The Evolution of NWNL

by Alison M. Jones, Director of NWNL

My photographic career began in 1985 on my first visit to Africa. After years of photographing landscapes, wildlife and cultures for magazines, exhibits and stock photography, I had the honor of helping start Kenya’s Mara Conservancy.  From then on I focused on conservation photography, with NWNL as my signature project.

2-K-ELE-2009.jpgLone elephant before establishment of Mara Conservancy, Mara River Basin

Flying low in a Cessna over sub-Sahara Africa in 2005, I saw from my copilot’s right-hand window, what looked like green ribbons strewn on the ground. They were the lakeshores and river corridors dotted with homes and animals. The rest was empty, grey miombo woodland. I kept repeating, “In Africa, it’s obvious. Where there’s no water, there’s no life.” I had a title, but not yet a topic.

Jones_2005_TZ_0029.jpg
Aerial view of riverine forest in sub-Sahara Tanzania

I considered a “Waters of Ethiopia” photography project, because when most think of Ethiopia they imagine a dusty desert. Few know Ethiopia holds the largest water tower in the Horn of Africa. Monsoonal torrents supply 75% of the Nile River via Ethiopia’s Blue Nile and 90% of Kenya’s Lake Turkana via its Omo River. An environmental resource manager suggested I include watersheds on other continents as well, for more interest and issues. Thanks to this soon-to-be Founding Advisor, focus then centered on African, N. American and S. American watersheds, as I already had photographed these regions.

4-Jones_070630_WA_5501.jpgMount Adams behind Trout Lake, Columbia River Basin

A second Founding Advisor, now Director of African People and Wildlife, suggested NWNL cover only two continents. South America was dropped, and so were incoming queries asking, “Why not India or China?” Now we could zero in on differences and similarities of water issues in developed v. developing nations. While every watershed presents compelling scenarios of threats and solutions, we chose 3 case-study watersheds on each continent. Those 6 river basins would allow us to raise awareness of almost all of the world’s watershed values and vulnerabilities.

Jones_080201_ET_6715_M.jpg
Women washing clothes, Omo River Basin

We established our expedition-based Methodology, outlining a process we’ve followed step by step for 65 expeditions. Each expedition begins in the office as we study our in-house research outlines (many created by summer college interns) to determine our expedition’s focus. We conclude with a finalized itinerary of expedition contacts to interview and sites to visit.

1-MO-JOH-107.jpgRecreational swimmers and sunbathers, Mississippi River Basin

Having set our case-study watersheds, procedures and website, it seemed NWNL was set to launch. But that first Advisor said that I needed to go back to school before the launch.  Even though I was the photographer in our mission to combine photography and science – not the scientist – she worried I’d embarrass myself (and NWNL) in front of Ph.D. scientists. So, I took Columbia University courses in Watershed Management and Forest Ecology. On completion, the forestry professor asked to be a NWNL Advisor; and I thanked that young advisor with 2 Master’s degrees who sent me back to school for being so astute and such a wise daughter!

8-Jones_100331_UG_4184.jpgMunyaga Falls in Bwindi Impenetrable Forest National Park, Nile River Basin

Credentials of today’s NWNL Team include expertise in still and video photography and training in environment, history and biology, forest and restoration ecology, and natural resource management. Our Advisors and Researchers set the focus and itinerary for our expeditions. Our Staff develops outputs from those expeditions. This structure has allowed me to lead 65 watershed expeditions, often joined by professional or passionate amateur photographers and conservationists.

6-Jones_080503_NJ_0198.jpg“Kids at Play” sign along tributary of Upper Raritan River

Since NWNL began, awareness of the degradation of our water resources has grown – from a bare mention in the news in 2007 to front-page coverage almost daily today. Working in tandem with that growing awareness, we’ve documented the drainage of water from 11 African countries into the Mara, Omo and Nile River Basins (about 10% of Africa’s land mass. With our focus on N. America’s Columbia, Mississippi and Raritan Basins, we’ve gone from coast to coast and covered 50% of the US. Our scope has included the US’s most rural and most densely-populated states (Mississippi and New Jersey).

9-IMG_9861.jpg2015 NWNL exhibition, “Following Rivers,” at Beacon Institute for Rivers and Estuaries

The NWNL Team is proud of the process and products it has created. We hope that – as a result of the efforts of NWNL, the 900+ scientists and stewards we’ve met and many others- nature and all its species will have enough clean water.

 

All photos © Alison M. Jones.

Surprisingly Similar: Deer and Elephant

By Bianca T. Esposito, NWNL Research Intern
(Edited by Alison M.  Jones, NWNL Director)

NWNL research intern Bianca T. Esposito is a Syracuse University  senior studying Biology and Economics. Her summer research was on the nexus of biodiversity and water resources. She already has 3 NWNL blogs on African and N American watershed species:  Wild v Hatchery Salmon; Buffalo & Bison; & Papyrus & Pragmites.

Jones_180225_K_6049.jpgAfrican Elephant, Mara Conservancy, Kenya 

INTRODUCTION

This blog compares Africa’s savannah elephant (Loxodonta africana) to the N. America’s white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in North America’s eastern United States. They present unlikely, but strikingly interesting comparative behaviors and impacts within their watersheds.  

In the Pliocene Era, elephants roamed and trumpeted their presence across the planet. Today they are a keystone species in African watersheds, including the Nile, Mara and Omo River Basins. Yet these giants are increasingly vulnerable to human poaching, hunting and destruction of habitat and migratory corridors. As a result, African savannah elephants are categorized as a “vulnerable” species.

In North America, white-tailed deer (also called Virginia deer) are present across the continent from the Atlantic Coast’s Raritan River Basin to the Pacific Coast’s Columbia River Basin. These nimble jumpers probably came to N America in the  Miocene Era as browsers competing for their niche with American rhinos. As they wheeze, grunt and bleat their presence today, they have few natural predators remaining, other than car collisions. Deer in the eastern US are a “Least Threatened” species – while Columbian white-tailed deer in Oregon’s Lower Columbia River Basin are “Near Threatened”.  

Jones_090629_NJ_1137.jpgWhite-Tailed Deer , Upper Raritan River Basin, New Jersey

North American male deer stand at 6-7 feet and weigh 100-275 pounds (¼ of a ton, the weight of a baby elephant).  In contrast, full-grown elephants stand at 11 feet (twice as tall as deer) and weigh up to 13,000 lbs (6.5 tons). Yet despite these huge size differences, these 2 species impacts on watershed forests are quite similar. As herbivores, both threaten and alter their habitats’ vegetative diversity, growth and regeneration.

VEGETATION & FOREST INTERFACE

Elephants alter their watersheds by converting woodland to shrubland. Elephants consume large amounts of vegetation allowing growth of plants previously blocked from the sun. However the benefit of increasing plant diversity is countered by the destruction elephants cause while browsing their way through watersheds. They remove trees, trample grasses and compact the soil. This limits forest regeneration since seedlings cannot grow and their trails cause soil erosion.

Similarly, deer today are increasingly damaging forest vegetation due to their soaring populations. In the Raritan River Basin, impacts of high deer populations have resulted in habitat loss for birds and other animals that rely on vegetation for protection. Thus, native species are decreasing and could eventually disappear locally.

HUMAN INTERFACE

Another similarity both species face is that of negative interactions with humans. Elephant and deer both damage farmers’ crops.  Elephant contact with humans continues to increase as they lose their traditional habitats due to human infringement and development. Increased development has also led farmers to further transgress into what was elephant rangeland or migratory corridors. In following and browsing along their ancient pathways and territories today, elephants can trample crops and even kill people. Those elephants are often killed in retaliation. In Tanzania’s Serengeti District, the effect of elephants raiding crops means a bag of maize can be locally more valuable than the cost of building a classroom or tarmac road.

In America, deer find an ideal environment in urban and suburban areas with their mix of ornamental shrubs, lawns and trees.  Since deep forest vegetation is too high for them, deer browse along the “edge habitat” which also provides easy access to suburban yards.

deer crossing road.jpgWhite-tailed deer crossing a road (Creative Commons)

With the loss of wolves, bears and cougars, deer have had a lack of predators, causing their populations to soar. Now their biggest predators are human hunters and car accidents which cause deer and human fatalities. As well, human health impacted by deer that browse in the woods, meadows or dunes with ticks carrying Lyme disease (Lyme borreliosis). Lyme disease can be lethal, or at the least debilitating, for humans, livestock and pets.

For elephant and deer, interaction with humans is not beneficial for either species. Sadly, given less space for the exploding human race, these fateful interactions will only increase.

WATER INTERFACE

The spread of human settlements, agriculture and livestock farming have replaced elephants’ natural habitats. Clearing of those traditional lands disturbs and decreases water volume in their rivers and lakes. Yet, when elephants were there, they created water holes which increased water availability for themselves and other species. Simultaneously, humans are increasing their consumption of today’s decreasing water and other natural resources.  

This scenario is dramatically playing out in Kenya’s Mara River Basin. In the Mau Forest highlands, human deforestation has depleted flows of source tributaries of the Mara River, a lifeline to the Maasai Mara National Reserve and Tanzania’s Serengeti National Park. In turn, lowered water levels downstream have increased temperatures and disrupted local rainfall patterns. Thus the human takeover of the Mau Forest has chased out the elephant and disturbed downstream ecosystems, which in turn will contributed to decreases in wildlife populations and thus park revenues from tourism.

Elephants have direct impacts on water sources and availability since they are a “water-dependent species.” When water is scarce, they dig in dry river beds to provide water for themselves, other animals, and humans. Additionally, elephants migrate to find water – even if only via artificial, supplementary water points. More research is needed, but water availability may become a useful tool for regulating elephant distribution and managing ecological heterogeneity.  Yet an abundance of artificial water should be avoided in conservation areas where the presence of elephant would cause vegetation degradation.

Jones_090930_K_0584.jpgAfrican Elephants crossing the Mara River, Mara Conservancy, Kenya

Deer, unlike elephants, have a more indirect impact to water resources. Their impacts are more about quality of water than its availability. The nutrients and pathogens excreted by white-tailed deer become water pollutants in nearby streams and groundwater, especially during in storm runoffs.  Deer waste dropped in and along streams in the Raritan River Basin produces greater pathogenic contamination than cattle manure deposited away from streams.

HUNTING AS A WAY TO REDUCE HUMAN-WILDLIFE CONFLICTS

Hunting is a controversial solution to controlling these species’ threats of ecosystem degradation and human conflict. Hunting elephant to counter their negative impacts has much greater negative consequences than hunting deer. Elephant poaching for  lucrative ivory profits became such a serious threat that elephants became listed as an Endangered Species. While a 1989 ban on international ivory trade allowed some populations to recover, illegal ivory trade still occurs and threatens elephant populations. Thus, shooting elephants marauding crops and killing farmers is not an option – thus the search for other means to controlling elephant degradation.

After elephants devour all vegetation in an area or during droughts, they migrate. However, that puts them face to face with today’s man-made fences and trenches built to stop elephants, as well as with new communities and farms. Thus Kenyan conservancies, International Fund for Animal Welfare,  Addo Elephant NP, Sangare Conservancy and other groups began creating “protected elephant corridors.” Such corridors provide elephants safe migratory paths where they don’t disturb humans.

Jones_180129_K_7661.jpgRanger at the entrance gate to Sangare Conservancy, Kenya

Deer hunting however is viewed  by many as a positive means to control over-abundant deer populations destroying gardens and forests. In rural regions, deer are still hunted for food and sport which helps save forest saplings from deer browse. But that removes only a limited number, and there have been traditional limits on deer hunting. Along Mississippi’s Big Black River, the state still restricts  killing year-old bucks and any deer hunting during floods. Many such restrictions are being loosened today to help counter the rapid growth of deer populations. As well, to reduce deer browse and car collisions, some suburbs hold carefully-organized, targeted hunts by licensed “sharp-shooters,” and the venison is harvested for homeless shelters. Suburban methods to combat deer intrusions also often include installing 8-foot tall fences to protect gardens, landscaping and critical ecosystems.

Jones_180129_K_7681.jpgFence of the Sangare Conservancy, Kenya 

FOREST IMPACTS

Elephants’ foraging creates open habitats for other species. However, browsing of resulting mid-successional species by elephants and other species can stop regrowth of trees and forest. “As go the elephants, so go the trees.” This issue is similar to deer browsing on soft-leaved saplings in N. American forests that preventing the growth of future forests.

Yet elephants compensate for their heavy vegetative consumption.  More than a dozen tree species depend on forest elephants for to spread their seeds. This type of seed dispersal occurs via each elephant’s daily  200-lb. dung droppings, thus ensuring survival of vegetation. Another benefit of creating open spaces by altering and removing trees is the opportunity for greater faunal diversity. Elephants uproot and fell trees and strip bark; but in this process, they break down branches which provides access to food for smaller wildlife.

TZ-ELE-215.jpgHerd of African elephants with newborn, Lake Manyara National Park, Tanzania

All this change created by elephants creates “a cyclical vegetational seesaw of woodland to grassland and back to woodland.” As debris of trees felled by elephants shields pioneer grasses and shrubs from trampling, deep-rooted perennial grasses can grow. These grasses attract grazers to the area, while the browsers leave. When the woodlands regenerate, elephant number will return, followed by browsers.  

Deer, unlike elephants, are non-migratory however, and thus they don’t spur cycles of regeneration. Therefore, watersheds with deer-infested forests face ongoing degradation. Today’s soaring numbers of deer prevent any chance of forest recovery from their constant browsing. Deer also displace native wildlife, which furthers the cascade of ecosystem degradation. When a forest loses trees, there is less water recycling  since trees produce and move rain downwind to other terrestrial surfaces.  Water retention in a forest is also related to presence of ground cover – also eaten by deer – which decreases stormwater runoff and downstream erosion in floodplains or wetlands. A lack of ground cover causes inland forests and downstream areas to become arid and potentially a waste land. The deer do not produce compensatory benefits that elephant produce.

Jones_090629_NJ_1120.jpgWhite-tailed deer Upper Raritan River Basin, New Jersey

CONCLUSIONS

Elephant and deer each have increasingly negative impacts on watershed vegetation and human communities. However a big difference exists in effective stewardship for controlling these species. In Africa, elephant numbers (2007-2014) have dropped by nearly a third, representing a loss of 144,000 elephants.  Begun in 2014, the Great Elephant Census (GEC) accounted for over 350,000 savannah elephant across 18 African countries and states the current yearly loss at 8 per cent. Tanzania, having one of the highest declines, and Mozambique have lost 73,000 elephants due to poaching in just five years.

However deer populations have exploded.  In 2014, US deer populations across the United States were estimated at over 15 million. In New Jersey, there are approximately 76-100 deer per square mile; yet a healthy ecosystem can support only 10 deer per square mile.  These high densities of deer are decimating US forests.

Making elephant poaching illegal and banning ivory trade has saved elephant populations in Africa. But in N America further controls of the growing population of deer is badly needed. The most obvious step towards this goal would be to remove deer hunting restrictions – the very opposite of Africa’s stopping the hunting and poaching of elephants.

On both continents, immediate solutions are critical if we are to protect our forests and water supplies – critical natural resources of our watersheds – from degradation being increasingly incurred by both species. Elephants consume vegetation and degrade areas of abundant water; while tick-carrying deer contaminate water with their excrement and threaten the future of our forests. One could summarize the consequence of too many deer as “No Forests – No Water” – and the consequence of losing elephant as “No Elephants – No Water.”

All photos © Alison M. Jones unless otherwise noted.

Bibliography:

World Wildlife Fund for Nature, accessed on June 28, 2018
Gereta, Emmanuel Joshua. Department of Biology Norwegian University of Science and Technology, accessed on June 18, 2018
African Forest Policy Forum – Proceedings, accessed on June 28, 2018
Chamaille-Jammes, Simon. Journal of Applied Ecology, accessed on June 28, 2018
Mutugi, Marion. European Scientific Journal, accessed June 28, 18 by BE
Kideghesho, Jafari R. The International Journal of Biodiversity Science and Management, accessed on July 2, 2018
Landman, Marietjie. Understanding Long-Term Variations in an Elephant Piosphere Effect to Manage Impacts, accessed on July 2, 2018
New Jersey Institute of Technology, The Neshanic River Watershed Restoration Plan, accessed on July 2, 2018
Opar, Alisa. Audubon, accessed on July 2, 2018
Woods, John J. Bucks On The Big Black, accessed on July 2, 2018
Ohio Wesleyan University. The Waning of the Elephants, accessed on July 16, 2018
Ohio Wesleyan University. The Waning of the Elephants, accessed on July 16, 2018
Gomez, Monserrat. Nikela, accessed on July 16, 2018
Marshall, Jessica. Discovery Channel, accessed on July 16, 2018
Thorman, Cartin. Minnesota Economy, Environment, accessed on July 16, 2018
Meyer, Amelia. Elephants Forever, accessed on July 17, 2018
Louisiana Sportsman, accessed on July 24, 2018
Steyn, Paul. National Geographic, accessed on August 7, 2018
Hersher, Rebecca. National Public Radio, accessed on August 7, 18 by BE
Pennsylvania State University New Kensington. The Virtual Nature Trail, accessed on August 7, 2018
Franklin Reporter & Advocate, accessed on August 7, 2018
Hurley, Amanda. CityLab, accessed on August 7, 2018
World Wildlife Foundation, accessed on August 7, 2018
Elephant-World, accessed on August 7, 2018
Chafota, Jonas. Effects of Changes In Elephant Densities On the Environment and Other Species—How Much Do We Know? Accessed on August 8, 2018
Howard, Meghan. Animal Diversity Web, accessed on August 8, 2018
Sheldrick, Daphne. Elephant Conservation, accessed on August 8, 2018
Sjogren, Kristian. ScienceNordic, accessed on August 8, 2018
Platt, John. Scientific American, accessed on August 8, 2018
Swit, Nadia. The Downtown Review, accessed on August 8, 2018
Hilderman, Richard. The Effect of Deforestation on the Climate and Environment, accessed on August 8, 2018
National Park Service. Draft White-Tailed Deer Management Plan/ EIS, accessed on August 8, 2018

The Endangered Species Act: 1973-2018

By Isabelle Bienen, NWNL Research Intern
(Edited by Alison M. Jones, NWNL Director)

NWNL research intern Isabelle Bienen is a junior at Northwestern University studying Social Policy with minors in Environmental Policy & Culture and Legal Studies. Her  research on the Endangered Species Act focuses on a current topic of interest in the US.  Her 5-blog series on US Clean Water Act, its history and significance, will follow soon.

Defining the Endangered Species Act

The U.S. Endangered Species Act [hereafter, ESA] was passed by the U. S. Congress in 1973 due to growing concern over possible extinctions of native plants and animals within US watersheds.1 The previous year, President Nixon had asked the 93rd Congress to develop legislation to prevent species extinction in the United Status due to inadequate efforts up to that point. The resulting act is administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Commerce Department’s National Marine Fisheries Service. The ESA’s defined purpose is to “protect and recover imperiled species and the ecosystems upon which they depend.”1 Thus the ESA plays an important stewardship role in US watersheds.

Jones_080530_WY_1866
Endangered Grey Wolf, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming

Since ESA protection includes safeguarding habitats of vulnerable species, the ESA governing agencies are assigned responsibility of targeted organisms by their habitat locations. The Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for terrestrial and freshwater organisms, and thus their watershed habitats. The National Marine Fisheries Service is responsible for marine life and habitat.6

Species of concern are labeled either “endangered” or “threatened” under the ESA. The term “endangered” indicates a species that “is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.”The term “threatened” indicates a species that  “is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future.”1 Congress ruled that all plant and animal species, other than pest insects, are eligible for listing by the ESA. . This includes subspecies, varieties and distinct population segments.1

The ESA, via the Environmental Protection Agency, annually provides approximately $1.4 billion of financial assistance to states with species of focus. These funds allow those states to develop local conservation programs. Their available powers, per the ESA, include relocating or  eliminating  ranching, logging, and oil drilling harmful to the species or their habitat.3 The ESA also allows the United States to meet its obligations to several international agreements and treaties, such as CITES [The Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora] and the Western Hemisphere Convention.2 These global agreements provide compelling support for upholding the ESA and its actions. Without the ESA, the United States would not uphold its international responsibilities.

K-RHI-804
Critically-endangered Black Rhino, Lewa Wildlife Conservancy, Kenya

Achievements of the Endangered Species Act

The success of the ESA is clear, despite critics. The Center for Biological Diversity credits the ESA for preventing extinction of 99% of species on the ESA endangered and threatened lists.7 Going further it says that due to EPA actions from its founding in 1973 to 2013, the ESA has shown a “90% recovery rate in more than 100 species throughout the U.S.”7 Their 2012 study documenting 110 U.S. Northeast species, supported by the Environmental Protection Agency, revealed that 93% of those species are “stable or improving,” while about 80% are “meeting the recovery targets established in Federal recovery plans.”7 These statistics are all indicative of the ESA’s wide-spread success. The NRDC [National Resources Defence Council]  has hailed the ESA as a literal lifesaver for hundreds of species on the brink of extinction.

Additionally, the ESA has received strong public support. A national poll of Americans, administered by the Center for Biological Diversity in 2013, found that 2 out of 3 “want the Endangered Species Act strengthened or left along, but not weakened.”7 Recent polls in 2017 suggest that these numbers indicating ESA support have further increased.  Their results say that 9 out of 10 people support the ESA. It is clear that dismantling the Endangered Species Act – or even weakening it – would go directly against the will of well over half of Americans.

Jones_170325NE_2423
Sharp-tailed grouse, similar to the endangered sage grouse, Nebraska

Recent Actions

As of July 2018, the Trump Administration initiated efforts to retract the Environmental Species Act. By mid-summer, more than two dozen pieces of legislation, policy initiatives and amendments designed to weaken the law have been proposed by the Trump Administration, and either introduced or voted on in Congress. These actions include:

  • a bill to strip protections from the gray wolf [Canis lupus] in Wyoming and along the western Great Lakes;
  • a plan to keep the sage grouse [Centrocercus urophasianus], a chicken-size bird that inhabits millions of oil-rich acres in the West, from being listed as endangered for the next decade;
  • a measure to remove the American burying beetle [Nicrophorus americanus] from the “endangered” list.  This orange-flecked insect has long been the bane of oil companies that would like to drill on the land where it lives.3
Gad_100330_UG_0064
Endangered Mountain Gorilla, Bwindi Impenetrable Forest National Park, Uganda

The many steps taken against the ESA in only a few weeks this summer indicates the intensity of its drive to strip the ESA of its powers. The reasons stated for these actions is a concern that the impacts from ESA policies might restrict economic development and some American livelihoods. Some feel those economic impacts outweigh the significance of the ESA’s protection of endangered or threatened  species.3  

Foreseen Impacts and Reactions to Recent Actions

A July 19, 2018, proposal by the Interior and Commerce Departments would require that economic consequences of protecting any species must be considered when deciding assignment to the “endangered” or “threatened” species lists.3 If these actions are finalized, it would be extremely difficult for any new species to be added. However, species currently on these lists and their habitats will continue to be protected.3

Jones_111104_LA_5778
Recovered endangered Brown Pelican, Santa Barbara, California

The proposals, backed by the Trump Administration, have been requested by oil companies, gas companies and ranches.   They have objected to the ESA because they believe it “represents a costly incursion of federal regulations on their land and livelihoods.3 [See Addendum below. ] Despite decades of efforts by lobbyists and libertarians, efforts to overturn the ESA have not had any effect. Recent intensified and coordinated efforts may portend a more serious challenge to our watershed species that are integral to the health of our ecosystems.

Retracting the ESA would be detrimental to the overall web of plant and animal species populations in watersheds across the United States. Their loss would affect their associated habitats, predators and prey  – and ultimately impact human lives. The loss of the ESA would impair the safety and well-being of endangered and threatened species, the health of our watersheds, and the quality of human life.

Today’s reality is that the landmark law that established the ESA could be overturned. The eternal reality is that once a species becomes extinct, that couldn’t be overturned. Extinction is forever.

USA: Massachusetts, Cape Cod, Wianno, piping plover in breeding plumage
Recovered endangered Sand Piper, Cape Cod, Massachusettes

ADDENDUM from NWNL Director Alison M. Jones:  Adding to current concerns being voiced over recent threats to the EPA, today (8/14/2018) on national television, Christie Todd Whitman, former EPA Chair and N.J. Republican, added her voice.  She opined that, while occasional re-examination of regulations can be worthwhile, many current environmental roll-backs “are only being done for individual industries’ bottom line.”

SOURCES

  1. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, accessed 7/25/18, published 2017, IKB, link.
  2. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, accessed 7/25/18, published 2015, IKB, link.
  3. The New York Times, accessed 7/25/18, published 2018, IKB, link.
  4. CNN, accessed 7/25/18, published 2018, IKB, link
  5. National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, accessed 7/25/18, published 2018, IKB, link
  6. The United States Department of Justice, accessed 7/25/18, published 2015, IKB, link
  7. The Center for Biological Diversity, accessed 7/25/18, published 2017, IKB, link. 

 

All photos © Alison M. Jones.

Papyrus and Phragmites: Invasive Species

By Bianca T. Esposito, NWNL Research Intern
(Edited by Alison M.  Jones, NWNL Director)

NWNL research intern Bianca T. Esposito is a senior at Syracuse University studying Biology and Economics. Her research this summer is on the nexus of biodiversity and water resources. Her earlier NWNL blogs were: Wild Salmon v Hatchery Salmon and Buffalo, Bison & Water.

 

My 3rd NWNL blog on biodiversity compares papyrus in Africa and phragmites in North America. I will highlight both flora’s ecological benefits, ecological threats and impacts to water, as well as solutions to prevent their uncontrollable spread.

Papyrus (Cyperus papyrus) is a tall, aquatic perennial shrub, ranging from 8 to 10 feet in height. This invasive species rooted into the ground, bearing simple brown fruit with brown/cream/green colored flowers, forms floating islands in tropical African swamps, rivers and lakes. In non-native habitats, papyrus will spread and invade the space of other native plants unless pruned. Commonly known as the “Paper Reed,” papyrus is native to Egypt and Sudan along the Nile River in North Africa, a NWNL case-study watershed. Papyrus is now also found in two other NWNL case-study watersheds: along Ethiopia’s Omo River (where damming has stabilized water levels allowing roots to take hold) and Tanzania’s Mara River Estuary.

Papyrus in Uganda .jpgPapyrus in Uganda (Creative Commons)

Once a well-known resource for paper making, today papyrus has potential for biofuel production. Papyrus also has many ecological benefits. Its value ranges from assimilating significant amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to providing breeding grounds for fish species, and feeding grounds for grazing herbivores.

In its native habitat, papyrus lines bodies of water, serving as a filtration system for removing sediments, sewage, and heavy metals that pollute the water. However, papyrus poses ecological threats to introduced environments, such as Italy and the United States, after being imported for ornamental use. Since it is invasive, papyrus disrupts ecosystems, threatens the growth of the native species, and impedes the flow of waterways. Papyrus will continue to expand problematically in introduced ecosystems if temperature warming continues to increase.

Jones_091003_TZ_1505.jpgPapyrus blooms in the Mara River Basin, Tanzania (© Alison Jones)

Major impacts papyrus has on non-native water ecosystems include: reducing native biodiversity by altering habitat; threatening the loss of native species; altering trophic levels; modifying hydrology; modifying natural benthic communities; and negatively impacting aquaculture and fisheries.

Solutions to prevent further papyrus spread into other ecosystems are the use of  physical, biological, and chemical controls. Physically, we could cut down and rake up the shrub. Biologically, we could use a novel fungal isolate that releases a phytotoxin to inhibit the growth of papyrus. And chemically, herbicides are a successful method to control papyrus spread.

Jones_091002_TZ_1209.jpgWoman collecting water in the Masurua Swamp with Papyrus in the background, Tanzania (© Alison Jones)

Phragmites (Phragmites australis) is a tall perennial grass that can grow up to 15 feet or more in height, with dense clusters of purple fluffy flower heads. Referred to as the “Common Reed,” this species is native to Eurasia and Africa. Our focus is on its impact in North America. Outside of its native habitat, phragmites is “cryptic invasive,” meaning that as this non-native species spreads within another native species’ range, it will typically go unnoticed due to its misidentification for the native species. Phragmites ideal habitat is marsh communities bordering lakes, ponds and rivers. Phragmites are present in the Columbia River Basin, Mississippi River Basin, and Raritan River Basin, the three North American NWNL case-study watersheds.

Jones_160414_NJ_3373.jpgPhragmites on the Raritan Bay, NJ (© Alison Jones)

The ecological benefits phragmites provide include improving habitat and water quality by filtration and nutrient removal, serving as shelter for birds and insects, as well as providing food for sparrows. Phragmites also help to stabilize soil against erosion. In light of climate change, this species is beneficial because its accretion rate keeps up with rising sea levels for protection.

Phragmites benefit marsh lands because of their ability to take up 3x more carbon than other native plants. When there is excessive carbon in the atmosphere sea level rises and allows for more frequent and intense storms, so keeping phragmites could help better protect marshes from rising sea levels and erosion. Phragmites also help build up more soil below the ground compared to native plants.

CT-NWK-514.jpgPhragmites at sunrise in Norwalk, CT (© Alison Jones)

Some ecological threats phragmites pose are as follows. Since phragmites grow in thickets by shallow water, they can displace native wetland plants, alter hydrology, and block sunlight from reaching aquatic communities. Phragmites decrease plant biodiversity, causing declines in habitat quality for fish and wildlife. This tall grass can also pose a driving hazard, as it blocks road signs and views around curves. Phragmites can also be a fire hazard when dry biomass is high during its dormant season.

The Neshanic River, a tributary of the Raritan River Basin, provides an example of the threats of non-native invasive phragmites. Here, it grows without regard to competition by suppressing regeneration of native vegetation and limiting biodiversity in the area.

Jones_120430_NY_1751.jpgPhragmites with redwings blackbirds on Long Island, NY (© Alison Jones)

Some solutions to combat the threats phragmites pose are similar to the methods used to control papyrus. Methods used include cutting or mowing the tall grass, applying herbicides (such as Glyphosate or Imazapyr), and controlling the spread of this invasive plant with molecular tools and fungal pathogens. Additional solutions would be to burn the plant, excavate the area, cover the area with plastic causing suffocation, increase plant competition in the area, increase grazing by herbivores, or use of biocontrol organisms (such as insect herbivores) to combat the spread of phragmites.

Whether in Africa or North America, we can see how detrimental non-native invasive plant species can be to the health of an ecosystem. Although papyrus and phragmites both have some positive benefits, they overwhelmingly impact aquatic habitats negatively with their spread. Thus many have concluded that the best thing to do is limit spread with the solutions suggested above, rather than attempt complete eradication. In some cases, they can become “guest invasives,” welcomed for the services they do supply, especially for wetlands and riverbank stabilization which minimizes storm damage.

 

Bibliography:
Morais, P. PubMed, accessed on June 13, 2018, via link.
Saltonstall, Kristin. PNAS, accessed on June 13, 2018, via link.
Swearingen, J. Invasive Plant Atlas of the United States, accessed on June 13, 2018, via link
National Parks Flora & Fauna Web, accessed on June 14, 2018, via link
Plants & Flowers, accessed on June 14, 2018, via link.
Popay, Ian. CABI, accessed on June 14, 2018, via link.
Hazelton, Eric. Annals of Botany Company, accessed on June 14, 2018, via link.
Sturtevant, R. Aquatic Nonindigenous Species Information System, accessed June 14, 2018, via link.
New Jersey Institute of Technology, The Neshanic River Watershed Restoration Plan, accessed on July 2, 2018, via link.
Oregon Department of Agriculture. Plant Pest Risk Assessment, accessed on July 17, 2018, via link.
Hauber, Donald P. Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation, accessed on July 17, 2018, via link.
Gaudet, John. Papyrus, accessed on July 23, 2018, via link.
Jackson, Harrison. Phragmites invasion: Detrimental or beneficial? Accessed on July 25, 2018, via link.

Glossaries: A Tool for Understanding

Written by NWNL Intern Lucy Briody
Edited by Alison M Jones, NWNL Director

No Water No Life Summer 2018 Intern Lucy Briody is a sophomore at Colgate University where she is majoring in Environmental Geography and minoring in English and Women’s Studies. Part of her work this summer has been dedicated to creating an updated and relevant glossary for the new NWNL website, launching later this summer.

Note from NWNL Director Alison M Jones: The NWNL Glossary of Watershed Terms, which Lucy helped edit this summer, will appear on our new NWNL website this fall.  Stay tuned. Meanwhile, this week the esteemed Lapham’s Quarterly serendipitously posted a more literary “Glossary: Water / From acre-foot to water birth, the language of water by their Senior Editor Leopold Froehlich.  Here’s to the myriad of glossaries we can peruse and use!

glossary.png

If you’ve ever been lost in a foreign country, signed a contract or tried to explain to parent or grandparent how to use an iPhone, then you understand how important a common language is in promoting comprehension, getting work done or efficiently making a birthday post on Facebook. In the scientific world, a common language is perhaps even more crucial. Scientists use very exact terms to specify and categorize; however such terms can confuse the average layman. For example, while the Latin name of species can seem obtuse to the layman, for those versed in scientists’ use of binomial nomenclature, the Latin name provides insight into the family, genus and species to which they belong.

The glossary is part of the path to understanding. It is not necessarily a complete guide, but rather serves as a tool. In order to use this tool most effectively when confronted with a complex subject, a reader should begin to get a feel for the concept through lay articles intended for the average reader rather than a scientific audience. Once a basic understanding has been reached, the glossary can help the individual more easily comprehend scientific articles that would have been far too complex without an explanation of unfamiliar terminology. Glossaries simplify important terms, critical to comprehension of many materials, by providing easily understandable definitions.

During my summer internship with No Water No Life, it was clear that watersheds have tremendous impacts on the lives and livelihoods of those who live and work in them. It is important to clearly communicate with watershed “stakeholders” the impacts and consequences of both natural and man-made processes happening around them. My job at NWNL was to complete and augment the project’s draft of a Watershed Glossary. I quickly understood that clarity and comprehension are critical to raising awareness actions needed to keep our ecosystems healthy in today’s rapidly changing world.

If environmental  jargon and terms describing the quality and availability of our freshwater supplies are not able to be clarified with tools such as a glossary, it limits the likelihood of watershed residents participation. To underline that, below is the definition of “citizen science” that I contributed to the NWNL glossary.

Citizen Science provides valuable support to many fields of data-driven exploration and research. The participation and contributions of non-scientists and amateur scientists from the public helps in collecting data and performing experiments, which may be simple but demand  a rigorous and objective commitment. Citizen scientists often contribute a tacit understanding and valuable local knowledge. As well, their involvement and gained knowledge helps bridge the gap between hard-core science and local people and cultures. Thus, citizen science – whether that of individuals, teams or networks – often raises levels of interest, knowledge and commitment of others. An example of citizen science documented by NWNL is the Louisiana Bucket Brigade in New Orleans, which encourages citizens to collect their own data regarding air quality.

Jones_100522_NJ_1027Citizen scientists, including Lauren Theis from the Upper Raritan Watershed Association, during stream water monitoring training. 

Interestingly, both citizen science and glossaries are tools that help counterbalance the possibility of science or other erudite subjects appearing exclusionary and limited to those with limited experience. Citizen science and glossaries are each key to bridging such gaps and promoting greater public involvement in issues that affect us all.

As the modern world changes at a rapid pace, many new technical and conversational terms are added to our vocabulary.  Many formerly common words are used less frequently, and are thus less understood. For over 2,000 years, glossaries have been a critical tool to helping civilizations face increasing pressure to be informed and knowledgeable about all that is going on around us – no matter how complex. Glossaries help each of us achieve a broader perspective.  Glossaries are critical to ensuring that scientific knowledge gained in the past can continue to be used to make the world around us a better place for all.

Jones_100522_NJ_0884.jpgCitizen scientists during the Upper Raritan Watershed Association stream water monitoring training. 

 

Photos © Alison M. Jones.

Viceroy Magic

Photos, paintings and a story by John Ruskey

Note from NWNL Director Alison M. Jones:  John Ruskey is a NWNL Partner and friend, and owner of Quapaw Canoe Company which runs expeditions on the Lower Mississippi River, its backwaters, oxbows and bayous. As NWNL highlights the value of the Endangered Species Act, we applaud John for supporting biodiversity on our on willow-ed creek banks. As Thoreau wrote, “In wildness is the preservation of the world.” Let’s protect their habitat, the loss of which poses the greatest danger to all species. The poised wings of the little Viceroy mimics that pause between heartbeats that Terry Tempest Williams says provides the grace of life, writing: “To protect what is wild, is to protect what is gentle.”

image.png

On Montezuma Island in early July I happened upon a Viceroy butterfly that could not fly — due to an injured wing. So I kept her for observation. 2 weeks later she was still alive, due to a daily regime of water and care, but by the third week she was noticeably weaker.

image.png

On the Mississippi River the Viceroy butterfly (Basilarchia archippus) prefers black willows (Salix nigra) as host plants for laying its small pale green eggs, and if you look carefully you might see examples of its entire life cycle on the leaves, branches, twigs and trunk of one willow tree. The chrysalis disguise themselves as bird poop — they look like slimy green blobs with white and yellow. The caterpillars rear up like a snake when disturbed.

(*note: this is just another remarkable feature of the lovely black willows which grace our Lower Mississippi River! For many, the willow is their source of food and shelter: in addition to Viceroy there is the Beaver and us, the Mighty Quapaws… We use willow for cooking, especially for smoking fish and meat. Willow makes the best shish-k-bob sticks. Stands of young Willow make the best shelter when setting up camp in windy or stormy weather. Mature Willow forests provide cool shady spots for hammocks, afternoon naps, and summer camp sites.)

image.png

The Viceroy looks a lot like the Monarch butterfly, but she is slightly smaller (by an inch or so), her oranges are darker (almost cinnamon red sometimes). She has some tell-tale markings that differentiate her: 1) a couple of white spots on a diagonal splash across the fore wing, and 2) a black vein line swooping along outer edge of hind wing.

image.png

Viceroys range across North America from Hudson Bay southwards down the middle of the country, down the Mississippi Valley, westwards to Great Range. My Audubon Guide says “In each life stage the Viceroy seeks protection through a different ruse. The egg blends with the numerous galls that afflict the willow leaves upon which it is laid.  Hibernating caterpillars hide themselves in bits of leaves they have attached to a twig.  The mature caterpillar looks mildly fearsome with its hunched and horny forecparts.  Even most birds bypass the chrysalis, thinking it is a bird dropping. The adult, famed as a paramount mimic, resembles the distasteful Monarch. Since birds learn to eschew Monarchs, they also avoid the look-alike Viceroy. Southern populations of Viceroys mimic the much deeper chestnut-colored Queen instead. In flight the Viceroy flaps frenetically in between brief glides.” (National Audubon Field Guide to North American Butterfiles).

image.png

Concentrating water droplets in her tongue: I watched in amazement the first day Viceroy took a drink of water from a wet rag I had set her on.

image.png

First she explored the rag with her antennae. Seemingly satisfied, she then extended her tongue (proboscis), uncoiling it to its full 1″ or so length. She delicately tapped the saturated rag repeatedly. Then she drew her tongue back in, coiling it into ever-tightening loops. As the coils tightened a tiny drop of water magically appeared where there once had been nothing, like an early morning dew drop.

image.png

I took her on every trip we had in early July. One morning she drank dewdrops from our roll-a-table. According to my Audubon Guide the proboscis is composed of 2 parallel, linked tubes, which work like a pair of drinking straws. It can be coiled tightly up against the face (the Viceroy seems to have a slot between its eyes for doing this, hiding the tongue when pulled all the way in).

image.png

In week 3 she was weakening. I decided to share an apricot-strawberry smoothie I was drinking. She eagerly lapped that up, using her proboscis in the same manner as she had done with water. This seemed to improve her condition. But the next morning she was lifeless. Maybe the smoothie was too much sugar all at once? Or maybe she was ready to die anyway?

image.png

Farewell friend! Thank you for the many hours of beauty you shared in the last days of your life!

Wild and Scenic River: Deschutes River

In 1988, sections of the Deschutes River in Oregon were added to the Wild and Scenic River System. From Wikiup Dam to the Bend Urban Growth boundary; from Odin Falls to the upper end of Lake Billy Chinook; and from the Pelton Reregulating Dam to the confluence with the Columbia River: all are designated segments. A total of 174.4 miles of the Deschutes River are designated: 31 miles are designated as Scenic and 143.4 miles are Recreational. No Water No Life visited the Deschutes River during a Columbia River Basin expedition to Oregon in October of 2017. For more information about the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act read the first part of this blog series.

More about the Deschutes River

Historically, the Deschutes provided an important resource for Native Americans as well as the pioneers traveling on the Oregon Trail in the 19th century.  Today, the river is heavily used for recreational purposes like camping, hiking, kayaking, rafting, wildlife observation and especially fishing. The Lower Deschutes provides spawning habitat for fish such as rainbow trout and chinook salmon. The river also provides riparian habitat for other wildlife like bald eagle, osprey, heron, falcon, mule deer, as well as many amphibians and reptiles. The riparian vegetation is dominated by alder trees.

The following are photographs taken during the 2017 expedition to the Deschutes River.

Jones_171024_OR_5595

Jones_171024_OR_5636

Jones_171026_OR_6326

Jones_171024_OR_5611

Jones_171024_OR_5840

 

Sources:

https://www.rivers.gov/rivers/deschutes.php

 

All photos © Alison M. Jones.