocharis palustris), and narrow-leaved cattail [58].
In Mississippi, the elemental composition (nitrogen, phosphorus,
potassium, calcium, and magnesium) of new growth on burned stands of
black rush or smooth cordgrass was generally higher (on a grams/acre
basis) than on unburned stands [18]. Prescribed fire in these stands
resulted in an increase in the net primary productivity of the aerial
portions of the marsh plants [22].
Periodic fire prevents the accumulation of organic matter and impedes
the elevation of the marsh and consequent succession to upland
communities [12].
FIRE EFFECTS ON RESOURCE MANAGEMENT :
Little is known of the response of wildlife to marsh fires and postfire
succession. Observations that have been made include: Marsh wrens
seldom nest in marshes the first postfire year; mud snails are more
prevalent the year following a fire; and mottled ducks (Anas fulvigula)
prefer to nest in rush (Juncus spp.) marshes 3 to 4 years after a fire
[22].
Prescribed fire is a common game management practice in saltmarshes on
the Gulf coast, particularly in Louisiana and Mississippi where large
tracts are often winter burned to maintain productive disclimax genera
such as Scirpus and Eleocharis [18]. Management of some Atlantic coast
saltmarshes for wildlife has also included prescribed fire [34].
Periodic burning of the high marsh areas along the north-central Gulf
coast increases annual primary productivity due to mulch removal and
increased insolation [16]. Vogl [56] stated that marsh fires are useful
in sustaining desirable rhizomatous species such as cattails (Typha
spp.), sedges (Cyperaceae), and rushes by destroying shallow-rooted
competitors (not specified) [56].
Lynch [31] reported that all species of geese seek out and consume new
growth of cordgrasses and saltgrass on burned Louisiana saltmarshes.
Cover burns have been used to attract geese to hunting areas, and to
facitilate hunter access [23,24].
Furbearers (particularly muskrat and nutria) are thought to prefer
certain bulrushes, which increase in abundance following fire [22].
The export of detrital particles into the estuary and near-coastal
marine systems is vital to secondary estuarine productivity. The impact
of litter removal by periodic burning on nutrient export from tidal
marshes is not well known [18]. Unburned litter may be moved by tides
into high areas or bays after fire [22].
FIRE USE CONSIDERATIONS :
The typical marsh fire burns at a rate of 3 inches forward per minute
for every 1 mile per hour wind speed. This would translate, for
example, to about 1 foot per minute with a wind velocity of 4 miles per
hour [24]. Fire intensity and propagation rate are low enough that
furbearing animals and young or wounded waterfowl usually escape marsh
fires without injury or with only minor singeing of the pelage or
feathers [23,24].
If a fire is set in a marsh where the water level is at the soil level
or higher, a vapor zone develops above the wet ground or water level to
a height of about 3 inches. The vapor or steam appears to protect the
exposed grass stems [24].
FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS :
Prescribed fires in Maryland brackish marshes favor Olney threesquare
over saltmeadow cordgrass [58]. The use of prescribed fire on tidal
marshes has been much more prevalent on the Gulf coast than on the
Atlantic coast. Fires are used to make food available to waterfowl by
burning off "rough" and to encourage the growth of high-grade muskrat
and waterfowl food plants at the expense of less valuable species (black
rush is less desirable, for example). New postfire growth is more
succulent than unburned vegetation and provides good grazing for geese
in Olney threesquare and cattail meadows. Fire is also used to thin
dense cover on small marsh islands which harbor predators and to thin
cover to allow hunter access to marshes [46].
There are three types of fire used in salt marsh management: cover
burns, root burns, and peat fires [31]. Cover burns are usually
conducted in winter (from October 15 to March 1) when the marsh
vegetation is dormant but the marsh surfaces are wet. Vegetative
material above the surface is consumed by fire, but roots and rhizomes
are undamaged. Root burns and peat fires are conducted when marsh
surfaces are dry. Root burns are hot fires which develop in a
relatively dry marsh and alter the composition of the vegetation. Peat
fires, the most severe of the three, burn holes in the marsh floor thus
creating additional areas of open water [31]. In marshes where nesting
occurs, fire should only be used where cover is too dense for nesting
[46].
Hackney and de la Cruz [22] recommended restraint in the use of fire as
a management tool in saltmarshes. By this they did not mean that fire
should be excluded; instead, they recommended a plan of prescribed fire
that results in a mosaic of differently aged postfire communities, and
that does not burn an entire marsh in one season [22].
REHABILITATION OF SITES FOLLOWING WILDFIRE :
NO-ENTRY
REFERENCES
KUCHLER TYPE: Northern cordgrass prairie
REFERENCES :
1. Adams, David A. 1963. Factors influencing vascular plant zonation in
North Carolina salt marshes. Ecology. 44(3): 445-456. [23046]
2. Amos, William H.; Amos, Stephen H. 1985. Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Borzoi Books. 670 p. [22896]
3. Au, Shu-fun. 1974. Vegetation and ecological processes on Shackleford
Bank, North Carolina. Scientific Monograph Series No 6: NPS 113.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service.
86 p. [16101]
4. Barrett, Nels E.; Niering, William A. 1993. Tidal marsh restoration:
trends in vegetation change using a geographical information system
(GIS). Restoration Ecology. 1(1): 18-28. [20797]
5. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's
associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p.
[434]
6. Bertness, M. 1992. The ecology of a New England salt marsh. Restoration
& Management Notes. 10(2): 194. [Abstract]. [20167]
7. Chabreck, Robert H. 1976. Management of wetlands for wildlife habitat
improvement. In: Wiley, Martin, ed. Volume I. Uses, stresses, and
adaptation to the estuary. Estuarine Processes. New York: Academic
Press: 226-233. [22914]
8. Chapman, V. J. 1960. Salt marshes and salt deserts of the world. Plant
Science Monographs. London: Leonard Hill [Books] Limited. 392 p.
[22895]
9. Chapman, V. J. 1977. Chapter 1. Introduction. In: Chapman, V. J, ed. Wet
coastal ecosystems. Ecosystems of the World 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier
Scientific Publishing Company: 1-27. [22839]
10. Christensen, Norman L. 1988. Vegetation of the southeastern Coastal
Plain. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Billings, William Dwight, eds. North
American terrestrial vegetation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press:
317-363. [17414]
11. Cowardin, Lewis M.; Carter, Virginia; Golet, Francis C.; LaRoe, Edward
T. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United
States. FWS/OBS-79/31. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service. 103 p. [3482]
12. Daiber, Franklin C. 1974. Salt marsh plants and future coastal salt
marshes in relation to animals. In: Reimold, Robert J.; Queen, William
H., eds. Ecology of halophytes. New York: Academic Press, Inc: 475-510.
[22843]
13. Daiber, F. C. 1982. Animals of the salt marsh. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company. 422 p. [22897]
14. Davison, Kathryn L.; Bratton, Susan P. 1988. Vegetation response and
regrowth after fire on Cumberland Island National Seashore, Georgia.
Castanea. 53(1): 47-65. [4483]
15. De La Cruz, Armando A. 1981. Differences between south Atlantic and Gulf
Coast marshes. In: Carey, R. C.; Markovits, P. S.; Kirkwood, J. B., eds.
Proceedings, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service workshop on coastal
ecosystems of the southeastern United States; [Date of conference
unknown]; [Location of conference unknown]. FWS/OBS-80/59. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office
of Biological Services: 10-20. [22912]
16. de la Cruz, Armando A.; Hackney, Courtney T. 1980. The effects of winter
fire and harvest on the vegetational structure and primary productivity
of two tidal marsh communities in Mississippi. (Final Report--3 year
study). MASGP-80-013. Ocean Springs, MS: Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
Consortium, Gulf Coast Research Laboratory. 111 p. [23363]
17. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and
Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]
18. Faulkner, Samuel P.; de la Cruz, Armando A. 1982. Nutrient mobilization
following winter fires in an irregularly flooded marsh. Journal of
Environmental Quality. 11(1): 129-133. [16155]
19. Garbisch, Edgar W., Jr. 1978. Wetland rehabilitation. In: National
wetland protection symposium: Proceedings; 1977 June 6-8; Reston, VA.
FWS/OBS-78/97. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service: 218-219. [22911]
20. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others].
1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range
ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]
21. Gosselink, James G. 1984. The ecology of delta marshes of coastal
Louisiana: a community profile. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish
and Wildlife Service. Office of Biological Services. FWS/OBS-84/109. 134
pp. [22898]
22. Hackney, Courtney T.; de la Cruz, Armando A. 1981. Effects of fire on
brackish marsh communities: managememt implications. Wetlands. 1: 75-86.
[14534]
23. Hoffpauir, Clark M. 1961. Methods of measuring and determining the
effects of marsh fires. Proceedings, Annual Conference of Southeastern
Association of Game and Fish Commissioners. [Volume unknown]: 142-161.
[19416]
24. Hoffpauier, Clark M. 1968. Burning for coastal marsh management. In:
Newsom, John D., ed. Proceedings of the marsh and estuary management
symposium; 1967; Baton Rouge, LA. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State
University: 134-139. [15274]
25. Johnson, Ann F.; Barbour, Michael G. 1990. Dunes and maritime forests.
In: Myers, Ronald L.; Ewel, John J., eds. Ecosystems of Florida.
Orlando, FL: University of Central Florida Press: 430-480. [17394]
26. Keeley, Jon E. 1981. Reproductive cycles and fire regimes. In: Mooney,
H. A.; Bonnicksen, T. M.; Christensen, N. L.; [and others], technical
coordinators. Fire regimes and ecosystem properties: Proceedings of the
conference; 1978 December 11-15; Honolulu, HI. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-26.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 231-277.
[4395]
27. Kirby, Conrad J. 1978. Wetland development, an alternative. In: National
wetland protection symposium: Proceedings; 1977 June 6-8; Reston, VA.
FWS/OBS-78/97. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services.: 139-142. [22908]
28. Kraeuter, John N.; Wolf, Paul L. 1974. The relationship of marine
macroinvertebrates to salt marsh plants. In: Reimold, Robert J.; Queen,
William H, eds. Ecology of halophytes. New York: Academic Press Inc.:
449-462. [22899]
29. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation
of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York:
American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384]
30. Kusler, Jon A.; Kentula, Mary E., eds. 1990. Wetland creation and
restoration: The status of the science. Washington, DC: Island Press.
594 p. [22900]
31. Lynch, John J. 1941. The place of burning in management of the Gulf
Coast wildlife refuges. Journal of Wildlife Management. 5(4): 454-457.
[14640]
32. Mitsch, William J.; Gosselink, James G. 1986. Wetlands. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Co. 539 p. [22913]
33. Montague, Clay L.; Wiegert, Richard G. 1990. Salt marshes. In: Myers,
Ronald L.; Ewel, John J., eds. Ecosystems of Florida. Orlando, FL:
University of Central Florida Press: 481-516. [17395]
34. Myers, Kent E. 1956. Management of needlerush marsh at the
Chassahowitzka Refuge. Proceedings Annual Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Game
and Fish Comm. 9: 175-177. [17807]
35. Niering, William A.; Warren, R. Scott. 1980. Vegetation patterns and
processes in New England salt marshes. Bioscience. 30: 301-307. [25239]
36. Nixon, Scott W. 1982. The ecology of New England high salt marshes: a
community profile. FWS/OBS-81/55. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. 70
p. [22901]
37. Penfound, William T. 1952. Southern swamps and marshes. The Botanical
Review. 18: 413-446. [11477]
38. Penfound, W. T.; Hathaway, Edward S. 1938. Plant communities in the
marshlands of southeastern Louisiana. Ecological Monographs. 8(1): 3-56.
[15089]
39. Queen, William H. 1977. Chapter 17. Human uses of salt marshes. In:
Chapman, V. J., ed. Wet coastal ecosystems. Ecosystems of the world 1.
Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company: 363-368. [22841]
40. Redfield, Alfred C. 1972. Development of a New England salt marsh.
Ecological Monographs. 42(2): 201-237. [23047]
41. Reimold, Robert J. 1976. Grazing in wetland meadows. In: Wiley, Martin,
ed. Volume I. Uses, stresses, and adaptation to the estuary. Estuarine
Processes. New York: Academic Press: 219-225. [22915]
42. Reimold, Robert J. 1977. Mangals and salt marshes of eastern United
States. In: Chapman, V. J., ed. Wet coastal ecosystems. Ecosystems of
the World: Vol. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company:
157-166. [22840]
43. Reschke, Carol. 1990. Ecological communities of New York State. Latham,
NY: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, New York
Natural Heritage Program. 96 p. [21441]
44. Shanholtzer, G. Frederick. 1974. Relationship of vertebrates to salt
marsh plants. In: Reimold, Robert J.; Queen, William H., eds. Ecology of
Halophytes. New York: Academic Press, Inc.: 463-474. [22916]
45. Shaw, Samuel P.; Fredine, C. Gordon. 1956. Wetlands of the United
States: their extent and their value to waterfowl and other wildlife.
FWS Circular 39. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish
and Wildlife Service. [Pages unknown]. [22910]
46. Smith, Robert H. 1942. Management of salt marshes on the Atlantic Coast
of the United States. Transactions, 7th North American Wildlife
Conference. 7: 272-277. [14505]
47. Tiner, Ralph W., Jr. 1984. Wetlands of the United States. In: National
wetlands inventory. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service: [pages unknown]. [22909]
48. Tiner, Ralph W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. In: National wetlands
inventory. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service; Dover, DE: Delaware Department of Natural Resources
and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. 77 p. [Cooperative
publication]. [22906]
49. Tiner, Ralph W., Jr.. 1985. Wetlands of New Jersey. In: National
wetlands inventory. Newton Corner, MA: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service. 117 p. [22907]
50. Trabaud, L. 1987. Fire and survival traits of plants. In: Trabaud, L.,
ed. Role of fire in ecological systems. Hague, The Netherlands: SPB
Academic Publishers: 65-89. [16411]
51. Turner, Monica Goigel. 1988. Multiple disturbances in a Spartina
alterniflora salt marsh: are they additive?. Bulletin of the Torrey
Botanical Club. 15(3): 196-202. [25240]
52. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants
of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. [23104]
53. Gulf South Research Institute. 1977. Coastal marsh productivity: A
bibliography. FWS/OBS-77/3. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services.
[Pages unknown]. [22917]
54. Valiela, Ivan; Vince, Susan; Teal, John M. 1976. Assimilation of sewage
by wetlands. In: Wiley, Martin, ed. Volume I. Uses, stresses, and
adaptation to the estuary. Estuarine Processes. New York: Academic
Press, Inc.: 234-253. [22918]
55. Vogl, Richard J. 1973. Effects of fire on the plants and animals of a
Florida wetland. American Midland Naturalist. 89: 334-347. [14580]
56. Vogl, Richard J. 1974. Effects of fire on grasslands. In: Kozlowski, T.
T.; Ahlgren, C. E., eds. Fire and ecosystems. New York: Academic Press:
139-194. [15401]
57. Werner, Harold W. 1977. Draft manuscript: salt marsh ecology. [Place of
publication unknown]: U.S Department of the Interior, National Park
Service. 21 p. [25241]
58. Willner, Gale R.; Chapman, Joseph A.; Pursley, Duane. 1979.
Reproduction, physiological responses, food habits, and abundance of
nutria on Maryland marshes. Wildlife Monographs No. 65. Washington, DC:
The Wildlife Society. 43 p. [18121]
59. Woodhouse, W. W., Jr.; Knutson, Paul L. 1982. Chapter 2. In: Lewis, Roy
R., III, ed. Creation and restoration of coastal plant communities. Boca
Raton, FL: CRC Press, Inc: 45-70. [22842]
60. Teal, John; Teal, Mildred. 1969. Life and death of the salt marsh.
Boston, MA: Little, Brown. 278 p. [15106]
61. Wade, Dale; Ewel, John; Hofstetter, Ronald. 1980. Fire in South Florida
ecosystems. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-17. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. 125
p. [10362]
62. Viosca, Percy, Jr. 1931. Spontaneous combustion in the marshes of
southern Louisiana. Ecology. 12(2): 439-443. [14582]
Index
FEIS Home Page
Related categories for Kuchler Type: Northern cordgrass prairie
|
 |
