Study

An assessment of urban lakeshore restorations in Minnesota

  • Published source details Vanderbosch D.A. & Galatowitsch S.M. (2010) An assessment of urban lakeshore restorations in Minnesota. Ecological Restoration, 28, 71-80

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use fences or barriers to protect freshwater wetlands planted with non-woody plants

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Introduce seeds of non-woody plants: freshwater wetlands

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Directly plant non-woody plants: freshwater wetlands

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Use fences or barriers to protect freshwater wetlands planted with non-woody plants

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2005–2006 of 22 lakeshore restoration sites in Minnesota, USA (Vanderbosch & Galatowitsch 2010) reported that protecting planted lakeshores with fences or wave breaks affected the plant community composition 1–6 years later. Data were reported as graphical analyses and statistical significance was not assessed. In the seasonally flooded zone, protected sites developed communities of native perennial species such as Canadian reedgrass Calamagrostis canadensis and swamp milkweed Asclepias incarnata. Exposed sites were sparsely vegetated by annuals and weedy perennials. In the permanently flooded zone, protected sites generally developed emergent vegetation whilst exposed sites were dominated by submerged and floating vegetation. In two of five sites protected with wave breaks, all planted vegetation died. Methods: In summer 2005 and spring 2006, plant species and their cover were surveyed in 22 urban lakeshore restoration projects. Native vegetation (mostly emergent wetland herbs) had been planted or sown between 1999 and 2004. Protection involved onshore fences, offshore fences and/or wave breaks. Some fences completely enclosed sites and some partially enclosed sites. In eight sites, protection was only in place for the first growing season after planting.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Introduce seeds of non-woody plants: freshwater wetlands

    A replicated study in 2005–2006 of 22 lakeshore restoration sites in Minnesota, USA (Vanderbosch & Galatowitsch 2010) reported that 17–40% of sown/planted species reliably established across multiple sites, and that no planted/sown species established in some individual sites. In the seasonally flooded zone, only 22 of 128 sown/planted species reliably established (survived in >75% of sites where planted, or ≥25% cover in ≥1 site). Fifty-six species failed to establish at any site. However, some sown/planted species established at 100% of sites. In the permanently flooded zone, 10 of 25 sown/planted species reliably established. Six species failed to establish at any site. Sown/planted species completely failed to establish at 27% of sites. Methods: In summer 2005 and spring 2006, plant species and their cover were surveyed in 22 urban lakeshore restoration projects. Native plants had been introduced between 1999 and 2004. Species lists were obtained from project reports or interviews with staff. Almost all introduced plants were emergent herbs, and most (but not all) were wetland species. Some plants were sown and some were directly planted (as plugs or on pre-vegetated coconut-fibre mats). The study does not distinguish between the effects of sowing and planting. Most sites were protected with fences and/or wave breaks, at least for the first growing season after sowing/planting.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  3. Directly plant non-woody plants: freshwater wetlands

    A replicated study in 2005–2006 of 22 lakeshore restoration sites in Minnesota, USA (Vanderbosch & Galatowitsch 2010) reported that 17–40% of planted/sown species reliably established across multiple sites, and that no planted/sown species established in some individual sites. In the seasonally flooded zone, only 22 of 128 planted/sown species reliably established (survived in >75% of sites where planted, or ≥25% cover in ≥1 site). Fifty-six species failed to establish at any site. However, some planted/sown species established at 100% of sites. In the permanently flooded zone, 10 of 25 planted/sown species reliably established. Six species failed to establish at any site. Planted/sown species completely failed to establish at 27% of sites. Methods: In summer 2005 and spring 2006, plant species and their cover were surveyed in 22 urban lakeshore restoration projects. Native plants had been introduced between 1999 and 2004. Species lists were obtained from project reports or interviews with staff. Almost all introduced plants were emergent herbs, and most (but not all) were wetland species. Some plants were directly planted (as plugs or on pre-vegetated coconut-fibre mats) and some were sown. The study does not distinguish between the effects of planting and sowing. Most sites were protected with fences and/or wave breaks, at least for the first growing season after planting/sowing.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust