1. INTRODUCTION

A. Description and purpose of the site (preserve or managed area) The Middle Niobrara Weed Awareness Group (herein referred to as the MNWAG) will be focusing on the control of noxious/invasive weeds in the 76 mile National Scenic River Corridor. It will include all lands that lie two miles north and two miles south of the river. (SEE APPENDIX 2, MAP 1). The main goal of the group is to facilitate management and control of noxious or invasive weeds within the area. These weeds will include: purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula), spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and the "watch weeds" common reed (Phragmites australis) and saltcedar (Tamarix aphylla). To achieve the above stated goal, the group will first need to educate landowners, both public and private, then coordinate and implement control efforts.

Additional initial goals include: coordinating resources and records (standardization for information sharing and analysis of control methods); assisting landowner’s efforts to manage weeds (cost-share); develop local sources of insects for biological control; mapping of the noxious/invasive weeds within the MNWAG boundary; and employ a Weed Management Coordinator.

B. Description of how certain plant species ("weeds") interfere with management goals The individual management goals within the MNWAG differ but all of the entities involved agree that this proposed plan is a step in the right direction. The group wants to coordinate and facilitate the control of noxious and invasive weeds. If allowed to proliferate, these weeds can "crowd" out native vegetation and eventually form a monoculture. (SEE SECTION 3 for complete detailed description of noxious/invasive weeds.)

C. Inventory of plant species that interfere with management goals* **
Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) APPENDIX 2, MAP 2
Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) APPENDIX 2, MAP 3
Spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) APPENDIX 2, MAP 4
Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) APPENDIX 2, MAP 5
Common reed (Phragmites australis) APPENDIX 2, MAP 6
Saltcedar (Tamarix aphylla) APPENDIX 2, MAP 7
*MAJOR GOAL IS TO CONTINUE MAPPING INFESTATIONS
**THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE IS IN THE PROCESS OF MAPPING ALL NOXIOUS WEEDS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE RIVER. THIS WILL SHOW MOSTLY ALL OF THE COVERAGE OF PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE WITHIN THE MNWAG.

2. OVERVIEW OF WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN

A. General Management Philosophy As state earlier, the individual management goals within the MNWAG differ but all of the entities involved agree that this proposed plan is a step in the right direction. The group wants to coordinate and facilitate the control of noxious/invasive weeds. We want to facilitate management in the Corridor to:

1. Be more cost efficient. We believe that a cost-share program could be implemented that would help to reduce the burden of spraying weeds.

2. Provide educational opportunities to local landowners, both private and pubic, and all other interested parties. We want to not only inform the group on noxious/invasive weeds already existing within the area but to increase awareness of potential noxious weeds.

3. Increase communication and interaction between all participating entities. We believe that control of weeds would be more effective if everyone knows what their neighbors are doing.

We set priorities in the hope of minimizing the total, long-term workload. Therefore, we act to prevent new infestations and assign highest priority to existing infestations that are the fastest growing, most disruptive, and affect the most highly valued area(s) of the site. We also consider the difficulty of control, giving higher priority to infestations we think we are most likely to control with available technology and resources.

I. Current extent of the species: under this category, priorities are assigned to species in order to first, prevent the establishment of new weed species, second, eliminate small, rapidly-growing infestations, third, prevent large infestations from expanding, and fourth, reduce or eliminate large infestations. To do this, priorities are assigned in the following sequence:
1 Species not yet on the site but which are present nearby.
2. Species present as new populations or outliers of larger infestations, especially if they are expanding rapidly.
3. Species present in large infestations that continue to expand.
4. Species present in large infestations that are not expanding.

II. Current and potential impacts of the species: Priorities are ordered under this category based on the management goals for the site. They are listed in the following sequence:
1. Species that alter ecosystem processes such as fire frequency, sedimentation, nutrient cycling, or other ecosystem processes. These are species that "change the rules of the game", often altering conditions so radically that few native plants and animals can persist.
2. Species that out compete natives and dominate otherwise undisturbed native communities.
3. Species that do not out compete dominant natives but:
a. prevent or depress recruitment or regeneration of native species; OR
b. reduce or eliminate resources used by native animals; OR
c. promote populations of invasive non-native animals by providing them with resources otherwise unavailable in the area.
4. Species that overtake and exclude natives following natural disturbances such as fires, floods, or hurricanes, thereby altering succession, or that hinder restoration of natural communities.

III. Value of the habitats/areas the species infests or could infest: Priorities are assigned in the following order: 1. Infestations that occur in the most highly valued habitats or areas of the site – especially areas that contain rare or highly valued species or communities and areas that provide vital resources. 2. Infestations that occur in less highly valued portions of the site.

IV. Difficulty of control and establishing replacement species: Priorities are assigned in the following order:
1. Species likely to be controlled or eliminated with available technology and resources and which desirable native species will replace with little further input.
2. Species likely be controlled but will not be replaced by desirable natives without an active restoration program requiring substantial resources.
3. Species difficult to control with available technology and resources and/or whose control will likely result in substantial damage to other, desirable species.
4. Species unlikely to be controlled with available technology and resources. Finally, weed species whose populations are decreasing and/or those that colonize only disturbed areas and don't move into undisturbed habitats nor impact recovery from the disturbance can be assigned the lowest priorities.
B. Tables SEE APPENDIX 3: Weed Management Plan Tables (Excel)
Table 1. Prioritized List of Weed Species Sets ranks or categories using Section 2B for guidelines.
Table 2. Weed Management Plan Implementation Schedule Schedules the planning, surveying, and treatment for each target weed for at least the next year.
Table 3. Projected Resource Costs to Implement Weed Management Plan This table will be revised annually after comparing estimated to actual costs (obtained from Table 5).
Table 4. Itemized Actual Annual Cost and Labor Worksheet(s) for Each Target Weed Data will be entered for each project or target weed to account for yearly costs and labor.
Table 5. Projected and Actual Resource Uses After each year, the difference between actual and estimated resource costs will be examined. These results will be used to estimate new resource costs for the upcoming year(s).