HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-08-21 ENR Packet
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCESCOMMISSION
Monday, August 21, 2017
7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers -Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road B East
1.Call to Order
2.Roll Call
3.Approval of Agenda
4.Approval ofMinutes:July 17, 2017
5.New Business
a.Wakefield Lake Water Quality–Public Meeting (7to 8p.m.)
b.Comp Plan 2040 –Natural Resources Chapter Review
c.Emerald Ash Borer Update
6.Unfinished Business
7.Visitor Presentations
8.Commission Presentations
a.Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee -Resiliency Chapter
9.Staff Presentations
a.July 20, 2017 City Council Meeting Review
1)Paris Agreement
2)Community Center Solar Panels
b.Energy Fair –Harriet Island Park, September 9-10, 2017
c.Metro Clean Energy ResourceTeams Annual Event –University of St. Thomas,
September 13, 2017
d.Nature Center Programs
10.Adjourn
Agenda Item 4
MINUTES
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
7:00 p.m., Monday,July 17, 2017
Council Chambers, City Hall
1830 County Road B East
1. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission was called to order at 7:05
p.m.by Chair Palzer.
2. ROLL CALL
Keith Buttleman, Commissioner Present
Mollie Miller, Commissioner Presentuntil 8:35 p.m.
Ann Palzer, Chair Present
Ted Redmond, Commissioner Present
Ryan Ries, Vice Chair Absent
Tom Sinn, Commissioner Present
Staff Present
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Millermoved to approve the agenda as submitted.
Seconded by CommissionerSinn. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Miller requested an amendment to the minutes on page 2, item 8 a. adding
“Commissioner Miller stated that the commission should also consider recommending the city
sign onto the Compact of Mayors, which is a global initiative to reduce emissions.”
CommissionerRedmondmoved to approve the June 19, 2017, Environmental and Natural
Resources Commission meeting minutes as amended.
Seconded by CommissionerMiller. Ayes –All
The motion passed.
5. NEW BUSINESS
a.2040 Comprehensive Plan Overview
i.Environmental Planner, Shann Finwall gave an overview of the 2040
Comprehensive Plan.The Environmental and Natural Resources Commission will
review Chapter 3 Sustainability (now called the Resiliency Chapter) and Chapter7
Natural Resources. The Commission should make recommendations on changes
or newlanguage for the chapters by October. The Commission’s
July 17, 2017
1
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission MeetingMinutes
recommendations will then be forwarded to the Comprehensive Plan Steering
Committee. The draft Comprehensive Plan is scheduled for completion in early
spring, at which time it is forwarded to the Metropolitan Council and surrounding
communities for review. The final plan must be adopted by the end of 2018.
Environmental Planner Finwall indicated that Natural Resources Coordinator Gaynor
would be present during the August Commission meeting to review the Natural Resources
Chapter.That chapter was developedwith the assistance of ecologists from Applied
Ecological Services. Much of that chapter is still relevant.
The Commission created a Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee to be made up of three
Commissionersthat will review and research the new Resiliency Chapter.
Commissioners Miller, Redmond, and Sinn were appointed to the subcommittee. The
subcommittee will present research and findings and offer draft language for review by the
full Commission.
6.UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a.Urban Agriculture–Zoning Review
i.Environmental Planner, ShannFinwall gave the update on the Urban Agriculture.
During tonight’s meeting the commission will finalize the review of crop agriculture
and begin discussions on direct consumer sales.
The ENRCommission finalizedtheir review of crop agricultureand began discussions on
direct to consumer sales.Staff will bring back changes to the Commission for review and
approval. The urban agriculture zoning review is scheduled to becomplete by the end of
the year.
7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None present.
8.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
None.
9.STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a.Emerald Ash Borer Update
The ENR Commission reviewed a plan in 2011 which was adapted by the City Council.
The Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor will be addressing the ENR
commissionin August to give an update on the Emerald Ash Borer policy and be looking
for input from the ENR Commission.
b.Capital Improvement Plan -Tuesday, July 18, 2017, 7 p.m.
During the Planning Commission Meetingthere will be a public hearing about the CIP
Plan. The City Council will make the final decision on the CIP in December 2017.
c.National Night Out –Tuesday, August 1, 2017
Tuesday, August 1, 2017,from 5 to 9 p.m. is National Night Out. Many neighborhoods
throughout Maplewood will be hosting a variety of special events such as block parties,
July 17, 2017
2
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission MeetingMinutes
cookouts, mini carnivals and visits from police and fire personnel. Contact the Maplewood
Police Department or visit the website at www.maplewoodmn.govclick on the National
Night out image for information on how to participate.If there are any volunteers contact
staff.
d.Master Water Stewards –Tuesday, August 8, 2017
The master water stewards is recruiting the next cohort of stewards. The fresh water
society developed the master water stewards program in 2013 to equip citizens with the
knowledge and skills needed to improve water quality at the grass roots level. You
volunteer 50 hours of community service in the initial year of certificate, at least 25 hours
each subsequent year and attend 8 hours of continuing education to maintain the
certification. Go to the website www.masterwatershedstewards.orgfor more information
on this program.
e.Nature Center Programs
Environmental Planner, ShannFinwall presented the upcoming Nature Center Programs.
For more information contact the Maplewood Nature Center at (651) 249-2170.
10.ADJOURNMENT
Chair Palzer adjourned the meeting at 8:40p.m.
July 17, 2017
3
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission MeetingMinutes
Agenda Item 5.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
FROM:Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Audra Robbins, Parks and Recreation Manager
Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
DATE: August 17,2017for August21,2017ENR Commission Meeting
SUBJECT:Wakefield Lake Water Quality – Public Meeting (7 to 8 p.m.)
Introduction
Maplewood hosted an open house on June 28, 2017, to gatherinput on the proposed multi-
purpose building for Wakefield Park. During the open houseand in survey responses, residents
expressed concerns about water quality and the condition ofWakefield Lake.At the August
Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission meeting, staff from Ramsey-
Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) and Barr Engineering will present the Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study they conducted for Wakefield Lake.
Background
The FederalClean Water Act of 1972 requires states to adopt water quality standards to protect
water bodies from pollution. These standards define how much of a pollutant can be present in
a water body and still allow it to meet designated uses such as drinking water, fishing,
swimming, irrigation or industrial purposes. An “impaired water” is a water body that does not
meet one or more of these water quality thresholds for certain pollutants.
Wakefield Lake has been declared animpaired water. When a lake is impaired, a TMDL study
must be submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The TMDL study
researcheslevels and causes of impairment,setsgoals for reaching approved standards,and
identifies some strategies for achieving the goals.
March 17, 2014: The ENR Commission held a public meeting to gather input into the Wakefield
Lake water quality study and learn about potential water quality improvement opportunities in
Wakefield Lake and its surrounding sub-watershed. During the meeting the RWMWD and Barr
Engineering gave a presentation on the preliminary results of the study and gathered input from
the public and the Commission on ways to reduce impacts to Wakefield Lake.
April 2017: RWMWD completed the Wakefield Lake TMDL study and submitted it to MPCA for
approval. It is currently undergoing review by the MPCA and is available at:
www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw8-54b.pdf
Discussion
The TMDL study reflects that Wakefield Lake is impaired for excess phosphorus levels. The
nutrient phosphorus feeds algae in the lake, resulting in algae blooms and loss of water quality.
The excess phosphorus in this lake is primarily from three sources:
1.About 1% is from atmospheric deposition.
2.About32% of the phosphorus is from within the lake (aquatic plants decaying and
phosphorus being released from the lake bottom sediments).
3.About 67% is from the watershed (stormwater runoff and everything that enters the
lake).
The TMDL study sets a goal of reducing phosphorus by 43% in Wakefield Lake. Several
projects and programs to reduce phosphorus have been implemented over the past several
years or are currently being considered. These projects will be presented during the ENR
Commission meeting.
Shoreline and aquatic vegetation are important parts of the lake ecosystem, essential for
insects, fish, and wildlife. Excessive vegetation and non-native aquatic weeds can interfere with
recreation and impact water quality and lake health. The TMDL study addresses aquatic
weeds,buta detailed weed management plan needs to be developed.The City of Maplewood
will be meeting with partners from RWMWD, Ramsey Conservation District, and the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources in 2017-2018 to study the pros, cons, and feasibility of
various management options,and to developa weed management plan for Wakefield Lake.
Residents have expressed concern about an exposed pipe and lake levels at Wakefield Lake.
These issues have been corrected.Other concernsbrought up at the June 28, 2017, park
improvement open houseincluded: 1) silt deposition, 2) fishing,and 3) litter in the lake.City
staff and representatives from RWMWD and Barr Engineering will be present during the ENR
Commission meeting to give a presentation on the TMDL study,andto discuss other concerns
brought up duringthe park improvement open house.
Recommendation
Review and discuss water quality issues at Wakefield Lake. No action required.
Attachmentsand Links
1.Wakefield Lake TMDL Study Executive Summary
2.Wakefield Lake Water Quality Information Document
3.Picturesof Aquatic Vegetation in Wakefield Lake
4.Link to Full Wakefield Lake TMDL Study:
www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw8-54b.pdf
2
Attachment 1
Executive Summary
This Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study addresses aquatic life and aquaticrecreation impairments
in Battle Creek and Fish Creek, and nutrient impairments in Bennett Lake and Wakefield Lake. The goal
of this TMDL report is to quantify the pollutant reductions needed to meet the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency’s (MPCA’s) water quality standards for all fourRamsey-Washington Metro Watershed
District (RWMWD) water bodies. This TMDL report was established in accordance with Section303(d) of
the Clean Water Act and provides thewasteload allocations (WLAs) andload allocations (LAs) for the
impaired water resources.
This report outlines the development of the TMDLs for Battle Creek, Bennett Lake, Fish Creek, and
Wakefield Lakeand describes best management practices (BMPs) that can be implemented to work
towards achieving the required pollutant reductions to these resources.
A Biological Stressor Identification (SID) Reportwas completed in spring 2015 for Battle Creek using the
United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 2010 Casual Analysis/Diagnosis Decision
Information System (CADDIS)(Barr 2015). The SID report found that chloride and total suspended solids
(TSS) are the primary stressors to the fish and macroinvertebrate assemblages within Battle Creek.To
evaluate sources of TSS to Battle Creek, sediment transport modeling was compared to annual TSS
loading predicted from observed water quality data.This analysis indicates that elevated TSS
concentrations in Battle Creek are caused by high sediment loading mobilized by watershed runoff and
erosion within the immediate stream channeland stream corridor.
The TSS load reductions of 66% to91% are required to meet water quality standards, depending on the
flow conditions. Primary implementation strategies includeincreasing flow detention and treatment
within the watershed and restoration of sections of the stream corridor.
Fish Creek was placed on the 303(d) list forEscherichia coli bacteria (E.coli)impairment in 2014. E.coli
bacteria is used in water quality monitoring as an indicator organism to identify water that is
contaminated with human or animal waste and the accompanying disease-causing organisms. Bacterial
abundance in excess of the water quality standards can pose a human health risk.A population source
inventory and assumed bacteria availability wereused to estimate the sources of bacteria loading to
Fish Creek. The analysis indicated that runoff from urban areas mobilizing bacteria from improperly
managed petwaste is the main source of E.coliloading during wet-weather conditions, and failing
subsurface septic treatment systems (SSTSs) and sanitary sewer exfiltration are the main sourcesof
loadingduring dry-weather conditions.
Overall E.coli load reductions up to62% are required in order to meet water quality standards,
depending on the flow conditions. The primary implementation strategies include education and
outreach related to pet waste management, and an inventory of and improvements to non-compliant
SSTSs and sanitary sewer infrastructure within the watershed.
Bennett and WakefieldLakesare impaired for aquatic recreation due to excess nutrients.The main
phosphorus sources to Bennett Lake are both watershed runoff and internal sediment. The major source
of phosphorus loading to Wakefield Lake is phosphorus mobilized by watershed runoff. Secondary
1
sources of phosphorus loading include release from lake sediment, release from die back of aquatic
plants, and direct atmospheric deposition.
To achieve the TMDL and state water quality standards, a 71%reduction of the growing season
phosphorus load is requiredfor Bennett Lake,and a46%reduction for WakefieldLake.The primary
implementation strategiesto address internal loadfor Bennet Lake include carp and curly-leaf
pondweed management to reduce internal phosphorus loading. Whole-lake alum treatment and
herbicide treatment to control curly-leafpondweed are the primary recommendations to reduce
internal phosphorus loading in Wakefield Lake. A varietyof water quality BMPs can be implemented to
achieve the required watershed runoff phosphorus loading reduction in both watersheds.
2
Attachment 2
Wakefield Lake Water Quality
Parks and Recreation Department, City of Maplewood, July 2017
Many people who grew up in the Wakefield Park neighborhood have fond memories of swimming in Wakefield
Lake as kids. The question often comes up, “What happened to the water quality in the lake and could we
ever swim here again?”
Stormwater Impacts
As Maplewood developed, buildings and roads replaced vegetation and there was less vegetated land to soak
up the rain. Stormsewers were installed to carry water out of the neighborhood to area streams, lakes, and
wetlands. In the Wakefield Subwatershed, stormwater is routed to Wakefield Lake through storm pipes. It
carries with it nutrients and pollutants.
Map of the Wakefield Subwatershed. The area that drains to Wakefield Lake is 945 acres.
Wakefield Lake Has Too Much Phosphorus
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has classified Wakefield Lake as an impaired water. It is
impaired for excess phosphorus levels. The nutrient phosphorus feeds algae in the lake, resulting in algae
blooms and loss of water quality.
Where is this excess phosphorus from? For Wakefield Lake about 1% is from atmospheric deposition, about
32% of the phosphorus is from within the lake (aquatic plants decaying and phosphorus being released from
the lake bottom sediments), and about 67% is from the watershed (stormwater runoff and everything that
enters the lake).
When a lake is declared impaired, a Total Maximum Daily Load study (TMDL) must be submitted to the MPCA.
This study researches levels and causes of impairment, sets goals for reaching approved standards, and
identifies some strategies for achieving the goals. A draft TMDL Study for Wakefield Lake was prepared by
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) and submitted to MPCA in April 2017 for approval.
This document is available at: www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/wq-iw8-54b.pdf.
What Can Be Done to Improve Water Quality in Wakefield Lake?
The draft TMDL sets a goal of reducing phosphorus by 43% in Wakefield Lake. Several projects and programs
to reduce phosphorus have been implemented over the past several years or are currently being considered.
1)A grit chamber on the north end of the Lake captures some sediments.
2)A spent lime system was constructed at south end of the Lake (calcium from the lime binds with the
phosphorus so it doesn’t dissolve in the water).
3)Wicklander Pond at City Hall takes some of this watershed’s runoff and was dredged in 2013-14.
4)A few stormponds and large rain gardens have been built in the Wakefield Subwatershed to trap
and/or filter pollutants.
5)Boulevard rain gardens in the neighborhood take some of the runoff. A retrofit project late this
summer will install curb cuts in 10 older rain gardens so they collect and filter street runoff.
6)An additional filter system for stormwater is proposed to be constructed on the city lot at Frost and
Kennard.
7)Street sweeping is ongoing.
8)Water quality monitoring by RWMWD is ongoing.
9)Rain garden retrofit projects have taken place at multiple churches in the area to help treat
stormwater.
10)RWMWD, the City of Maplewood, and other partners will do additional projects in the future.
What About Weeds in the Lake?
Shoreline and aquatic vegetation are important parts of the lake ecosystem, essential for insects, fish, and
wildlife. But excessive vegetation and non-native aquatics can interfere with recreation and impact water
quality and lake health. The City does not yet have a vegetation management plan for the Lake but looks
forward to working with partners to create one.
What Can Individuals and Homeowners Do?
There are many things homeowners and visitors can do to help reduce pollutants entering Wakefield Lake: 1)
create a rain garden to capture the rain from your roof and driveway so it doesn’t enter the stormsewer, 2) use
best management practices if you’re fertilizing to avoid spills and excess, 3) avoid washing your car in the
driveway, 4) pick up pet waste, 5) keep grass clippings and leaves out of the street.
Interested in a Rain Garden?
Contact Michael Schumann, Ramsey Conservation District, to schedule a site visit.
michael.schumann@CO.RAMSEY.MN.US or (651) 266-7275
Attachment 3
Wakefield Lake Aquatic Vegetation
Agenda Item 5.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
FROM:Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
DATE: August 17,2017for August 21, 2017ENR Commission Meeting
SUBJECT:Comp Plan 2040 – Natural Resources ChapterReview
Introduction
Everyten years, all Twin Cities metro cities and counties are required to update their
comprehensive plansto ensure compatibility with the plans adopted by the Metropolitan
Council. Chapters and areas of focus include land use, housing, sustainability, parks, natural
resources, transportation, historical resources, surface water and sanitary sewer. The city has
hired consultants HKGi to oversee the planning processfor the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Background
The Natural Resources Chapter of the 2030ComprehensivePlan (Attachment 1) was
developed with the assistance of ecologists from Applied Ecological Services. Much of this
chapteris still very relevant.At the August Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR)
Commission meeting, staffwill review the outline of the 2030 Natural Resources Chapter and
review accomplishments since then. In addition, staff would like to gather input on:1)
Greenways; 2) Local Habitats; 3) Special Natural Resources Topics. Discussion questions for
these are included below.
Discussion
The Natural Area Greenways
Attached is a map of the Natural Area Greenways (Attachment 2). The brochure on Natural
Area Greenwaysexplains the concept with additional details found on pages 5-8 of the 2030
Natural Resources Chapter. The City also completed a brochure for the Holloway-Beaver
Creek Greenway.These brochures are included as separate handouts in your packet, with
links to the brochures included below. The Greenway concept is very valuable as a planning
tool formanaging our natural resources. However, it has been a problematic because some
people expect these to be recreation corridorsandhave difficultyunderstanding that the
Greenways area mix of public and private lands. Questions for Commissioners to consider:
1.Do you think the Natural Area Greenway brochure successfully explains the concept of
our Greenways?
2.Do you think of the Greenwaysas recreation corridors or as primarily habitat/wildlife
corridors?
3.Do you think it is confusing for people that the Greenways include both public and
private land?
4.Should we continue to use the term Greenways or should we consider changing the
term or doing away with the Greenwayconcept?
Local Habitats
Local Habitatsare individual natural areasor areas with more than one parcel that are too small
to be considered Greenways. They may be Neighborhood Preserves, natural areas within
active parks, backyard habitat areas, stormwater management areas and other open space
sites.This concept isvaluable in natural resources planningbut has been confusing for some
people becauseit includes individual sites as well asclusters of sites, and it includes both public
and private land.Questionsfor Commissionersto consider:
1.Is the descriptionof Local Habitatson pages 8-9of the 2030 Natural Resources Chapter
clear?
2.Do you find the concept of Local Habitatsconfusing since it includes both public and
private lands?
3.Are the two significant Local Habitats(3M Wetlands and Highwood-Vista Hills Wetlands)
confusing? Should they be considered mini Greenways instead?
City-Wide Natural Resource Issues
The2030Natural Resources Chapter addresses several special natural resources topics on
pages 14-15. In the past several years the following issues have been especially important:
urban tree management, invasive species management, andurban wildlife management. A
new issuethat was not mentioned in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is pollinators. In addition,
rain gardens and the City’s tree inventoryare being added to the City’s asset management
software, which will give us better tracking and management capabilities.Questions for
Commissioners to consider:
1.Are there other natural resource issues the city should be working on that should be
included in this section?
2.Do you think we need to better develop thetopics listed under natural resource issues?
If yes, are there particular programs or ideas you’d like to suggest?
Accomplishments
The City hascompleted several natural resource projects thatmeet goals or strategieslaid out
in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Some highlights include:
1.Conducted land cover inventory using Minnesota Land Cover Classification System.
2.Developed Greenwaybrochures.
3.Completedreport for the Fish Creek Natural Area Greenway.
2
4.Acquired the Fish Creek property and restored prairie habitat onthe site.
5.Made wildlife and pedestrian connection under Highway 36 in the Phalen Chain of Lakes
Greenway.
6.Adopted Living Streets Policyand completed street projects using these guidelines.
7.Adopted pollinator resolution.
8.Expanded citizen monitoring programs to include invasive plant patrol and bee
monitoring.
9.Improved City webpageson natural resource topics.
Recommendation
Commissioners should review and provide input for the Natural Resources Chapter of the 2040
Comprehensive Plan.
Attachments
1.Natural Resources Chapterof the 2030 ComprehensivePlan
2.Greenway Map
3.Natural Area GreenwaysBrochure(separate attachment)
4.Holloway-Beaver Creek Greenway Brochure(separate attachment)
Links
1.Natural Area Greenways Brochure:
http://maplewoodmn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/10858
2.Holloway-Beaver Creek Greenway Brochure:
http://maplewoodmn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/10859
3
Attachment 1
Chapter 7: Natural Resources
Protect, Connect, Restore, and Manage Ecosystems, Plant Communities and Species
Why a Natural Resources Plan is Needed
Maplewood’s quality of life depends on how it managesits natural resources. Natural resources are theair, minerals,
land, water, and biotathat form the foundation to life in Maplewood. For example, the oxygen we breathecomes
from plants. Without plants, the atmosphere would be poisonous to people and animals.That is a free ecosystem
service that benefits people in Maplewood. There are many others.
The benefits of treating natural resources in a sustainable wayinclude:
High quality forests, savannas, prairies, wetlands, lakes, and streams will support a variety of life—trees,
shrubs, wildflowers, groundcover, fish, birds, and other wildlife.
Lakes, streams, and wetlands will be clean enough tosupport aquatic life and provide recreational
opportunities.
Undeveloped land will provide essential ecosystem services.
Vegetation will help preventsediment, phosphorus, nitrogen, and contaminants from reaching lakes,
streams, and wetlands.
Rainwater infiltrates, which reducesflooding and feeds groundwater.
Groundwateris rechargedand can be used for drinking, irrigation, and to feedcold, clean water to lakes,
streams, and wetlands.
Water levelsare more stable, which prevents erosion ofshorelines and stream channels.
Beautiful placesexist for people tosee and visit.
There is an economic value to treating natural resourcesin a sustainable way. Property values are higher near
1
. New developments that protect natural resources using conservation design and
natural areas and open space
2
low-impact developmenttechniquescan save an average of 24-27%in construction costs per development.
Damage to stormsewer outfalls, shorelines, and buildings due to flooding are reducedin such developments. In
addition to the economic and recreational benefits of natural resources, for many people nature and natural
resources merit protection and care due to their intrinsic value.
This natural resources plan is a guide for how Maplewood can manage natural resources in a sustainable way. It will
help protectand enhance Maplewood’s quality of life for current and future generations. It suggests strategies to
protect, connect, restore and manage ecosystems, plant communities, and species.This plan can guide zoning and
ordinances.It gives citystaff and officials information to use when making annual and long-range budgets.This plan
will also provide citizens withan understanding of how they can play a role in achieving these goals through wise
land use and management of their property.
1
Embrace Open Space study is at: http://www.embraceopenspace.org/EOSReport/EconomicValueofOpenSpace.pdf.
2
EPA Low Impact Development study isat: http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid/costs07/documents/reducingstormwatercosts.pdf;
AES study is at: http://www.appliedeco.com/Projects/ConDevArticleLayout.pdf.
Natural Resources 7-1
st
Wiseuse and management of natural resources isnotall that Maplewood needs to be a great place to live in the 21
century: the city also needs good schools, a vital economy, and efficient public services. But healthy natural
resourceswill help ensure that Maplewoodhas a high quality of lifethat can be sustained far into the future.
Vision and Goals for Natural Resources inMaplewood
The City of Maplewood has led the way in urban natural resource conservation in Minnesota.From a bonding
referendum in 1993to protectforests and wetlands, to a raingarden program for recharging groundwater and
purifying runoff to its lakesand streams, Maplewood’s citizens and elected leaders quickly adopt new ideas from
scientists, businesses, and regulatory agencies. Maplewood has learned that supporting environmental laws and
best practices has benefits for cityresidents.The cityalso believes that property values and the city’s overall
marketability will increase over time by improving natural resources and the environment.
Maplewood’s desire to become sustainable depends on stewardship of its ecosystems, plant communities, and
species. Good stewardship protects the functions of ecosystems and the free ecosystems services necessary for a
high quality of life.
Following its tradition, the City of Maplewood holds the following vision for natural resources:
The City of Maplewood,inorderto preserve a beautiful, functional,and varied environment for current and
future residents, will protect, connect, restore and manage its ecosystems, plant communities, and species.
The city will do this byusing the best science and striving forthe highest ecological standard.
To realize this vision, the City of Maplewood has these goals for natural resources:
Natural Resources Goal 1.Protect and buffer ecosystemsforests, savannas, prairies, lakes, streams,
wetlandsand other natural resources.
Natural Resources Goal 2.Connect and enlarge natural areas and wildlife habitat.
Natural Resources Goal 3.Restore and manage natural areas,wildlife habitat, and other natural resources
for high ecological qualityand for diversity of plant and animalspecies.
Natural Resources Goal 4.Restore the natural ecological functions involving water by better managing
stormwater runoff. This means vegetation filtering, infiltration, groundwater recharge, and maintaining
stable water levels.
Natural Resources Goal 5.Fund natural resourceprogramsto achieve the vision and goals.
Natural Resources Goal 6.Integrate the citys natural areas, open space, and active parks and trails.
Natural Resources Goal 7.Incorporate the vision and goals for natural resources in the citys
comprehensive plan, ordinances, policies, development standards, and zoning.
Natural Resources Goal 8. Enhance publicunderstanding of nature, natural systems, and environmental
issuesby providing programs, information, and interpretive facilities.
Natural Resources 7-2
Natural Resources Goal 9.Promote a culture of stewardshipon public and private land through access to
natural areasand education and volunteer opportunities in natural areas restoration and management.
Natural Resources Goal 10.Seek cost savingsby using natural systems to provide services such as
heating, cooling, stormwater managementand water conservation.
The Natural Environment of Maplewood
Prior to settlement in 1851,most of Maplewood was covered by oak savanna, aplant community with scattered oak
trees or oak groves and a groundcover of grasses, sedges, and wildflowers. Hazelnut, chokecherry, juneberry,
nannyberry, and wild plum grew in the savanna and at wetland edges. Low, wet areas contained wet prairies, sedge
meadows, and marshes. Forests grew on the Mississippi River bluffs in south Maplewood and in valleys where fires
were not severe. Some forests were mainly oak and in others sugar maple and basswood mingled with oaks. Lakes
were smaller at the time, and were later enlarged by excavating wetland vegetation from the shorelines.
Nearly every year the Mdewakanton Dakota Indians ignited fires in the region; the fires had burned the savannas and
wetlands for thousands of years. As a result, most of the plants and animals living in the natural areas of Maplewood
were residents of savannas, marshes, wet prairies, and sedge meadows. Plants and animals of forest settings lived
in the small forest areas of the Mississippi bluffs and in ravineswith flowing streams.
After settlement, many changes took place in Maplewood:
Natural lands were developed with farms, houses, and businesses.
Large savannas andforests were broken into smallseparatedparcels.
Remaining savannas became overgrownwith trees and shrubs.
Many wetlands were drained, excavated, and filled.
Plant life was altered by grazing and the introduction of non-native plants.
Trees from river floodplains seeded into uplands and wetlands.
Erosion occurred in streams, at shorelines, and on steep slopes.
More sediment, phosphorus, and nitrogen reached lakes, streams, and wetlands than historically.
Some wildlife was eliminated by hunting.
Some wildlife left or died out because there was not enough habitatto successfully breed.
More water flowed directly into lakes, streams, and wetlandsafter rainstorms.
Water levels in groundwater fell, and water levels in lakes, streams, and wetlandsrose and fellmore often
and more quicklythan historically.
One example of what these changes mean ismany wildlife species are disappearingor are indecline.Generalist
species, such asraccoonand deer, are species that can adapt to different types of habitat, including urban habitats.
Many generalist species thrive in Maplewood. But specialist species, such as the ovenbird and Blanding’s turtle, are
more particular about habitat and often need large, connected habitat to persist. These species have declined, or are
in danger of declining locally. Many of the species in Table 7.1 are specialists.
Natural Resources 7-3
Table 7.1.Status of Selected Historical and Current Species in Maplewood. These species are on the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ list of species in greatest conservation need and are found in the
east Twin Cities region. The list is for illustration only and was not checked by field surveys.
Once Present, Now GonePossibly Present, In Decline?Species Restored
American WoodcockCommon MudpuppyBald Eagle
Black-crowned Night-heronBrown ThrasherPeregrine Falcon
Eastern MeadowlarkCommon Nighthawk
Red-headed WoodpeckerEastern Wood-pewee
Red-shouldered HawkField Sparrow
Sedge WrenLeast Flycatcher
Trumpeter SwanNorthern Rough-winged Swallow
Upland SandpiperOvenbird
Wood ThrushRose-breasted Grosbeak
Persius DuskywingSwamp Sparrow
RegalFritillaryVirginia Rail
American BadgerYellow-bellied Sapsucker
Franklin's Ground SquirrelAmerican Brook Lamprey
Prairie VoleLeast Weasel
Blanding's TurtleCommon Snapping Turtle
Gopher SnakeSmooth Green Snake
Western Hognose SnakeEastern Fox Snake
Eastern Hognose Snake
Today, Maplewood is a patchwork of developed land and undeveloped natural areas(Figure 7.1). Maplewood has
several lakes and ponds in the north, fringed by small amounts of wetland vegetation. The urban watershedthat
feeds the lakes provides poor water quality.There are many wetlands, but aggressive cattails andreed canary-grass
cover most.
South Maplewood has large forests. The once large expanses of savanna and prairie no longer exist—remaining
grasslandsare small andsupport only a few species.Three streams—Battle Creek, Fish Creek, and Snake Creek—
flow from Woodbury through Maplewood and then to the Mississippi. Inplaces their banks are eroding andwater
quality is poor because the headwaters are in developed areas. Despite the problems they support a variety of
aquatic insect and fish life.
There are few natural areas of high quality in Maplewood. Most have lost plant and animal species because they are
smalland suffer serious edge effects—invasion by non-native species,for example. However, in several places in
the citythere are large, continuous habitats well suited to preserving a wide variety of wildlife and plantsif restored
and managed.In many local habitats native plants and animals persist despite thesmall size of the habitat.
Maplewood faces the following challenges in managingitsnatural resources:
1.How to integrate a developed city and dense population with natural resource conservation.
2.How to protectand restore ecosystems in the cityso that ecosystem services will continue.
3.How to retain and attract animal species that need high qualityor large habitats (e.g., specialist species).
4.How to protectand restore the quality of upland and lowland plant communities, wildlife habitats, lakes, and
streams.
5.How to generate funding for natural resourcesand associated infrastructure.
6.How to prioritize projects.
Natural Resources 7-4
7.How to involve city residents and businesses with city staff and officials in carrying out thevision and goals
for natural resources.
Natural Resources in Maplewood
The City of Maplewood intends toachieve its vision and goals for natural resources using a comprehensive
approach. Maplewood’sframework for protecting and managing natural resources focuses on four levels.
Natural Area Greenways.Natural Area Greenways are large contiguous areas of habitat that cross
ownership boundaries. They protect and expand ecosystem services and habitat.Because they are large
they have the potential to provide habitat for both generalist and specialist species.Maplewood has
identified four greenways.
Local Habitats.Local Habitats are individual natural areasand backyard habitat connections. They serve
the needs of people wanting to enjoy and learn about wild habitat near theirhomes and also provide
ecosystem services and wildlife habitat locally. Because they are relatively small, they are typically not able
to provide habitat for specialist species.Local habitats may be public or private lands.
Active Parks and Trails. Active Parks and Trails connect Natural Area Greenways and Local Habitatsand
give people places to play sports, picnic, and bike.
Natural Resource Issues.Somenatural resource issues are addressed city-wide through individual
programs, such as stormwater management.
Natural Area Greenways
Maplewood defines Natural Area Greenways aslarge contiguous areas of habitat that cross ownership boundaries.
Thepurpose of Natural Area Greenways is to protect, connect, and restore large scale ecosystems and ecosystem
services and provide habitat for speciesthat need large natural areas.Greenways contain large natural areas, high
quality plant communities and wildlife habitat, and provide a wide, continuous corridor for animal movement. In
general, a corridorin a greenway should not be narrower than the habitat size for a species that needs the corridor.
Scientific studies vary tremendously in their recommendations for corridor width. For Maplewood a reasonable
minimum corridor width in a greenway is660 feet (200 meters). This width tries to balance the limitations on natural
resources in cities with the needs of animals that use corridors to survive.It is unlikely Maplewood will be able to
achieve this minimum width throughout a whole greenwaydue to existing roadsand development, however it is a
goal to reach for where feasible.
Four Natural Area Greenways exist in Maplewood(Figure 7.2). They were selected by mapping and connecting
large, better quality natural areas and avoiding major roads and watershed divides that are barriers to many species
(Appendix 7.1). The two northern greenways are mostly lowland ecosystems (lakes and wetlands) north of I-94. The
two southern greenways consist mostly of upland ecosystems (forests, grasslands)with smallwetlands and streams
south of I-94.
Greenways provide stopovers for the hundreds of bird species that migrate through Maplewood each spring and fall.
Butbirdsalso use Local Habitats and backyards if food and shelter are present.Bird and insect migrants (e.g.,
monarch butterfly) move through Maplewood along a broad front. They may concentrate in some places due to local
Natural Resources 7-5
geography and vegetation. The Mississippi Flyway, for example,is wider than the Mississippi River.Waterfowl,
waterbirds, and shorebirds generally orient to itand use its open water in the spring while waiting for ice to melt on
lakes and wetlands in the surrounding area. Once in Maplewood, these birds choose migratory stopover habitat
based on size, quality, and isolation, not geographic location. Migrating songbirds from the tropics and subtropics
also move on a broad front, but descend from flight elevations and move through vegetation eating insects as they
journey north. As they move through Maplewood, these birds concentrate in woodlots, dense tree patches in
developments, grasslands and brushland, and in the vegetated edges of wetlandsand lakes. The more patches of
permanent vegetationthere are,the more opportunities these birds have to feed as they migrate.
1.Phalen-Casey Chain-of-Lakes
Greenway composition and regional barriers
This large, lowland greenway consists of a chain of lakes in formerly extensive wetlands. Stretching from Phalen
Lake to Casey Lake, it includes Round, Keller, Gervais, Kohlman Lakes and Kohlman Creek.Most of the greenway
is open water with a narrow wetland fringe. More wetlands are east of Kohlman Lake.This greenway extends into
North St. Paul, Little Canada, and St. Paul.
Regional barriers to the movement of fish, freshwater mussels, crayfish, and some other aquatic life are the urban
development south and west of the greenway, and the major watershed divides to the north and east.Water leaves
this greenway from Phalen Lake and travels in a large storm sewer until it discharges tothe Mississippi River at
Mounds Park, St. Paul.
Elevenconstrictions (pinch points) with greenway width of <660 feet(Figure 7.2)restrictwildlife movementin the
greenway. Pinch points are mainly at road crossings (Frost Avenueat Round Lake, Highway61 at Keller Lake,
Highway36 at Keller Lake, Highway61 east of Kohlman Lake, west side of Hazelwood Park, and White Bear
Avenue). Other pinch points are the outlet of LakeGervais, the outlet of Kohlman Lake, a narrow wetland west of
Hazelwood Park, and a drop structure at the outlet of Casey Lake.
Greenway challenges
Reduced infiltration due to high percentage of impervious surface in the watershedcauses a lower water
table and reduces groundwater inflow to lakes and wetlands.
Poorwater quality inlakes and wetlands due to large amount of surface runoff from impervious surfaces
and turfgrassbrings sediment, nutrients, and pollutantsto waters.
Narrow lake and wetland buffersreduce the filtering and cleansing effect of vegetation at the water-upland
edge.
The small size of upland habitats next to lakes and wetlandspreventssome wetland animals from
completing a life cycle that includes using uplands (e.g., Blanding’s Turtle).
Over-abundance of reed-canary grass and cattaildegrades wetland habitat.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has designated several lakes in this greenway as impaired: Kohlman,
Gervais, Spoon, Keller, Round, and Phalen.
2.Holloway-Beaver Lake Wetlands
Greenway composition and regional barriers
This large, lowland greenwayis more or lesscontinuous wetland habitat from the marshlands north of Holloway
Avenue, southwest towetlands and uplands at Priory Neighborhood Preserve, and continuing southwest along
wetlands and Beaver Creek to Beaver Lake. This greenwayextends into North St. Paul, Oakdale, and St. Paul.
Natural Resources 7-6
Beaver Lakehas a narrow wetland fringe. This is a historical wetland area, containing wet prairie, wet meadow, and
marsh. Thelowland forests with ash, elm, cottonwood, and silver maplethat exist inthis greenwaywere not here
historically.
Regional barriers include a major watershed at the east edge, dense urban development inSt. Paul, and minor
watershed divides to the north and south. The greenway drains out of Beaver Lake and the water flows in a large
storm sewer west to Phalen Creek. The movement of fish, freshwater mussels, crayfish, and some other aquatic
speciesarerestricted by these barriers.
Sevenpinch pointswith greenway width of <660 feet (Figure 7.2)restrict wildlife movementin the greenway. Pinch
points are where roads (Century Avenue, Maryland Avenue,andLakewood Drive) and a railroad cross the
greenway. The narrow wetland between Maryland Avenue and Lakewood Drive isalsoa pinch point.
Greenway challenges
Thechallenges are the same as for Phalen-Casey Chain of Lakes above.
3.Battle Creek Forests
Greenway composition and regional barriers
This large, mostly forested greenway includes Battle Creek Regional Park and connects to the Mississippi River
bluffs in St. Paul. This greenway includes the Ponds at Battle Creek Golf Course,the forested portion of Highwood
neighborhood, and Applewood Neighborhood Preserve. The largest, best qualityforests are in Battle Creek
Regional Park. Battle Creek is part of this corridor and begins in Tanner’s Lake in Landfall, then flows to Battle Creek
Lake in Woodbury, and then through a narrow stream valley to Battle Creek Park. This is a historical forestarea of
oak forest,oak-maple-basswood forest, and aspen-oak woodland.
Regional barriers around this upland greenway are the major divided highways: US61, I-494, and I-94. These
highways prevent themovement of small mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and ground-dwelling insects that are an
important part of the forest’s food chain. Theyalso pose a significant risk to other mammals, birds, and flying insects
(e.g., butterflies, dragonflies) attempting to cross them.
Two pinch points in the continuous forest are on Battle Creek and Lower Afton Road west of McKnight Road. A
pinch point in the greenway exists at Lower Afton Road between Battle Creek Regional Parkand the golf course.
Battle Creek is pinched where it crosses under I-94 between Tanner’s and Battle Creek Lake, at the outlet of Battle
Creek Lake, and at Century Avenue.Only two pinch points are within the City.
Greenway challenges
The large forests are far from each other and connected by poor quality corridors.
Development at the edges of the large forests affects habitat quality inside the forests. Edge effects shrink
the actual size of interior forest habitat, reducing breeding areafor forest songbirds (e.g., warblers, vireos)
and other forest animals.
Low quality forest habitat is due to over-abundance of European buckthorn and invasion by other non-native
plants (e.g., garlic mustard).
Groundcover plants, trees, and shrubs were affected by cattle grazing in the past, and are today affected by
abundant white-tailed deer. Grazing and browsing affects some plant species but not others, reducing
forest plant diversity.
The forests were protected from severe fires historically, but not from all fire.
Feral and free-roamingcats affect small mammal populations and shrub nesting birds.
Natural Resources 7-7
Two-and four-lane roads inside the greenway prevent movement of some species.
The challenges described for the lowland greenways affect Battle Creek, a mostly developed 11.4 square
mile watershed. Battle Creek is a typical urban stream, with very low flowsat times andwith very highflows
3
after rainstorms, but water quality and aquatic lifeare fair to good.
4.Fish CreekForests
Greenway composition and regional barriers
This large, mostly forested greenway includes fourunits of Ramsey County’s Fish Creek Open Space. It is at the
north end of a large, mostly forested greenway that includes forests in Newport, St. Paul, and Cottage Grove. Fish
Creek is part of this corridor and begins at Carver Lake in Woodbury, then flows through the Fish Creek Open Space
and beneath I-494 and US61 to the Mississippi River. A smaller creek, Snake Creek, begins in the Bailey Nursery
grounds and also flows to the Mississippi. This is a historical forestarea of oak forest,oak-maple-basswood forest,
and aspen-oak woodland.
A portion of this greenway is in the Mississippi River Critical Area and the Mississippi National Riverand Recreation
Area.The Critical Area was designated and established by two governors and the Metropolitan Council between
1976 and 1979. Executive Order 79-19 requires that municipalities and agencies coordinate planning and
4
management in the Critical Area using common guidelines.In 1991 the legislature made the National River and
Recreation Area (part of the National Park Service) a critical area under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 116G. The
legislation also made the boundariesof the Critical Area and the National River and Recreation Area the same.
Regional barriers tothis upland greenway are the major divided highwayI-494and development to the east in
Woodbury. These barriers prevent the movement of small mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and ground-dwelling
insects that are an important part of the forest’s food chain. The highway poses a significant risk to other mammals,
birds, and flying insects (e.g., butterflies, dragonflies) attempting to cross it.
The main pinch pointsin the continuous forest arenear SterlingStreet atI-494and on the Bailey property.
Greenway challenges
The challenges are the same as the challenges for Battle Creek Forests above.
Loss of private land to development will decrease the amount ofnatural land in this greenway.
Unwise developmentmay degrade habitat.
Developers and landowners are often not knowledgeable about or are not receptive to conservation design
strategies.
Fish Creek and Snake Creek are reported to have eroding banks and beds.
Local Habitats
Local Habitats are individual natural areas and backyard habitat connections(Figure 7-3).The purpose ofLocal
Habitatsis to protect,buffer, and manage small, isolated wild habitats and protectlocal ecosystem servicesoutside
the Greenways.Local Habitatswill be difficult to enlarge and connect and will usually benefit generalist speciesbut
3
See Met Council monitoring reports for 2001 and 2003 at:
http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/Riverslakes/Streams/Reports/Battle.pdf,
http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RiversLakes/Streams/Reports/2003_Report/03Battle.pdf
4
For guidelines see: http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/critical_area/execord.pdf.
Natural Resources 7-8
not specialistspecies. These lands may be private or public. Private lands are included to show thenatural
resources that exist in the city. These private lands are not open for public use and these sites may bedeveloped
someday. Many of thepublic sites provide access and opportunities for people to enjoy and learn about wild
habitats.
Local Habitats include:
Some Maplewood Neighborhood Preserves;
Natural areas withinactive parks;
Neighborhoods that have contiguous backyard habitat;
Natural areas that are used for stormwater management;
County and city open space sites that have natural vegetation;
Private sites that have natural vegetation.
Two Local Habitats are significant because of their size and arrangement.
3M Lake Wetlands
This is the largest concentration of Local Habitatin Maplewood. It contains 3M Lake and wetlands identified by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as regionally significant.It is at the top of a watershed and runoff
comes from nearby. This improves chances to manage runoff and protector restore water quality in the lake and
wetlands.
Highwood-Vista Hills Wetlands
The Highwood and VistaHills neighborhoodsare unique in Maplewood due to the dozens of small, kettlehole
wetlands formed by the glaciers melting in place here(i.e., an ice-stagnation moraine). It is at the top of a watershed
and runoff comes from nearbylawns, driveways, andstreets. This improves the chances to manage runoff and
protector restore water quality in the wetlands. The Highwood-Vista Hills Wetlandsoverlap with the Battle Creek
Forest Greenway.Small forested wetlands provide excellent habitat for frogs and other aquatic life.
Local HabitatChallenges
Small habitats are affected more than large habitats by edge effects. Edge effects include invasion by non-
native plants (e.g., European buckthorn, garlic mustard) and animals (e.g., European Starling, House
Sparrow) and predation on wildlife by feral and free-roamingcats.
Many native species do not survive in small habitats for very long because they have small populations, and
small populations can easily go extinct.
Small habitats can be over-used by peoplebecause the impacts are concentratedin a small area. In small
habitats vegetation is easily trampled and lost, erosion is quick to start, and dumping of trash, lawn
clippings,leaves, and debris often happens.
Small lakes and wetlands are easily polluted because the runoff from impervious surfaces and turfgrass is
large and overwhelms the ecosystem’s ability to absorb and treat it. When they are at the top of a
watershed, small lakes and wetlands tend to have better water quality because less runoff reaches them.
Active Parks and Trails
The purposeof active parks and trailsis to provide easy access for people’s recreational enjoyment. These places
provide fewer ecosystem services than greenways and Local Habitats because they usually haveturfgrass,
compacted soils, and impervious surfaces, and are poor wildlife habitat. However, some parts of active parks,trails,
and golf coursescould be used to expand habitat and reduce edge effects in greenways and Local Habitats.In
Natural Resources 7-9
addition, areas withinactive parks that are not needed for active recreation may be restored to native plant
communities.The Parks Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan covers parks in detail.
Challenges in Active Parks and Trails
It is necessary to understand which parts of active parks and trails have an effect on greenways and Local
Habitats, positive and negative.
Some specialist wildlife isdisturbed by human activity. This is more important in greenways thaninLocal
Habitats.
Wheels, shoes, dogs, and wildlifespreadseeds of non-native plants to natural areas (e.g., garlic mustard).
Maintenance activities in parks and along trails can affect greenways and Local Habitats. Herbicide drift is
one example.
Special Natural ResourceIssues
Some natural resources issues arewidespread in the city and are addressed by topic through city-wide programs.
Existing programs include:
Stormwater Management Program;
Maplewood Tree Program;
Buckthorn Management Program.
Additional programs should be established to address natural resources issues such as:
Invasive plants and animals (other than buckthorn);
Wetland buffer improvements;
Sustainable landscaping and yard care;
Toxic waste sites;
Impaired waters. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has designated the following Maplewood Lakes as
impaired: Kohlman, Gervais, Spoon, Keller, Round, Phalen, Wakefield, and Beaver;
Stream restoration.
Thisnatural resources plan provides a newframework for protecting natural resourcesin Maplewood. It addresses
regional, city-wide, neighborhood, and site levels. It encompasses both public and private lands. This
comprehensive approachwill enableMaplewood to protect and manage natural resources. Implementation
strategies are discussed in the following section.
Natural Resources 7-10
Implementation Strategiesfor Natural Resources
The city’s present and future residentswill benefit by using Maplewood’s natural resourcesin a sustainable
way. The city’s reputation and its quality of lifewill be enhanced, residents and visitors will see beauty and
varietyinthe environment, and healthy ecosystems will provide services and benefits thatkeep the city’s
lakes and streams clean and its wildlife populations diverse.
This is a large vision with many ambitious goals for protecting,restoring and managing natural resources in
the city. It will take many yearsof discussion, planning, budgeting, and other work to make it a reality.
The implementationplan for natural resources has the following strategies. The city will need to review and
update the plan as priorities and resources change, as new strategies and opportunities arise, and as staff
and officials learn about new approaches to sustainability.
Education
Educate residents about nature, natural resources,and protection and management of resources.
Adopt both city-wide and neighborhood-based educational programming.
Give annual progress report tocity council and the community.
Organize public tours of the greenwaysand Local Habitats.
Develop educationalmaterials and create a natural resources pageon the city’s website. Post
natural resources plan, maps of greenways and Local Habitats, brochures, technical information for
stewardship work by residents, etc.
Present workshops to explain the natural resourcesplan. Answer questions: What are greenways
and Local Habitats, why are they needed, where are they, and how do they affect residents?
Develop programs and events to involve citizens in monitoring and conductingspeciesinventories.
Maplewood currently has citizen-monitoring programs for bluebirds, frogs, and for the
Neighborhood Preserves. Develop additional citizen-based inventory and monitoring programs to
gather information throughout the year. In addition, consider hosting events such as “BioBlitz Day”
to involve citizens in inventorying species on a single day.
Provide training on natural resources management for staff.
Collaborate with area schools to educate students on the local natural resources.
City Planning and Zoning
Integrate natural resources (e.g., greenways and Local Habitats) into the city’scomprehensive
plan, zoning, ordinances, development review, daily operations, capital budgeting, and bonding
initiatives.
Investigateoptions toencouragepreservation and management of Natural Area Greenways such
as educational programs, zoning overlays,or incentive programs for private landowners to adopt
certainapproaches to construction and land treatment thatimprovenatural resources in the
greenway.
Modify the city’s operating procedures and annual budgets to implement feasible strategies
identified above.
Hold brain-storming sessionswith cityleadership to identify strategies for implementing the natural
resources plan. Discussion should focus on three things: 1) integrating all public lands, across all
uses and owners; 2)integrating the public and private use of land and waters, where feasible;and
3) integratingthe existing stormwater infrastructure and management approach with the vision for
natural resources.Ideas for stormwater may include:
Natural Resources 7-11
Wetland and FloodplainBuffers.Set water quality buffer width using best available science
and incorporate in city ordinances and standards.
Stormwater Utility.Incorporate in the city’s stormwater utility the locations for stormwater
management that benefit greenways and Local Habitats. Implementation isongoing, but focus
should includeregional view and the integration of greenways and Local Habitats.
Update the city’s zoning and ordinances to implement win-win strategies such as:
o Conservation Design Ordinance.Create an ordinance or zoning overlaysthat encourage
low impact development and conservation design practices. Examples include City of
Lino Lakes, rural residential cluster development ordinance of Chisago City and Marine on
St. Croix, and St. Croix County, WI.Examples of conservation development designs and
5
approaches are widely available.This type of ordinance preserves large natural areas,
manages stormwater ecologically, minimizes land clearing and grading, reduces
infrastructure costs (sewers, curb andgutter, irrigated turfgrass, pavement extent, utility
run lengths), and promotes stewardship of natural resources. Incentives to landowners
might include accelerated permitting, exemptions, and increased housing density.
Alternative Stormwater Standards.This tool is part of a conservation design ordinance or
can stand alone. Its focus is to promote low impact development practices for stormwater
management, and integrate thosepractices with existing stormwater management
infrastructure operations and maintenance. Many examples of low impact practices exist,
6
such as rain gardens, bioswales, porous pavement, and narrow streets.
Protection and Restoration
Inventory and Evaluate Natural Resources
Conduct landcover inventory for city using Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS).
At a minimum, MLCCS should be done for the greenways and for all city-owned Local Habitats.
Identifyparcels with high ecological quality that need protection.
Identify areas in active parks that could be restored to natural habitat.
Identify locations in active parks, golf courses, and recreational trails that are part of greenways
and Local Habitatsand their buffers.
Identify locations in active parks, golf courses, and recreational trails useable for alternative,
ecological stormwater management. These areas can manage runoff from the parks, golf courses,
and trails,or can intercept and manage runoff from other land.
Identify other locations on public land (e.g., school property, county land, City Hall) that benefit
greenways and Local Habitats.
Assess natural resources city-wide, identify opportunities,and prioritize conservation and
managementinitiatives.
Protect Natural Areas
Develop and adopt a land protection plan for Fish Creek Forests Greenway using strategies
outlined in this section and the section below on Protect Natural Areas on Private Land.
5
Applied Ecological Services: http://www.appliedeco.com/ConservationDev.cfm; Urban Land Institute:
http://minnesota.uli.org/Content/NavigationMenu18/ConservationDesign/ConservationDevelopmentFramework.pdf
6
Low Impact Development Center, Inc.: http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org; National Stormwater Center:
http://www.stormwatercenter.org; USEPA NPDES Stormwater Program:
http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwatermonth.cfm; Minnesota Erosion Control Association: http://www.mnerosion.org;
Applied Ecological Services: http://www.appliedeco.com/StormWaterMgt.cfm.
Natural Resources 7-12
Pursue protection options initiated in 2007-2008 for city-owned parks and natural areas, including:
ordinances, no-net loss policy,zoning, conservation easements, and Comprehensive Plan. The
Comprehensive Plan should define special land use conditions for the Maplewood Neighborhood
Preserves, active parks, and other city open spaces. The Comprehensive Plan should also define
conditions and policies such as no-net loss in Neighborhood Preserveacreage.
Convene a budgeting session with cityleadership to identify the strategies to fund protection and
restoration of greenways,Local Habitats, and their buffers. Budget for the 5-yearand longer term
planning horizons. Strategies include:
Park Dedication.Transfer dedications from other parts of cityto greenwaysand Local
Habitats. Increase amount of parkdedication required.
Grants.Seek grants for greenways. (E.g., Minnesota Department of Natural Resource’s
(MNDNR) Regional Park or Natural and Scenic Areas grantwith 40% match for Regional Park
7
or 50% for Natural and Scenic Areas.MNDNR Environmental & Conservation Partnerships
Grant program for up to $20,000, with 50% municipal in-kind/cash match.)
Private Easements.Encourage private landowners to enter into conservation easementswith
a group such as Minnesota Land Trust.
Donation of Land or Easement.Seek donation of land or donation of conservation easement.
Trust for Public Land can be intermediary. Donations can reduce federal and state taxes.
Identify key messages and incentives to landowners on tax benefits of donation.
8
Acquisition.Consider a bonding initiative for greenwayand Local Habitatacquisition.
Collaboration.Collaborate with adjacent communities, county, and agencies in development
and implementation ofplans for Natural Area Greenways.
Protect Natural Areas on Private Land
Protecting natural areas on private land is complicated and requires a willing landowner. Each property
needs a different approach. Implementing the natural resources plan will lay the groundwork for
approaching landowners with ideas for protecting natural areas in greenways and Local Habitats. There are
several tools for approaching landowners:
Educate landowners about the resources on their particular siteand in their neighborhood.
Provide stewardship training to residents.
Encourage landowners to enter into conservation easements with a group such as Minnesota Land
Trust.
Develop incentives for landowners to donate conservation land to city.
Adopt zoning and development ordinances with incentives to protect open space.
Natural Resources Management Plans
Develop and implement management plans for Natural Area Greenways and city-owned Local
Habitats.
Develop and implement site-specific management plans for each Maplewood Neighborhood
Preserve.
Develop and implement management plans addressing city-wide management issues such as
invasive species.
Develop and implementaMaplewood TreePlan to coverboulevard trees, park trees, woodlots and
forests.
Modify park and trail operations to adopt environmentally friendly maintenance practices and to
minimize edge effects to nearby greenways and Local Habitats.
7
See http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/grants/land/natural_scenic.html
8
See http://conservationcampaign.org
Natural Resources 7-13
City-wide Natural Resources Issues
Stormwater Management
Alternative Stormwater Standards.Discussed above.
Identify Target Locations.Complete a study to identify and prioritize areas with existing conditions
that create problems for downstream lakes, streams, and wetlands in the city.
Blue Stormwater Program for Existing Developments.Create a program to deliver technical advice
and assistance about low impact retrofit practices to improve ecosystem services involving
stormwater (vegetation filtration, infiltration, recharge, and water level stability). These include rain
gardens, bioswales, infiltration plantings (e.g., butterfly and botanical gardens, prairies), tree boxes,
created wetlands, cisterns, and many more practices.
Inspection of structures. Continue city’s inspection program, which inspects all stormwater
pollution control devices annually.
Street and Boulevard Design and Maintenance
Investigate alternative road de-icing options. Options range from new formulations of calcium
chloride to a solution containing sugar beet juice.
Sweep streets on annual schedule. Currently the city sweeps most streets two times per year;
streets in sensitive areas are swept more often.
Identify erosion-prone street shoulders atlakeshores, streams, and wetland edges and take
corrective action. This is being implemented, and will include a focus on Natural Area Greenways
and Local Habitats.
Develop guidelinesfor environmentally friendly street design such as plantings in cul-de-saccenter
9
islands, tree boxes in boulevards, and innovations such as Portland’s Green Street program.
Develop pedestrian and bicycle-friendly street designs.
Urban TreeManagement
Develop and implement an Urban TreeManagement Plan for the city that addressesboulevard
trees, park trees, and woodlands.
Monitor tree disease and pest outbreaks and implement control program (Dutch elm, oak wilt,
emerald ash borer, etc.). Expand to include other diseases and pests as they occur.
10
Consider adaptingthe Minnesota Forest Stewardship whole-site planning model for the city.
Non-native Invasive Species Management
Educate city staff and residents on threat of invasive species and management options.
Develop a volunteer program to help monitor city-owned land for new invasions.
Partner with adjacent cities and agencies in controlling invasive species regionally.
Monitor developments in control methods for buckthorn, garlic mustard, reed canary-grass,
Siberian elm, and other target species and revise outreach materialsas needed.
9
See http://www.portlandonline.com/BES/index.cfm?c=44407&
10
http://na.fs.fed.us/stewardship/index.shtm
Natural Resources 7-14
Urban Wildlife Management
Educate residents about the value and stewardship of urban wildlife.
Participatein Ramsey County’s deer management program.
Explore options to reduce populations of bird and mammal species that compete with or prey on
native songbird populations (feral and free-roaming cats, raccoons, starlings, house sparrows,
crows and grackles, etc.).
Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor and the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area
Updatecity’s planning,development review, zoning and ordinances tobe consistent with
guidelines for these areas.
Identify parcels of land in these areas that have high ecological quality and need protection.
Educate landowners in these areas about the designations and what they mean.
Natural Resources 7-15
ImplementationSchedule for Natural Resources Plan
The Natural Resources Plan proposes a new approach tomanaging Maplewood’snatural resources. One
of the first steps in achieving the goals is to gain a better understanding of Maplewood’s resources. To do
this, the implementation plan recommends that Maplewood conducts a land cover classification survey of
the whole city. This workwill lay the foundation for planning and management. It should be completed
before the city attempts to prioritize protection and restoration projects. Therefore, the implementation
schedule focuses on planning, not on specific restoration and management projects.
CategoryDateKey ActivitiesCost Estimate
Planning20091.Develop policies, zoning, and ordinances to Staff
implement natural resources plan
2.Develop land protection strategies for south Staff
Maplewood
3.Determine staffing needs for implementation of Staff
natural resources plan
4.Determine role of Environmental and Natural Staff, ENR
Resources Commission (ENR) in implementation of
Natural Resources Plan
5.Conduct MLCCS inventory for entire city ($10,000$25,000
grant received)
6.Assess and prioritize protection and management Staff
projects
7.Develop funding strategiesStaff
8.Develop Maplewood Tree PlanStaff
20101.Develop management plan for each greenway$40,000
2.Develop generalmanagement plan for Local $10,000
Habitats
2010+1.Develop individual management plansfor individual $30,000total
Neighborhood Preserves when fundingis available
tobegin restoration at site
2.Develop programs that address natural resources staff
city-wide (ex: wetland buffers, sustainable
landscaping)
Education,2008-1.Develop natural resources workshop focusing on $5,000 grant
Outreach,2009protection and stewardship of neighborhood
Community resources
Engagement2.Present natural resourcesworkshop in four Staff
neighborhoods (two in 2008, two in 2009)
3.Enhance natural resources section of websiteStaff
4.Present community-wide programs on sustainable Staff
landscaping and natural resources
5.Conduct “BioBlitz” for one siteStaff
6.Develop strategies for citizen-based inventory and Staff
monitoring programs
20101.Present natural resources workshop for fourStaff
neighborhoods
2.Present community-wide programs on sustainable Staff
Natural Resources 7-16
landscaping and natural resources
3.Conduct “BioBlitz” for one siteStaff
4.Implement one new citizen-based inventory or Staff
monitoring program
20111.Present natural resources workshop for fourStaff
neighborhoods
2.Present community-wideprograms on sustainable Staff
landscaping andnatural resources
3.Conduct “BioBlitz” for one siteStaff
4.Implement one new citizen-based inventory or Staff
monitoring program
20121.Present community-wide programs on sustainable Staff
landscaping and natural resources
20131.Present community-wide natural resources Staff
programs
Restoration 2009-See Parks Chapter for restoration and management Staff
and 2013projects at Neighborhood Preserves.
Management
Natural resources management activitiesare contingent
upon assessment and prioritization which is scheduled
for 2009 (after MLCCS data compiled).
Land20091.Develop policies, zoning, and ordinances that help Staff/ENRC
Protectionprotect natural lands
and 2009-1.Acquire non-buildable land for preservation$25,000-
Acquisition2013$100,000/acre
2.Acquire buildable land for preservation$100,000-
(Cost-share grants available for land in Mississippi $300,000/acre
Critical Area)
3.Acquire land through donation$10,000/transaction
General costs for restoration and management:Per acre
Buckthorn removal$1000-$10,000
Prairie restoration (including three years management)$4000-$8000
Woodland restoration$2000-$20,000
Wetland restoration$2000-$8000
Yearly maintenance of restored areas$100-$250
Natural Resources 7-17
5.Figures
Figure 7.1. Natural and Semi-Natural Land in Maplewood
Figure 7.2.Natural Area Greenways
Figure 7.3.Local Habitats
Figure 7.4. Maplewood’s Natural Resources, Parks, Trails, and Open Space
6.Tables
Table 7.1. Status of Selected Historical and Current Species in Maplewood
Natural Resources 7-18
Attachment 2
61
694
120
694
D
D
Owasso
Lydia
Joy
Silver
Silver
Lake
Lake
Kohlman
Kohlman
Lake
Lake
Casey
Casey
Lake
Lake
C
Gervais
Gervais
50th
th
17
C
Lake
Lake
Phalen-Casey
Chain-of-Lakes
Keller
Keller
36Lake
Lake
40th
E
B
B
49
ay
ollow
H
RoselawnFrost
5
34th
Wakefield
Wakefield
Lake
Lake
Larpenteur
nteur
Larpe
Holloway-Beaver
Wh
35
Lake
Lake
Lake Wetlands
Phalen
Phalen
Ivy
Maryland
Beaver
Beaver
Lake
Lake
vester
Har
15th
120
5
10
5 th
Minnehaha
3M Lake
3M Lake
Tanners
Tanners
94
Lake
Lake
Burns
Battle
Battle
Creek
Creek
Lake
Lake
on
Upper Aft
Battle
Creek
Lower Afton
Forests
City of Maplewood Boundary
10
Natural Area Greenway
Pigs Eye Lake
Pigs Eye Lake
494
Upland System Constriction
61
Lowland/Aquatic System Constriction
Lake
ood
HighwCourtly
Stream or Water Flow Path
00.51
Miles
Carver
Carver
Lake
Lake
Figure 2
Carver
Fish
Natural Area Greenways
Creek
City of Maplewood Comprehensive Plan
Forests
Bailey
Natural Area Greenways include both public and private land.
Date: 06-06-08
Source: 2006 and 2003 digital orthophotography; City of Maplewood base data;
StreetMap USA
Drawn by: DMM
Reviewed by: KAC
AES Job No.: 08-0036
File Name: maplewood_greenway_plan_10_figure2natlareagreenways_02.mxd
Agenda Item 5.c.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
FROM:Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
DATE: August 17,2017for August 21, 2017ENR Commission Meeting
SUBJECT:Emerald Ash Borer Update
Introduction
In May 2017the first case of Emerald Ash Borer (EAB)was confirmed in Maplewood. Staff will
update the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commissionduring the August
Commission meeting.
Background
EABis a wood-boring beetle from eastern Asia that can kill our native ash trees: green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), white ash (Fraxinus Americana), and black ash (Fraxinus nigra).
Mountain ash is not a trueash and is not affected by EAB. EAB has devastated ash trees in
Michigan and other states, resulting in the loss of all ash trees in communities. It wasfound in
St. Paul in 2009 and since then has spread to several locations in the Twin Cities. The
Minnesota Department of Agriculture website has excellent information on EAB symptoms and
management and a map of EAB locations state-wide.
(www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/pestmanagement/eab.aspx).
Discussion
On May 17, 2017, EABwas confirmed in Maplewood, at Carver Elementary School on Upper
Afton Road. This wasthe first confirmed case in Maplewood. A single tree was positively
identified and a nearby tree was suspicious but not confirmed.An article about EAB appeared
in the July issue of Maplewood Living and two education sessions have beenscheduled for
residents – August 3 and October 24, 2017.Maplewood is guided by the EAB Plan the ENR
Commission drafted and the City Council approved in 2011 (Attachment 1). In July, City staff
met with our contracted City forester to review the EAB Plan and determine next steps. We are
currently working on detailed logistics and procedures and will bring these to the ENR
Commission this fall.At the ENR Commissionmeeting, staff will review the EABplan and
present an update on how the City is proceeding.
Recommendation
No action required.
Attachments
1.EAB Management Plan
Attachment 1
EmeraldAshBorerManagementPlan
CityofMaplewood,Minnesota
May3,2011
I.Purpose
ThepurposeofthismanagementplanistoaddressandplanfortheeventualinvasionofEmeraldAsh
Borer(EAB)intoMaplewoodurbanforests.Thegoalofthisplanistoslowthespreadoftheinfestation
througheducation,inspection,andstrategicmanagement.Bydefiningandbeginningmanagement
nowwehopetolessendisruptiontooururbanforest,stretchthemanagementcostsassociatedwith
EABoveralongerperiodoftime,andcreateanatmosphereofEABawarenesstodetectaninfestation
asearlyaspossible.
II.Applicability
atepropertieswhereEABmay
ThisplanisapplicabletoallpubliclandinMaplewoodandallpriv
negativelyimpactpublicareasorgenerallythreatentheoverallhealthofağƦƌĻǞƚƚķƭurbanforest.
III.Administration
ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķƭCityForesterandNaturalResourcesCoordinatorwillberesponsibleforimplementing
thisprogram,withsupportfromParksandRecreationDepartmentandPublicWorksDepartment.
IV.EABBackground
EmeraldAshBorer(EAB)isanonnativebeetlethatcauseswidespreaddeclineanddeathofashtrees.
ThelarvalstageofEABfeedsonthetissuebetweenthebarkandthesapwood,disruptingthe
transportofnutrientsandwaterinthetrees.Ifinfestationishighenoughinanindividualtree,the
damagewillbesevereenoughtokillthetree.EABhasdestroyedmillionsofashtreesinotherstates.
(SeeAppendicesA,B,andCformoreinformation.)
V.EABStatusinMinnesota
In2009,EABwasfoundinsouthernMinnesotaandinSt.Paul.TheinfestationinSt.PaulwasintheSt.
AnthonyareaandontheUniversityofMinnesotaSt.PaulCampus.SubsequentlyEABwasfoundin
Minneapolis,intheTowerHillandProspectParkareas.Themetroinfestationsareabout1mileapart.
TheMinnesotaDepartmentofAgriculture(MDA),MinnesotaDepartmentofNaturalResourcesand
UniversityofMinnesotahavehelpedcoordinatetheresponsetotheinfestationandeducation.InSt.
Paulthisincludedashtreeremovalintheinfestedareasaswellaspreemptiveremovalofashin
selectedneighborhoods.In2010,theMDAreleasedbiologicalcontrolagents(threespeciesofwasps)
n.TheMDAplanstodoareleaseinthemetroareain2011.
atthesiteofthesouthernMNinfestatio
VI.EABManagementStrategies
WhenEABwasfirstfoundinMinnesota,itwasbelievedthatwewouldeventuallyloseallashtreesin
Minnesota.ButEABmayspreaddifferentlyinMinnesotathanithasinotherstates,sinceitappears
thatwehavefounditrelativelyearlyintheinfestation.SLAM(SlowAshMortality)isanapproachto
EABthatfocusesonslowingashtreemortalitythroughintegratedmanagementstrategies.Itmay
involveacombinationofmonitoringforEAB,preemptiveremovalofashtrees,insecticidetreatment,
andbiologicalcontrol.SlowingthespreadofEABandslowingashtreemortalityenablesustospread
managementcostsoveralongertimeperiod.Inaddition,withbiologicalcontrolnowapossibility,the
outlookforashinMinnesotacouldbedifferentthaninitiallypredicted.
1
VIΑ1EABManagement:TreeInventory
AtreeinventoryisthefoundationofanEABplanandprovidesthebaselinedataforaĭźƷǤƭurban
forestryprogram.Thedatacanalsobeusedtotrackmanagementofindividualtrees,similartothe
wayacitytracksinfrastructuremaintenance(ex:stormsewerstructures).
In2010,MaplewoodhiredS&STreeSpecialiststoconductacompleteinventoryforpark(not
preserve)treesincludinglocation,species,diameter,andhealth.Onlymanicuredareasofparkswere
inventoried.Maplewoodparkshave2507trees,484ofwhichareash(19.3%).In2010,staff
inventoriedasamplingofboulevardtrees.Theprotocolbeingusedrequiresweinventoryaminimum
of2000boulevardtreesinordertoestimatehowmanytreeswehaveonboulevards.Thissampling
willbecompletedin2011.
Theboulevardsamplingandthecompleteparktreeinventoryprovidedatathatenablesusto
understandthepotentialfinancial,aesthetic,andecologicalimpactsofEABinMaplewood.Buta
completeboulevardtreeinventory,withinformationonthehealthofeachtree,isrequiredforthecity
tostrategicallytargetindividualtreesfortreatmentorremoval,andtomakeplantingdecisionsthat
ensuretreediversity.
Itisstronglyrecommendedthatthecityhireacontractortodoacompleteinventoryofboulevard
trees.Inaddition,itisrecommendedthatstaffconductinformalinventoriesonafewnaturalareasin
thecitytoobtainsomebasicinformationabouttheashpopulationinforestedareas.
VIΑ2EABManagement:Inspection,Detection,andMonitoring
Thegoalofdetectionistofindinfestationsasearlyaspossible.Onceaninfestationcenterisfound,
weneedtodeterminethedurationandouterboundariesoftheinfestation.Manypeopleshouldbe
involvedindetection.
1.CityForester.Maplewoodcontractsaparttimeforestertoinspectpropertiesforoakwiltand
DutchElmDisease.TheŅƚƩĻƭƷĻƩƭcontractshouldbeexpandedtoincludeEABdetectionand
inspection.Inaddition,theCityForestershouldbethepersonresponsiblefordelineatingthe
infestationboundaries.
2.CityStaff.CitystaffneedtobekeyplayersindetectingEAB.Itisrecommendedthatstaffatthe
naturecenterandparksandpublicworkscrewmembersundergoEABtrainingsotheycanhelp
monitortheashtreesintheareaswheretheywork.Inaddition,itisrecommendedthatEAB
trainingbeprovidedforallemployeesinterestedinlearningabouttheinsectanditsthreat.
3.ResidentsandtheMaplewoodTreeHotline.ResidentswilloftenbefirsttodetectEABonprivate
lands.IftheyhaveatreewithsuspectedEAB,theyareencouragedtoreviewEABinformation
onlineand/orcalltheMaplewoodTreeHotline.Thecityforesterrespondstoallcallsanddoesa
sitecheckifheĭğƓƷruleoutEABduringthephoneconversation.
4.ArrestThePestHotline.ThestatemaintainsanArrestthepesthotline.Citizenscancallthe
hotlinetoreportasuspectedincidenceofEAB.
5.MinnesotaForestPestFirstDetectorNetwork.ThefirstdetectornetworkistheƭƷğƷĻƭearly
warningsystemforinvasivetreepests.FirstdetectorscanhelpverifythepresenceofEAB.
6.MinnesotaTreeCareAdvisors.Thetreecareadvisorprogramisanetworkoftrained,community
basedvolunteerswhopromoteurbanandcommunityforestrytoallresidentsofMinnesota.This
programisrunbytheUniversityofaźƓƓĻƭƚƷğƭDepartmentofForestry.
2
7.Citizenmonitoringprogram.SomeMaplewoodresidentshaveexpressedinterestinlearning
moreaboutEmeraldAshBoreranditspotentialimpacttothecityandthelandscapesaroundtheir
homes.ThecityshouldencourageinterestedresidentstoparticipateintheForestPestFirst
DetectorprogramortheMinnesotaTreeCareAdvisorprogramsotheycanhelpthecitywatchfor
EAB.Thecityshouldconsiderpayingthetuitionforresidentsintheseprogramsiftheycommitto
volunteeringhoursforinspectingsitesinthecityforEAB.
8.PurpleTraps.In2010,theMinnesotaDepartmentofAgriculturesetpurpletrapsthroughoutthe
state,includinginMaplewood.ThepurposeofthetrapsistohelptheMDAbetterdeterminethe
extentoftheEABinfestation.ThecityshouldcontinueworkingwiththeMDAtohavethesetraps
setinMaplewood.
VIΑ3EABManagementTreeRemoval
Whenashtreesdieordeclinetheybecomehazardsnearboulevards,buildings,andplayareas.Most
deadtreesandhazardtreeswillneedtoberemoved.Butstrategicremovaloftreesbeforetheydie,
whethertheyareinfestedornot,shouldalsobeapartoftheĭźƷǤƭEABmanagementstrategy.
StrategicremovalhelpsspreadoutremovalandreplantingcostsandmayhelpslowthespreadofEAB.
Thecityshouldusefourremovalstrategies:
1.wĻƒƚǝĻƷƩĻĻƭƷŷğƷķźĻ͵Sometreesmaynotbedetectedearlyintheinfestationprocesssothey
willberemovedwhentheydie.Onboulevardsandinlandscapedareaofparks,alldeadashtrees
shouldberemoved.Innaturalareas,itwillnotbefeasibletoremovealldeadashtreesand
deadfallshouldbeaddressedonasitebysitebasis.Onprivatesites,ownersshouldremovedead
treesthatarehazardoustopeopleorstructures.
2.wĻƒƚǝĻƷƩĻĻƭƷŷğƷğƩĻźƓŅĻƭƷĻķ͵Agooddetectionprogrammustbeinplacetousethisremoval
strategy.Typicallyinfestationcentersarenotdetectedfor35yearsafterinsectsarrivedueto
subtletiesofinitialsignsinthetree.Whenaninfestedtreeisidentified,surroundingtreeswill
needtobesurveyedtodeterminetheextentofinfestationandthenumberoftreesthatwillneed
toberemoved.ThecityshouldconsultwiththeMDAwheninfestationsareinitiallyidentified.
3.wĻƒƚǝĻƷƩĻĻƭƦƩĻĻƒƦƷźǝĻƌǤĬğƭĻķƚƓŷĻğƌƷŷ͵Selectiveremovalofpublicashtreesbasedon
healthconditionshouldbeapartoftheĭźƷǤƭEABstrategy.Inordertousethisstrategythecity
willhavetocompleteaboulevardtreeinventory,includinghealthinformationforeachtree.The
cityhasthisdataforparktrees.Theashtreesthatwouldbeconsideredforremovalinclude:
a.UnhealthyƷƩĻĻƭΓźƓǝĻƓƷƚƩźĻķtreesthathaveaconditionratingoffourorless(outoften).
b.Treesthatareunsafeduetopoorhealthorstructureandarelocatedwheretheyarelikely
todamagepeopleand/orproperty(hazardtrees).
c.Treesthatareinconflictwithutilities.
d.Treesthatarepoorlylocatedand/orrequireexcessivemaintenance.
Ifseveraltreeswillberemovedpreemptivelyfromaparkoraneighborhood,thefullsiteimpacts
shouldbeconsideredpriortoremoval.
4.wĻƒƚǝĻƷƩĻĻƭƦƩĻĻƒƦƷźǝĻƌǤźƓğƓğƩĻğ.Preemptiveremovalbyareamaybeappropriatein
situationssuchas:
a.Whenalargepopulationofashtreesisnearanexistinginfestationandtherearea
significantnumberoftreesinpoorcondition.
b.Inconjunctionwithapublicworksprojectifthehealthofashtreesonastreetwouldbe
negativelyimpactedbytheprojectandmakethemmoresusceptibletoEAB.
c.InconjunctionwithadjacentcitiesorregionalstrategiestomanageEAB.
3
Apriorityremovallistshouldbedevelopedandrevisedregularly.Intargetingtreesforremoval,the
followingshouldalsobeconsidered:
1.Proximityofashtreeremovalstocurrentinfestationcentersandtheiranticipatedspread.
2.Thenumberoftreesinpoorconditionthatarelocatedneareachother.
3.Spreadingoutremovalcostsoverseveralyears.
VIΑ4EABManagement:PesticideTreatment
InsecticidesareavailableformanagingEAB.Whentimedappropriately,thesetreatmentscancreatea
toxicenvironmentfortheEmeraldAshBorer,killingdispersingadultsaswellaseggsandlarvae.High
valueashtreescanbepreservedfromEABwithconsistenttreatmentsovertime.Therearetwo
primarymethodsofpesticideapplicationforEAB:soildrenchingandtrunkinjection.Insoildrenching,
theinsecticideisappliedtothesoilunderthetreecanopyandthetreerootstakeitin.Intrunk
injection,aholeisdrilledintothetreetrunkandthechemicalisinjectedintothetissuesunderthe
bark.Witheithermethod,thechemicalisdispersedthroughoutthetree.Emeraldashborers(and
otherinsects)feedingonthetreeingestthechemicalandarekilled.
ThecityhasdeterminedthatitwillnotpermittheuseofpesticidestocontrolEmeraldAshBoreron
cityland,includingtherightofway,duetonegativeenvironmentalandhealthimpacts.AppendixC
includesreferencesonEABinsecticides.AppendixDcontainsamemoanddocumentationfrom
ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķƭEnvironmentalandNaturalResourcesCommissionregardingtheimpactsofEAB
insecticides.
Thecityshallencouragepropertyownerstocarefullyevaluateenvironmentalimpactsbeforeusing
pesticidestotreatEABonprivateproperty.OwnersthatdecidetouseEABpesticidesareurgedtouse
trunkinjectionratherthansoildrenching,whichwillhelpreducepesticidedriftandreduceimpactsto
groundwaterandsurfacewater.
VI5EABManagement:BiologicalControl
TheMinnesotaDepartmentofAgricultureconsidersbiologicalcontrolthebestoptionofcost
effective,longtermmanagementofEAB.In2010,theMDAreleasedwaspsthatkillEABeggsorlarvae
inHoustonCounty,insoutheastMinnesota.Thisreleasewillbemonitoredtodetermineitsefficacy.
TheMDAplanstodoareleaseinspring2011neartheinfestationinMinneapolisandSt.Paul.
AppendixEcontainsinformationonbiologicalcontrolforEAB.IfbiologicalcontrolforEABproves
effective,thecityshouldcoordinatewiththeMDAforreleaseofthesebiocontrolagentsin
Maplewood.
VIΑ6EABManagement:WoodDisposalandUtilization
EABcanspreadthroughtransportationofashǞƚƚķΓźƓlogs,treewaste,chipsorfirewood.
RestrictingthemovementofashwoodcanhelpslowthespreadofEAB.RamseyCountyandselected
countiesinMinnesotaareunderanashquarantinewhichprohibitsmovementofashoutofthe
county.Thequarantinerestrictsmovementoffirewoodofalldeciduousspecies.Businessesthat
needtomovetherestricteditemsacrosscountylinesmayapplyforComplianceAgreementthat
indicateshowtheywilltreattheregulatedarticlestomitigatethespreadofEAB.
Iflargenumbersofashdie,itisessentialtolookforwaystodisposeoforutilizeashwood.
Informationcontinuestobepublishedonpotentialmarketsforurbanwoodutilization.Possibleuses
forashwoodincludefuel(biomassenergychips),mulch,pulpwood,andsawlogs.Thecityshould
4
identifylocaloptionsfordisposalandwoodutilization.Inaddition,thecityshouldseekpartnerships
withnearbycitiesfordisposalandutilization.
VIΑ7EABManagement:Replanting
Thelossofashinoururbanforestwillhaveavisualandecologicalimpact.Itisrecommendedthatat
leastonetreebeplantedforeverytreeremovedorlosttoEAB.Increaseddiversityshouldbeakey
elementinourreplantingprogram.Therearedifferentmodelsforboulevardtreediversity.For
example,DaveHansonfromtheUniversityofMinnesotapromotesthe102030rule:plantnomore
than10%ofanyspecies,20%ofanygenus,and30%ofanyfamily.Priortomovingforwardwith
replanting,thecityshoulddevelopaTreeMasterPlanthatsetsgoalsforoururbanforest,ensures
diversityoftreespecieswithinneighborhoods,identifiesappropriatetreespecies,andaddresses
plantingandcareguidelines.
ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķƭTreeRebateprogramprovidesacostsharematchforresidentstoplanttreesonprivate
land.Itisrecommendedthatthecitycontinuefundingthisprogramand,ifneeded,adjustthe
programsoitsupportsresidentsinreplantingafterashremoval.
VIIEducationandOutreach
EducationandoutreachareessentialcomponentsoftheEABManagementPlan.Thecityshall
developanEABeducationandoutreachprogramthat:
1.EducatesresidentssotheyunderstandthethreatsofEAB,knowwhattolookfor,knowwhattodo
whentheyfindEABoradecliningashtree,understandreplantingandcareoftrees,andcanmake
informeddecisionsforashtreesontheirproperty.
2.EducatesparksandpublicworksstaffsotheycanrecognizesignsandsymptomsofEAB
infestation.
3.Usesdiverseforumsforeducationincluding:publicprograms,website,articlesincity
publications,handouts,publicserviceannouncements,etc.
4.Providesadvancenotificationtoaneighborhoodorhomeownerofashtreemanagementthatwill
occurintheirarea.
5.Provideseducationalandothersupporttoresidentsthatwishtoformneighborhoodgroupsto
detectandmanageEABintheirneighborhood.
6.DevelopspartnershipwithgroupssuchasTreeCareAdvisors.
VIIIOrdinanceandPolicy
CitycodeshouldbereviewedandrevisedtoaccountforEAB.Twosectionsofcodeinparticularmay
needrevision:
1.Section38,ArticleI.Thissectionprohibitsplantinginthepublicrightofway.Ifwehavemajor
lossesofboulevardtreesourordinanceshouldallowforandencouragereplacement.Staffand
CommunityDesignReviewBoardshouldreviewthispolicyandmakerecommendationstocouncil.
2.Section38,ArticleII.ThissectioncoverstheĭźƷǤƭtreediseaseinspectionprogram.Itallowsthe
citytocontrolandeliminateDutchelmdiseasefungusandelmbarkbeetlesandͻƚƷŷĻƩepidemic
diseasesofshadeƷƩĻĻƭ͵ͼItstatesthatthecitymayenterpropertiestoinspectforepidemictree
diseases.Propertyownersarerequiredtoabatetreesthataredeclaredanuisance.This
ordinanceshallberevisedtoincludeemeraldashborerasatreepest.Inaddition,guidelinesshall
bedevelopedtoidentifyappropriateabatementactions.Forexample,intheearlystagesofEAB
infestationinMaplewood,thecitymayneedtorequirethathomeownersremoveinfestedashto
5
helpslowthespread.But,onceEABiswidespreadinthecity,itmaybecomeimpracticalto
requireremovalofallinfestedtrees.
Inaddition,thecityshoulddevelopaStreetTreeMasterPlanandpolicythataddresses:
1.Goalsforstreettrees;
2.Guidelinesanddesigntemplatesforspeciesdiversity;
3.Listofappropriatespecies;
4.Guidelinesforplantingandcare.
IXLicencing/permitting
AspartofEABmanagement,thecityshouldreviewrequirementsfortreecontractorslicensedinthe
cityanddeterminewhetherrevisionsarenecessary.
XFunding
FundingwillbeneededtoimplementtheEABmanagementplan.Primarycostsinclude:
1.Boulevardtreeinventory(estimate:$25,000$32,000);
2.CityforesterΑincreasedhoursfordetectionandinspection.ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķƭcityforesteris
contractedfor150170hoursperyear,primarilytoinspectpublicandprivatepropertiesforoak
wiltandDutchElmdisease.WewillneedasignificantincreaseinforesterhoursonceEABisfound
inMaplewood.
3.Treeremoval(stafforcontractors);
4.Pesticidetreatmentofselectedtrees,ifapprovedaspartoftheEABplan(stafforcontractors);
5.Educationandpublicoutreach(staffandcityforester);
6.Replanting(staff,contractors,volunteers).
EstimatedcostforremovalandreplantingashtreesatMaplewoodparksis$193,600to$290,400.
Thisisbasedon484ashtrees,withremovalcostsof$200$250pertreeandreplantingcostsof$200
to$350pertree.Whilesmallertreesestablishwellandcatchupinsizetolargertreesinafewyears,
itisthoughtthatplantinglargertreesonboulevardsandinpublicplaceshelpsreducevandalismand
accidentalinjuryoftrees.Whenthesamplinginventoryofboulevardtreesiscompletedin2011,we
willbeableestimateremovalandreplantingcostsforboulevardtrees.
MaplewoodwillneedtosecurefundingforEABmanagement.
1.Grants.Currentlythereisnolongtermgrantfundingdedicatedtoassistingcommunitiesin
MinnesotatomanageEAB.AninitialroundofgrantswasavailableforEABplanningand
management.Maplewoodwillneedtostayinformedongrantopportunities.Tobecompetitive,
itwillbehelpfultostrengthentheĭźƷǤƭurbanforestryprogram.HavinganEABplan,atree
inventory,andastreettreepolicywillallbelookedatinapositivelight.
2.Generallevyorfees.ThecitywilllikelyneedtousesomegeneraloperatingfundsforEAB
managementandmayneedtoconsideradditionalfees.St.Paulproposeda2%surchargeon
rightofwayratesdedicatedtoEABmanagement.
3./źƷǤƭtreefund.TheĭźƷǤƭtreefundcouldbeusedtocompletetheboulevardtreeinventoryand
forsometreeplanting.Butthisfundingwillnotgofar,anditspurposeisnottocontroltree
diseaseandpests.
4.Treedonations.Thefundingpackageshouldalsoconsideratreedonationprogram.Currently
FriendsoftheParksandTrails(St.PaulandRamseyCounty)hastreedonationandTributeTree
programsthatservecitiesinRamseyCounty,includingMaplewood.Publicizingtheseprograms,or
6
creatingourowndonationprogram,willhelpprovideplantmaterialandfundsforplantingtrees
atparks.
XISummaryofActionsNeeded
1.Conductinventoryofboulevardtrees.
2.Developdetailsforstrategicremovalandreevaluatetheplanfrequently.
3.Developstrategiesfordisposalorutilizationofash.
4.Developandprovideeducationalandoutreachmaterialsforresidents.
5.EducatestaffinparksandpublicworkstorecognizeEAB.
6.ImplementprogramforvolunteerstohelpdetectEABinMaplewood.
7.ReviewandrevisetreediseaseordinancetoincludeEABasaforestpestthatshouldbe
controlledonprivateland.
8.DevelopaTreeMasterPlanthatincludesgoalsforstreetandparktrees,guidelinesforspecies
diversity,listsofappropriatespecies,guidelinesforplantingandcare.
9.SecurefundingforEABmanagement.
Appendices:
A.PestAlertΑEmeraldAshBorer
B.DoIHaveEAB?
C.EABReferences
D.PesticideImpacts
E.BiologicalControlforEAB
F.WhatareothermetrocommunitiesdoingtomanageEAB?
7
Appendix A
United States
Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Northeastern Area
State and Private Forestry
NA-PR-02-04
Revised September 2008
A beetle from Asia, Agrilus planipennis
2002 as the cause of widespread ash (Fraxinus spp.) tree decline and mortality in southeastern
Michigan and Windsor, Ontario, Canada. Larval feeding in the tissue between the bark and
sapwood disrupts transport of nutrients and water in a tree, eventually causing branches and the
entire tree to die. Tens of millions of ash trees in forest, rural, and urban areas have already been
killed or are heavily infested by this pest.
A. planipennis has been found throughout Michigan, across much of Ohio, and in parts of Indiana,
Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Infestations have
also been found in more areas of Ontario and in the province of Quebec. The insect is likely to be found in additional areas as
detection surveys continue. Evidence suggests that A. planipennis is generally established in an area for several years before it is
detected.
The broad distribution of this pest in the United States and Canada is primarily due to people inadvertently transporting infested
regulate transport of these products.
Adult beetles are generally larger and brighter green (Fig. 1) than the native North
American Agrilus species. Adults are slender, elongate, and 7.5 to 13.5 mm long. Males
of the thorax. Adults are usually bronze, golden, or reddish green overall, with darker,
metallic emerald green wing covers. The dorsal side of the abdomen is metallic purplish
red and can be seen when the wings are spread (Fig. 2). The prothorax, the segment
Figure 1. Adult emerald ash borer.
head and the same width as the base of the wing covers.
Larvae reach a length of 26 to 32 mm, are white to cream-colored, and dorso-ventrally
mouthparts are visible. The abdomen has 10 segments, and the last segment has a pair
of brown, pincer-like appendages.
A. planipennis generally has a 1-year life cycle. In the upper Midwest, adult beetles
begin emerging in May or early June. Beetle activity peaks between mid June and early
July, and continues into August. Beetles probably live for about 3 weeks, although
Figure 2. Purplish red abdomen on adult
some have survived for more than 6 weeks in the laboratory. Beetles generally are
beetle.
most active during the day, particularly when it is warm and sunny. Most beetles
appear to remain in protected locations in bark crevices or on foliage during rain or
high winds.
Throughout their lives beetles feed on ash foliage, usually leaving small, irregularly
shaped patches along the leaf margins. At least a few days of feeding are needed
before beetles mate, and an additional 1 to 2 weeks of feeding may be needed
before females begin laying eggs. Females can mate multiple times. Each female
probably lays 30-60 eggs during an average lifespan, but a long-lived female may lay
more than 200 eggs. Eggs are deposited individually in bark crevices or under bark
Figure 3. Second, third, and fourth stage larvae.
7 to 10 days.
cambial region. Larvae feed on phloem for several weeks, creating serpentine
becomes progressively wider (Fig. 4). Beetle galleries often etch the outer sapwood.
The length of the gallery generally ranges from 10 to 50 cm. Feeding is usually
completed in autumn.
Prepupal larvae overwinter in shallow chambers, roughly 1 cm deep, excavated
in the outer sapwood or in the bark on thick-barked trees. Pupation begins in
Figure 4. Gallery of an emerald ash borer larva.
late April or May. Newly eclosed adults often remain in the pupal chamber or bark for 1 to 2
(Fig. 5).
Studies in Michigan indicate 2 years may be required for A. planipennis to develop in newly
infested ash trees that are relatively healthy. In these trees, many A. planipennis overwinter as
early instars, feed a second summer, overwinter as prepupae, and emerge the following summer.
In trees stressed by physical injury, high A. planipennis densities, or other problems, all or nearly
Figure 5. D-shaped hole where an
all larvae develop in a single year. Whether a 2-year life cycle will occur in warmer southern
adult beetle emerged.
states is not yet known.
A. planipennis is native to Asia and is found in China and Korea. It is also reported in Japan,
Mongolia, the Russian Far East, and Taiwan. In China, high populations of A. planipennis occur
primarily in Fraxinus chinensis and F. rhynchophylla, usually when those trees are stressed by
drought or injury. Other Asian hosts (F. mandshurica var. japonica, Ulmus davidiana var. japonica,
Juglans mandshurica var. sieboldiana, and Pterocarya rhoifolia) may be colonized by this or a
related species.
In North America A. planipennis has attacked only ash trees. Host preference of A. planipennis
or resistance among North American ash species may vary. Green ash (F. pennsylvanica) and
black ash (F. nigra), for example, appear to be highly preferred, while white ash (F. americana)
and blue ash (F. quadrangulata) are less preferred. At this time all species and varieties of native
ash in North America appear to be at risk from this pest.
Figure 6. Jagged holes left by
A. planipennis in newly infested trees because they exhibit few, if any,
woodpeckers feeding on larvae.
external symptoms. Jagged holes excavated by woodpeckers feeding on late instar or prepupal
adult beetles may be seen on branches or the trunk, especially on trees with smooth bark
(Fig 5). Bark may split vertically over larval feeding galleries. When the bark is removed from
are readily visible (Fig. 4 and Fig. 7). An elliptical area of discolored sapwood, usually a result of
secondary infection by fungal pathogens, sometimes surrounds galleries.
As A. planipennis densities build, foliage wilts, branches die, and the tree canopy becomes
increasingly thin. Many trees appear to lose about 30 to 50 percent of the canopy after only a
few years of infestation. Trees may die after 3 to 4 years of heavy infestation (Fig. 7). Epicormic
shoots may arise on the trunk or branches of the tree (Fig. 8), often at the margin of live and dead
tissue. Dense root sprouting sometimes occurs after trees die.
A. planipennis larvae have developed in branches and trunks ranging from 2.5 cm (1 inch) to 140
cm (55 inches) in diameter. Although stressed trees are initially more attractive to A. planipennis
than healthy trees are, in many areas all or nearly all ash trees greater than 3 cm in diameter have
been attacked.
Figure 7. Ash tree killed by
emerald ash borer. Note the
serpentine galleries.
For more information on the emerald ash borer and related topics...
Published by:
USDA Forest Service
Multi-agency Emerald Ash Borer Web Site:
Northeastern Area
www.emeraldashborer.info
State and Private Forestry
USDA Forest Service: www.na.fs.fed.us/fhp/eab/
Newtown Square, PA 19073
USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:
www.na.fs.fed.us
www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/
Federal Recycling Program
Printed on recycled paper.
Deborah G. McCullough, professor, Departments of Entomology and Forestry, Michigan State University
Noel F. Schneeberger, Forest Health Program leader, and Steven A. Katovich, forest entomologist,
Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry, USDA Forest Service
David L. Cappaert and Howard Russell, Michigan State University, www.forestryimages.org
Steven A. Katovich, USDA Forest Service, www.forestryimages.org
Edward Czerwinski, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, www.forestryimages.org
Figure 8. Epicormic branching on
a heavily infested ash tree.USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Appendix B
625 Robert St. N., St. Paul, MN 55155-2538
www.mda.state.mn.us
Do I Have Emerald Ash Borer (EAB)?
I think my ash tree may be
S
1
infested with Emerald Ash Borer.
T
E
Go to step #3
P
I suspect I have seen an Emerald
S
2
Ash Borer.
T
E
Go to step #5
P
Review this guide
S
www.mda.state.mn.us/news/publications/ext/ashtreeid.pdf
Is my tree an ash?
3
T
E
If yes, go to step #4
P
If no, go to step #7
Review this guide
Does my ash tree have symptoms
S
4
of Emerald Ash borer?
T
E
If yes, go to step #5
P
If no, go to step #7
Review these guides
Are the symptoms or insects EAB
S
www.mda.state.mn.us/news/publications/ext/eablookalikes.pdf
5
look-alikes?
T
www.mda.state.mn.us/sitecore/content/Global/MDADocs/
E
If yes, go to #7
pestsplants/eab/eabreference.aspx
P
If no, go to #6
www.forestry.umn.edu/extension/index.html
S
It could be EAB.
6
T
Contact the U of M Forest Resources
E
Insert Screen Shot When AvailableInsert Screen Shot When Available
P
www.extension.umn.edu/gardeninfo/diagnostics/
S
It isnt EAB; so, what is it?
deciduous/ash/index.html
7
T
Visit the University of Minnesota Extension
E
“What’s Wrong With My Plant” website to
P
Do I have EAB factsheet.indd
AppendixC:EABReferences
GeneralEABinformation
www.emeraldashborer.info
www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/horticulture/M1242.html
www.dnr.state.mn.us/invasives/terrestrialanimals/eab/slideshow.html
MinnesotaDepartmentofAgriculture:
General:www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/pestmanagement/eab.aspx
Managementstrategies:www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/pestmanagement/eab/eabstrategies.aspx
Quarantineinformation:www.mda.state.mn.us/en/plants/pestmanagement/eab/quarantinefaq.aspx
Biocontrol:www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/pestmanagement/eab/biocontrolinsemn.aspx
InsecticidesforEAB:
16pageguide:www.emeraldashborer.info/files/multistate_EAB_Insecticide_Fact_Sheet.pdf
EnvironmentalimpactsofImidacloprid:www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs/health
environment/pesticides/imidaclopridfactsheet.shtml
Impacts:www.emeraldashborer.info/files/Potential_Side_Effects_of_EAB_Insecticides_FAQ.pdf
Homeownerguide:
www.mda.state.mn.us/en/plants/pestmanagement/~/media/Files/plants/eab/eabtreatmentguide
2.ashx
bƚƷĻΓ/ƚƒƒźƭƭźƚƓĻƩGinnyYinglinghasassembledseveraltechnicalarticlesonEABinsecticidesand
staffcanmaketheseavailable.
AppendixD:4/18/11MemofromEnvironmentalandNaturalResourcesCommission
To:MaplewoodCityCouncil
From:MaplewoodEnvironmentalandNaturalResourcesCommission
Date:April18,2011
Re:ConcernsregardinguseofchemicaltreatmenttoaddresspotentialEmeraldAshBorerinfestations.
AtitsMarch2011meeting,theMaplewoodEnvironmentalandNaturalResourcesCommissionpasseda
resolutionstronglyurgingtheCityCouncilnottoallowtheuseofchemicaltreatmentsonashtreesownedby
thecityaspartofitsEmeraldAshBorer(EAB)strategy.Thisdecisionwasbasedonseverallinesofreasoning:
1.Suchtreatments,oncebegun,mustcontinueforthelifeofthetree,atpotentiallyconsiderable
expensetothecity.
2.Damagetothetreesasaresultofinjectingthechemicals(theenvironmentallyͻƦƩĻŅĻƩƩĻķͼapproach)
islikelytoreducethelifeofthetreesanyway.
3.Financialresourcesusedfortreatmentwouldbebetterspentinmitigationstrategies,suchasthinning
ofashtreesoncitypropertyandboulevardstoreducetheoverallcoverageofthisspecies(thereby
makingthelargerforestͻƌĻƭƭğƷƷƩğĭƷźǝĻͼforEAB)andpreemptivereplacementwithothertree
species.
4.Chemicaltreatmentsmaypostpone,butultimatelylikelywillnotpreventthelossofmanyashtrees;
butchemicaltreatmentscomewithpotentiallyhighenvironmentalcosts.
Itistheseenvironmentalcoststhatwehaveoutlinedingreaterdetailforyoubelow(anddescribeineven
greaterdetailwithsupportingdocumentationintheattacheddocument).Thetwomostlikelychemicalstobe
usedagainstEABareimidacloprid(IM)andemamectinbenzoate(EB).Bothofthesechemicalsarehighlytoxic
tovariousbeneficialinsectsandhaveknownandpotentialenvironmentalconsequencesthat,inouropinion,
makethemundesirableforuseinourcity:
Imidacloprid(IM)
1.IMisextremelytoxictohoneybeesandhighconcentrationsofIMarefoundbyresearchersinsap,
pollen,andnectaroftreatedplants.Shorttermexposuretoaslittleas5nanograms(onebillionthofa
gram)resultsin50%mortalityamonghoneybees.
2.Whilepollinationbybeesisnotimportantforashtrees,intheupperMidwestthepollenfromash
treesconstitutenearly40%ofĬĻĻƭpollensourceinApril,whenothersourcesarenotyetavailable.
3.StudieslinkingIMtocollapseofhoneybeepopulationsinEuropehasledItaly,FranceandGermanyto
banitandtheEUtoscheduleźƷƭphasingout.
4.IMisalsoverytoxictobeneficialpredatorinsectssuchasladybirdbeetlesandlacewings,toaquatic
insectssuchasmayfliesandcaddisflies,andtoearthworms.
5.StudiessuggestLaƭuseintreesmayactuallypromoteinfestationsbyunwantedinsects,suchas
spidermites.Thesestudiesindicatesuchinfestationsareduenotonlytotheeliminationofbeneficial
insectsthatpreyonthemites,butalsoasaresultofthechemicalscausinggreatereggproductionby
themitesthemselves.
6.Leavesfromsystemicallytreatedashandmapletreeswerefoundtoinhibitfeedingofdecomposer
organisms,suchasearthwormsandaquaticinvertebrates.
7.IMishighlysolublesoitisfoundinrunofffromagriculturalfields,instreams,andgroundwater
throughoutNorthAmerica.
8.Atconcentrationsfoundintheenvironment,aquaticinsectcommunitiesshowreducedpopulations
andbiodiversity.
9.Onceappliedtoatree,eitherbysoildrenchorinjection,IMisquicklydetectableinleaves,sap,and
pollen,wherenontargetspeciesmaybeexposedtosignificantconcentrations.
10.Thebreakdownproducts,ormetabolitesofIM,areoftenmoretoxicthanIMitself.
Emamectinbenzoate(EB)
1.EBisextremelytoxictobutterfliesandmothsanddoesnotdistinguishbetweenͻŭƚƚķͼandͻĬğķͼ
species.Studieshaveshownitis20to64,000timesmoretoxictobutterflyandmothcatepillarsthan
otherpesticidesusedonthesamecropsasEB.
2.EBisusedinagricultureasatopical(spray)treatmentonavarietyofcropsbecauseithasbeenfound
toberelativelylesstoxictonontargetinsectsthanotherpesticides(otherthanmothsand
butterflies).However,whensprayedontoplants,EBdegradesrapidlyinsunlightlimitingexposureof
nontargetspecies.NostudieswerefoundevaluatingEBstoxicityasasystemicpesticide,soitisnot
knownwhatkindofexposuresoraffectswouldbeexperiencedbynontargetspecieswhenEBisused
inthismanner.
3.EBisalsousedtokillparasiticsealiceinfishfarms.Studiesindicateitmayactasanendocrine
disruptor,causingearlyinductionofmoltinginlobstersandothercrustaceans.Wouldthesamebe
trueincrawfish?Thereisnoinformation.
4.EBappearstobemoderatelytoxictofreshwaterfishsuchasbluegill,troutandfatheadminnow.
5.EBisverytoxictomarinecopepods,butthereisnoinformationregardinghowitwouldaffect
freshwaterinvertebrates.
6.EBtendstobindtosoilorsedimentparticles,makingitlesslikelytoleachtogroundwater,butalso
makingitverypersistentinsoil.Also,runoffcarryingsoilparticlescouldcarryEBtosurfacewaters.
7.ThebiggestconcernisthelackofinformationaboutEBasasystemicpesticideanditspotential
impactsinterrestrialandfreshwaterecosystems.
PesticidessuchasIMandEBhavegainedfavorbecauseoftheirapparentlowtoxicitytomammals,including
humans.Webelievethisisshortsighted.Ourhealthandqualityoflifedependsupontheintegrityofthe
ecosystemsinwhichwelive.Fromourperspectivethelossofcertaininsectspeciesmayseem
inconsequential;fromtheperspectiveofthelargersystemitcanbedevastating.Upsettingthedelicate
balancebetweenpredatorandprey,plantsandpollinators,detritusanddecomposersisoftenconsideredby
ustobearegrettable,butremoteeffectontheͻƌƚǞĻƭƷƚƩķĻƩƭͼoftheanimalworld.Infact,itisakinto
chippingawayatthefoundationofourhome.
Giventhepotentialimpactsofthesechemicalsonourenvironment(andinthecaseofEBthegapingholesin
ourknowledgeregardingitspotentialimpacts),weurgethecitycounciltonotallowtheuseofthemontrees
inourcity.WhilechemicaltreatmentsmayprovideashorttermfixtotheEABproblem,webelievethecity
wouldbebetterservedbytakingaholisticviewofourenvironmentthatconsiderstheindirectconsequences
ofthesetoxicchemicalsandadoptalongterm,preventativeapproachthroughstrategicmanagementofour
forests.
EnvironmentalFateandEcologicalToxicityofChemicalsProposedfor
EmeraldAshBorerTreatments
PreparedfortheMaplewoodEnvironmentalandNaturalResourcesCommission
bycommissionmember,GinnyYingling.April17,2011.
Imidacloprid
Imidacloprid(IM)isanicotinemimicthatproducestoxicitybybindingtoandoverstimulatingcertainneuron
receptors,disruptingthenervoussystem.Itbindsmuchmorereadilytothesereceptorsininvertebratesthan
vertebrates,givingitahighermarginofsafetyforhumans.Ininsects,thedisruptionofthenervoussystem
resultsinmodifiedfeedingbehavior,paralysisandsubsequentdeath(Mullins,1993).IMisusedagainstawide
varietyofinsectpests,includingAsianlonghornbeetles(mapletrees),potatobeetle,cockroaches,fleason
domesticpets(Advantage®),termites,turfinsects,etc.Whileitonlymoderatelytoxictomammalsandfish,it
isextremelytoxictonontargetbeneficialorganisms,suchashoneybeesandearthworms(Zang,etal.,2000;
Luo,1999),andimportantpredatorinsects,includingladybirdbeetlesandlacewings(Kaakeh,etal.,1996;
MizellandSconyers,1992).SomestudieshavealsoshownthattreatmentwithIMmayresultininfestations
unwantedinsects,suchasspidermites(JamesandPrice,2002;Raupp,etal.,2004;Sclar,etal,1998).
byother,
Theseinfestationsarepromotednotonlybythereductionoreliminationofbeneficialpredatorinsects,but
alsobyincreasedspidermiteeggproductionresultingfromtheirexposuretoIM(JamesandPrice,2002).
IMishighlywatersolubleanddoesnotbindreadilytosoilparticles(Fossen,2006),soitmayreadilyleachinto
1
groundwater.Itisquitepersistentintheenvironment,degradingquiteslowlyinwater(halflife=3146days;
KiddandJames,1991;Tomlin,1997)andsoil(halflife=69Α997days;Sarkar,et.al.,1999;Gupta,etal.,2002;
RobertsandHutson,1999).However,whenexposedtosunlightIMhasashort(3hour)halflifeinsurface
1998;Wamhoff,etal.,1999),soitislesslikelytobefoundinsurfacewatersthan
water(Moza,etal,
groundwater.Yet,despiteitsrapiddegradationinsunlight,investigatorsreportdetectingconcentrationsof
0.2,0.4,and1.0partsperbillion(ppb)instreamsinNewYork,NewBrunswickandFlorida,respectively.
as11.9ppbhavebeendetectedinrunofffromagriculturalfieldsinCanada(CCME,
Concentrationsashigh
2007).IMhasbeendetectedinthegroundwaterinNewYorkatconcentrationsupto6.69ppb(USEPA,2003).
SeveralIMbreakdownproductshavebeenshowntobeofequalorgreatertoxicitythantheparentcompound
(Nauenetal,1998).
Despiteitsenvironmentalpersistenceandpresenceinwaters,verylittleisknownaboutLaƭlongterm
chronicandshorttermͻƦǒƌƭĻͼeffectsonnontargetaquaticorganisms.However,instudiesbyKreutzweiser,
1
A half-life is the time it takes for half of the mass of a contaminant to degrade.
etal.(2007and2008),leavesfromashandmapletreestreatedwithIMattypicalfieldratescontained0.8Α
1.3and311partspermillion(ppm)IM,respectively.Theleaveswerethenaddedtoaquaticandforest
microcosmstoevaluatetheeffectonleafshreddinginsects.Whilethereappearedtobenoeffectonthe
źƓǝĻƩƷĻĬƩğƷĻƭsurvivalrates,the1.3ppmandhigherconcentrationscausedsignificantfeedinginhibition
amongaquaticinsectsandearthworms,aswellasmeasurableweightlossintheearthworms.IMapplied
directlytothewateroftheaquaticmicrocosms,tosimulateleachingfromsoils,wasatleast10timesmore
toxictoaquaticinsectsthantheIMintheleaves,withhighmortalityat0.13ppmandsignificantfeeding
inhibitionat0.012ppm.Pestana,etal.(2009)foundthatboththeabundanceandbiodiversityofaquatic
bottomfeedinginvertebrateswasreducedbyexposuretoIMatconcentrationsof2and20ppb.Theyalso
notethatIMistoxictootheraquaticinsects,suchascaddisfliesandmayflies.Mayfliesareparticularly
sensitivewith50%ofthemayfliesdyingwithin24and96hrsofbeingexposedto2.1and0.65ppbIM,
respectively.Prematurematurationandemergenceofmayflies,andimpairedreproductivefitness,occurred
whentheywereexposedtopulsesofIMatconcentrationsofaslittleas0.1ppb(Alexander,etal.,2007and
2008).
IMrapidlymovesthroughplanttissuesafterapplicationsandcanbepresentindetectableconcentrationsin
theleaves,vascularfluids(sap)andpollen.StudieshaveshownplantsgrownfromseedstreatedwithIMcan
havesignificantconcentrations(upto15ppminleavesofyoungseedlings,upto13ppbinpollen)ofIMin
theirsap,pollen,flowers,andleaves(LaurentandRathahao,2003;Rouchaud,etal,1994;Bonmatin,etal.,
2005;Westwood,etal,1998).Asaresult,manynontargetinsects,suchashoneybees,parasiticwasps,and
predaceousgroundbeetlessensitivetoIMmaybeexposedastheyforageforsap,pollenandnectarorfeedon
otherinsectsthathavebeenexposed.
BeesareparticularlysensitivetoIM.Pollenconstitutestheonlyproteinsourceforabeehive,andits
contaminationcaninducebothcontactandoralintoxication.Fiftypercentofbeeswilldieiftheyingestjust5
2
nanograms(ng)ofIMoverashortperiodoftime(acuteexposure),orjust0.01Α1ngoveralongerperiodof
time(chronicexposure).ThesevaluesareoftenreferredtoastheLD50,ortheamountofatoxinthatisa
ͻƌĻƷŷğƌķƚƭĻͼ(LD)to50%oftheexposedorganism(Suchail,etal,1999).Whenbeesforagefornectar,they
oftenbecomecoatedwithpollen.TheLD50forsimplycomingintocontactwithIMcontaminatedpollenis24
ngofIM(Suchail,etal,1999).EveniftheuseofIMisofshortduration(springapplications),theexposurefor
beesinchronic,asbothbeesandtheirlarvaefeedonthestockedcontaminatedpollenandnectar,especially
inthewinterandearlyspring(Bonmatin,etal.,2005).LowdosesofIMandIMmetabolitesalsonegatively
affecthoneybeeforagingandlearningbehavior(Decourtyeetal,2003and2004).
PerhapsthemostcompellingevidenceforthetoxicityofsystemicIMonhoneybeesisanonlinevideoat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8Nsn4KvjwM.Inthisvideo,researcherscomparetheeffectson
2
A nanogram is one billionth of a gram
honeybeesoffeedingthemsapexpressedfromthebladetipofcornseedlingsgrownfromIMtreatedand
untreatedseeds.Thebeesfedthesapfromthetreatedseedlingsdiedwithin2to5minutes.
AsuseofIMasaseeddressingformulationforvariouscropshasincreased,researchershavenoteda
coincidentalsuddenanddrasticdeclineinhoneybeepopulationsandhoneyproductioninEurope(Colin,etal.,
2004).Whileaconclusivelinkhasnotbeenmade,itissuspectedthatIMhasplayedamajorroleinthese
declines(Bonmatin,etal,2005)andhasledseveralindividualnations(Italy,France,Germany)andtheEUto
banorphaseouttheuseofIM.
Itisoftennotedthatashtreeslargelypollinatebyairbornedispersionoftheirpollen,andthereforedonotrely
heavilyonbeesfortheirpollination,suggestingthatbeeexposuretoashpollen(andanyIMitmaycontain)
maybeminimal.However,ashtreesareoneoftheearliestfloweringtreesintheupperMidwestandbees
relyheavilyonthemasasourceoffoodwhentheyfirstbeginforaginginthespring.Infact,inaPhDthesis
fromWisconsin,Severson(1978)reportsthatashpollenmayconstituteasmuchas39%oftheĬĻĻƭpollen
sourceinmidApril.
EmamectinBenzoate
Emamectinbenzoate(EB)belongstoaclassofpesticidescalledavermectins,whichdisruptthetransmissionof
nerveimpulses,resultinginparalysisanddeathofthetargetorganisms.RecentstudiesalsosuggestthatEB
hastheabilitytoinduceprematuremoltingininsects,suggestingitisalsoanendocrinedisruptor(Bright,et
al.,2005).Avermectinsarebroadspectrumtoxicantsfornematodesandinsects.EBwasdevelopedasa
lepidoptericide,soitisextremelytoxictomothsandbutterflies.ACanadianstudyfoundEBisalsotoxicto
greenalgaeatrelativelylowconcentrations(3.9ppb;OPP,2000).Italsoappearstobemoderatelytoxicto
3
freshwaterfish,suchasbluegill,trout,andfatheadminnow,withLC50valuesof180,174,and194ppbin
water,respectively(OPP,2000).Irreversible,toxiceffectsonmarinecopepodswereobservedatwater
concentrationsaslowas0.12ppbandsignificantreductionineggproductionwasobservedat0.158ppb
(WillisandLing,2003).EBappearstoberelativelynontoxicforbirdsandmammals(Bright,etal,2005).
Intheenvironment,EBtendstobindtosoilorsedimentparticles(SPAH,2002),makingitlesslikelythanIMto
leachintothegroundwater,butmorelikelytobewashedintosurfacewaterwithrunoffcarryingsediment.
Studieshaveshownittohaveahalflifeinsoilof174Α427days(thelowertheoxygenlevelsinthesoil,the
longerEBpersists).EBisverystableinwater,althoughifexposedtosunlightithasahalflifeof1.4Α22days
(Bright,etal,2005).
EBhasbeenusedasatopical(spray)treatmentinawidevarietyofagriculturalcropssuchascotton,tobacco,
cabbage,potatoes,etc.whereitisusedprimarilytokillͻĭŷĻǞźƓŭandsuckingƦĻƭƷƭͼͲsuchasaphids,
leafhoppers,tobaccobudworms,southernarmyworm,potatobeetle,andwhiteflies.Itsagriculturaluseshave
3
LC-50, the 50% lethal concentration, is similar to LD-50, but refers to the concentration (rather than dose) of a toxin in
water, soil, or food, at which 50% of exposed organisms will die.
lessharmfultobeneficialinsectspeciesthanother
increasedinrecentyearsbecauseitisrelatively
avermectinswhenappliedasaspray(Sechser,etal.,2003;LasotaandDybas,1991).However,nostudies
werefoundevaluatingtheeffectsofEBwhenusedasasystemicpesticide.
Inrecentyears,EBhasbeenusedtokillparasiticsealicewhichinfectsalmoninfishfarms.Studieshave
indicatedthatthehighdosesfoundinfishfeedandfecesbeneaththefishpensmayhaveadverseeffectson
themoltingcycleandreproductivesuccessoflobsters(Waddy,etal.,2010).Thismayhaveimplicationsfor
thedevelopmentandsubsequentreproductionofothercrustaceans(suchasfreshwatercrawfish),beneficial
insects,andotherinvertebrates,butnostudieshavebeendonetoevaluatethis.EBhasalsobeendetectedin
bluemusselsupto100mfromthefishpens,butitdoesnotappeartopersistinthemoncethesourcehas
beenremoved(Telfer,etal.,2006).Nostudieswerefoundtohavebeenconductedonfreshwaterbivalvesto
determinewhethertheywouldbesimilarlyaffectedifexposedtoEB.
ThemainconcernsurroundingEBisthelackofinformationregardinghowitwillbehavewhenusedasa
systemicpesticideintrees(orotherplants)andthegeneralabsenceofinformationregardingitseffectson
freshwaterorganisms.
Referencescited:
Alexander,AC.,Culp,MN,Liber,K.andCessna,AJ(2007)Effectsofinsecticideexposureonfeedinginhibition
inmayfliesandoligochaetes.Env.Toxicol.&Chem.,26:17261732.
Alexander,AC.,Heard,KS,andCulpJM(2008)Emergentbodysizeofmayflysurvivors.FreshwaterBiol.,
53:171180.
Bonmatin,JM,etal.(2005)Quantificationofimidaclopriduptakeinmaizecrops.Jour.Agric.FoodChem.,
53:53365341.
Bright,DAandDionne,S.(2005)UseofEmamectinBenzoateintheCanadianFinfishAquacultureIndustry:A
ReviewofEnvironmentalFateandEffects.PreparedforEnvironmentCanada.March2005.
Burridge,L.E.,etal.(2004)Acutetoxicityofemamectinbenzoate(SLICE)infishfeedtoAmericanlobster,
Homarusamericanus.Aquacult.Res.,35:713722.
CCME(2007)CanadianWaterQualityGuidelines:Imidacloprid.ScientificSupportingDocument.Canadian
CouncilofMinistersoftheEnvironment,Winnipeg.
Conlin,M.E.,etal.(2004)Qunatitativeanalysisoftheforagingactivityofhoneybees:relevancetothesub
lethaleffectsinducedbysystemicinsectides.ArchiveEnviron.Contam.Toxicol.,47:387395.
Decourtye,A.,Lacassie,E.andPhamDelegue,MH(2003)Learningperformancesofhoneybees(Apismellifera
L.)aredifferentiallyaffectedbyimidaclopridaccordingtotheseason.PestManagementSci.,59:269278.
Decourtye,A.,Devillers,J.,Cluzeau,S.,Charreton,M.andPhamDelegue,MH(2004)Effectsofimidacloprid
anddeltamethrinonassociativelearninginhoneybeesundersemifieldandlaboratoryconditions.Exotoxicol.
Environ.Safety,57:410419.
Fossen,M(2006)EnvironmentalFateofImidacloprid.DepartmentofPesticideRegulation,Sacramento,CA.
April2006.
Gupta,S.,etal(2002)Leachingbehaviorofimidaclopridformulationsonsoil.Bull.Environ.Contam.Toxicol.,
68:502508.
James,DGandPrice,TS(2002)ImidaclopridBoostsTSSMEggProduction.Agrichem.&Env.News,Issue189.
WashingtonStateUniv.ExtensionService.
Kaakeh,N.,Kaakeh,W,andBennet,G(1996)Topicaltoxicityofimidacloprid,fipronil,andsevenconventional
insecticidestotheadultconvergentladybeetle(Coleoptera:Coccinellidae).Jour.OfEntomol.Sci,31(3):315
322.
KiddH.andJamesDR(1991)TheAgrochemicalsHandbook,ThirdEd.TheRoyalSocietyofChemistry.Unwin
BrothersLtd.,OldWoking,Surrey,UK.
Kreutzweiser,D.,Good,K.,Chartrand,D.,Scarr,T.,andThompson,D.(2007)Nontargeteffectsonaquatic
decomposerorganismsofimidaclopridasasystemicinsecticidetocontrolemeraldashborerinripariantrees.
Ecotoxicol.Env.Safety,68:315325.
Kreutzweiser,DP,Good,KP,Chartrand,DT,Scarr,TA,andThomspon,DG(2008a)Areleavesthatfallfrom
imidiclopridtreatedmapletreestocontrolAsianlonghornedbeetlestoxictonontargetdecomposer
organisms?Jour.Env.Quality,37:639646.
Kreutzweiser,DP,Thomspon,DG,andScarr,TA(2008b)Imidiclopridinleavesfromsystemicallytreatedtrees
mayinhibitlitterbreakdownbynontargetinvertebrates.Ecotoxicol.&Env.Safety,72:10531057.
Kreutzweiser,etal.(2008c)ToxicityoftheSystemicInsecticide,Imidacloprid,toForestStreamInsectsand
MicrobialCommunities.BulletinofEnvironmentalContaminantToxicology,80:211214.
Lasota,JAandDybas,RA(1991)Avermectins,anovelclassofcompounds:Implicationsforuseinarthropod
pestcontrol.Ann.Rev.ofEntomol.,36:91117.
14
Laurent,FMandRathahao,E.(2003)DistributionofCimidaclopridinsunflowers(HelianthusannuusL.)
followingseedtreatment.Jour.Agric.FoodChem.,51:80058010.
Luo,Y.(1999)Toxicologicalstudytwonovelpesticidesonearthworm,Eiseniafoetida.Chemosphere,39:2347
2356.
Mizell,RFandSconyers,MC(1992)Toxicityofimidaclopridtoselectedarthropodpredatorsinthelaboratory.
FloridaEntomol.,83:18061812.
Moza,PN,Hustert,K.,Fesicht,E.andKettrupA.(1998)Photolysisofimidaclopridinaqueoussolution.
Chemosphere.36(3):497502.
Mullins,JW(1993)Imidacloprid:Anewnitroguanidineinsecticide.Am.Chem.Soc.SymposiumSeries
52400976156.
Nauen,RK,Tietjen,K.,Wagner,K.andElbert,A.(1998)Efficacyofplantmetabolitesofimidaclopridagainst
Myzuspersicae and Aphisgossypii(Homoptera:Aphididae).Pestic.Sci.,52:5357.
OPP,2000PesticideEcotoxicityDatabase(Formerly:EnvironmentalEffectsDatabase(EEDB).Dataretrieved
fromUSEPAEcotoxdatabase.OfficeofPesticidesProgram.
Pestana,J.,etal.(2009)Structuralandfunctionalresponsesofbenthicinvertebratestoimidaclopridin
outdoorstreammesocosms.Env.Pollution(2009).
Raupp,MJ,Webb,RE,Szczepaniec,A.,Booth,D.,andAhern,R.(2004)Incidence,AbuncanceandSeverityof
MitesonHemlocksFollowingApplicationsofImidacloprid.Jour.ofArboriculture,30(2):108113.
Roberts,TRandHutson,DH(eds)(1999)Chlorpyrifos.In:MetabolicPathwaysofAgrochemicals,Part2.The
RoyalSoc.ofChem.,Cambridge,UK,pp234242.
Sarkar,MA,etal(1999)EffectofpHandtypeofformulationonthepersistenceofimidaclopridinwater.Bull.
Environ.Contam.Toxicol.,63:604609.
Rouchaud,J.,GustinF.,andWauters,A.(1994)Soilbiodegradationandleaftransferofinsecticideimidacloprid
appliedinseeddressinginsugarbeetcrops.Bull.Environ.Contam.Toxicol.,53(3):344350.
Sclar,D.C.,Gerace,D.,andCranshaw,W.S.(1998)ObservationsofPopulationincreasesandinjurybyspider
mites(Acari:Tetranychidae)onOrnamentalPlantsTreatedwithImidacloprid.Jour.Econ.Entomol.,91(1):250
255.
Sechser,B.,Ayoub,S.,andMonuir,N.(2003)Selectivityofemamectinbenzoatetopredatorsofsuckingpests
oncotton.Jour.ofPlantDiseaseandProtection,110(2):184194.
Severson,DW(1978)PollenGatheringbyHoneyBeesinLaCrosseCounty,Wisconsin.Thesissubmittedtothe
facultyoftheUniversityofWisconsin.September1978.
SPAH,2002Potentialenvironmentalimpactsofemamectinbenzoate,formulatedas{ƌźĭĻξͲforsalmonids.
TechnicalReport.36pp.ScheringPloughAnimalHealth.
Suchail,A,Guez,D.,andBelzunces,LP(1999)Discrepancybetweenacuteandchronictoxicityinducedby
imidaclopridanditsmetabolitesin Apismellifera.Environ.Toxicol.Chem.,20(11):24822486.
Telfer,T.C.,etal.(2006)Environmentaleffectsoftheantisealice(Copepoda:Caligidae)therapeutant
emamectinbenzoateundercommercialuseconditionsinthemarineenvironment.Aquaculture,260:163
180.
th
Tomlin,C(1997)Thepesticidemanual:Incorporatingtheagrochemicalshandbook,10ed.BritishCrop
ProtectionCouncil,Farnham,Surrey,UK.
U.S.EPA(2003)Imidacloprid;PesticideToerances.Fed.Regist.68:3530335315\[Online\].Availableat
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAPEST/2003/June/Day13/p14880.htm(ascitedinFossen,2006;verified1
1106).USEPA,Washington,DC.
Waddy.SL,Merritt,VA,HamiltonGibson,MN,andAiken,DE(2010)Effectofemamectinbenzoateonthemolt
cycleofovigerousAmericanlobsters Homarusamericanus isinfluencedbythedosingregimen.AquaticBiol.,
11:4752.
andSchneider,V.(1999)Photodegradationofimidacloprid.Jour.Agric.FoodChem.,47(4):1730
Wamhoff,H.
1734.
Westwood,F.,Bean,K.,Dewar,A.,Bromilow,R.,andChamberlain,K.(1998)Movementandpersistenceof
14
\[C\]imidaclopridinsugarbeetplantsfollowingapplicationtopelletedsugarbeetseed.Pesti.Sci.,52(2):97
103.
Willis,KJandLing,N.(2003)Thetoxicityofemamectinbenzoate,anaquaculturepesticide,toplanktonic
marinecopepods.Aquaculture,221:289297.
,Eiseniafoetida.Environ.Pollut.,
Zang,Y.,etal.(2000)Genotoxicityoftwonovelpesticidesfortheearthworm
108:271278.
Appendix E: Biological Control
The following text is from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture website, 3/4/11:
Biological control (biocontrol) is the best option for cost-effective, long-term EAB population reduction. A
variety of insecticides are available to treat individual, high-value ash trees. Cost and logistical
considerations make these treatments impractical on a large scale. Biocontrol, already used successfully to
fight some weed and insect pests in Minnesota, is considered the only feasible large-scale tool for combating
EAB. Biocontrol reunites a target pest with the insects or diseases that control the pest in its native range. In
this case, tiny, stingless wasps that control EAB in Asia are released to reduce EAB damage. Prior to their
use, biocontrol organisms are thoroughly tested to ensure they will not harm humans, native plant and
animal species, or the environment.
USDA rears three species of wasps as biocontrol agents for EAB. Two species kill EAB larvae. Tetrastichus
planipennisiadults find and insert their eggs into EAB larvae. Spathius agrili behaves similarly except that
the wasp eggs and developing wasps are attached to the outside of the EAB larvae. The developing wasps
feed on and eventually kill the EAB larvae. Egg parasitoid, Oobius agrili, adults insert their eggs into EAB
eggs on ash bark. The developing wasps feed on and destroy the eggs.
AppendixF:WhatAreOtherMetroCommunitiesDoingtoCombatEAB?
BelowarenotescompiledinMarch2011regardingwhatnearbycommunitiesaredoingtomanageEAB.
SaintPaul
Removedallinfestedashtreesfrominitialinfestation
CreatedtraptreestomonitorEABpopulation(destructivesamplingofash)
Structuredremovaloffullblocksofdecliningash
2011:somepesticidetreatmentininfestedareas
2011:residentswillbeallowedtohirelicensedcontractorstotreatboulevardtreesviatrunkinjection
Minneapolis
Removedallinfestedtrees
Trunkinjectionofselectparktrees
2011:releaseofbiologicalnearinfestation
RamseyCounty
Removing300trees
Trunkinjectionof1600treesincountyparks/golfcourses
Woodbury
EABplanpresentedtocouncilMarch2011
OrdinancewillbeupdatedtoincludeEAB
Notrecommendingchemicaltreatmentatthistime
Councilwilldeterminewhetherornottodopreemptiveremovals
CottageGrove
Plansfortrunkinjectionof3000blvdashtrees
Plancallsforremovalof50150ashperyeardependingonseveralfactors,includingcosts
Plancallsforremovalandreplacementofapproximately1000oftheir4000boulevardashtreesover
12years
Possiblestructuredremovalofpoorerqualitypublicashtreesdependingonfunding
Roseville
CitycouncilapprovedEABplaninfallof2010
$100,000budgetedforEAB,plusreceived$50,000grant
Eachyearwillremovesomeashthatareinpoorcondition
Willtreatsomeashtreesconsideredsignificant
Residentsmaytreatboulevardashtreesiftheyapplyforapermitandusealicensedcitycontractor
Updatingdiseaseordinancetoincludeash
NorthSaintPaul
Allowingresidentstoregisterboulevardashtreestheywouldliketohavetreatedwiththecity
Planningonsomestructuredremoval