REVEGETATION OF SUPERFUND SITES WITH NATIVE PLANTS:
A PRIMER FOR SUPERFUND PERSONNEL
U.S. EPA Region 5 Superfund Division
Native Plant Workgroup
May 1996
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction 1
II. What is a Native Plant? 2
III. Benefits and Costs of Restoration with Native Plants 4
Benefits 4
Costs 5
IV. Planning a Native Landscape 7
Compatibility with Area . . 7
Timelines - 8
Plant Selection 9
Seed Sources and Availability _ 10
V. Establishing and Maintaining a Native Landscape 11
Planting 12
Maintenance 13
Monitoring and Evaluation 13
VI. Conclusions 13
REFERENCES 15
APPENDICES
A. Superfund Memorandum
B. Beneficial Landscape Practices Guidance
C. Plant Databases
D. Example Documents and Case Studies
Note: For additional information about the Superfund Native Plant Workgroup or for technical
support for native plant revegetation efforts, contact Jim Chapman of the Technical
Support Section.
-------
540R96538
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Several years ago, a group of U.S. EPA staff formed an unofficial workgroup to encourage the
use of native landscaping at Superfund and related cleanup sites. The purpose of this group, the
Superfund Native Plant Workgroup, is to inform, educate, and provide resources to fellow
employees regarding the use of native plants for revegetation at their sites. This Primer and a
companion document "Revegetating Superfund Sites with Native Plants: State Specific
Resources" are the workgroup's first efforts to share the information we have gathered so far.
The group primarily responsible for these documents are:
James Chapman
Laura Evans
Leah Evison
Sally Jansen
Diana Mally
Marilou Martin
Additional contributors include:
Dan Cowgill
Bill Franz
Mike Gifford
Steve Grabacek
Duane Heaton
JohnKuhns
Romy Myska
John O'Grady
Pat Vogtman
-------
I 1. Introduction
Revegetation at Superfund sites traditionally consists of wide expanses of turf grasses
that often require perpetual mowing and regular applications of water, fertilizers and, at times,
pesticides. The wildlife value of these expanses is low, and there are no opportunities for
promoting public awareness of conservation issues. This primer was developed by the Region 5
Superfund Division's Native Plant Workgroup to offer project managers and other Superfund
personnel an alternative vision. It is intended to start the discussion; the assistance of
professionals in native plant revegetation will undoubtedly be needed to implement projects.
Native plants are evolutionarily adapted to local conditions, so they are more likely to be
self-reliant than most of the alien species commonly used in landscaping. The hardiness of
native plants potentially reduces maintenance costs through decreases in mowing costs and
fertilizer, pesticide and water uses. Additional-benefits of native plant revegetation include
opportunities to regenerate natural areas, increase biodiversity, create wildlife habitat, reduce
exposures to lawn chemicals, and provide public education in sustainable environments.
Although the potential benefits of revegetation of cleanup sites with native species have
been recognized by Region 5 for several years (see Appendix A), the broader issue of native
landscaping has also reached Federal prominence. Following a recommendation hi the National
Performance Review, President Clinton signed a Presidential Memorandum on April 26, 1994,
that called for the establishment of guidelines on how to increase the use of native species,
reduce the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and conserve water on Federal lands,
facilities, and federally funded projects. An interagency workgroup subsequently developed
guidance for Federal agencies, published in the Federal Register on August 10, 1995 (see
Appendix B), and hereafter referred to as the Beneficial Landscape Practices Guidance.
This Region 5 Superfund primer is an initial effort to offer practical advice to Superfund
personnel concerning the issues that are likely to arise in native plant revegetation projects. The
Superfund Native Plant Workgroup expects to update the primer as the Division gams field
experience. Opportunities exist in the Superfund Division not only for revegetation at clean-up
sites (the focus of this primer), but also to restore or protect existing native landscapes in
-------
settlement negotiations for natural resource damages or penalty satisfaction through
Supplemental Environmental Projects. The Workgroup encourages these approaches as well.
II. What Is A Native Plant?
The distinction between native and alien plants is seemingly straightforward. The
Beneficial Landscapes Practices Guidance defines a native plant species as "one that occurs
naturally in a particular region, state, ecosystem, and/or habitat without direct or indirect human
actions". In practice, native plants include the vegetation present in a region prior to European
exploration and settlement, and alien plants include the vegetation intentionally or inadvertently
introduced from other regions.
The alien plants of the upper Midwest are mostly European or Asian" species highly
adapted to the types of disturbance characteristic of agricultural and residential landscapes and,
therefore, include many of our most common plants. For example, more than 95% of the areas
with vegetative cover in the 22-county region around Chicago are dominated by introduced
plants (Swink and Wilhelm, 1994). Many alien species are established in "wild" areas, often so
successfully that the public is unaware of their foreign origins. A distressing example is a natural
landscaping brochure that included common buckthorn, an introduction from Eurasia, in a list of
native plants. While some of our native plants also thrive in residential or agricultural
landscapes, many native plants do not successfully compete in the landscapes transformed by our
modem economy.
Some complications arise when compiling native species lists. For example, Kentucky
bluegrass is usually considered an alien since the landscaping varieties are introduced from
Europe, but it is probably native along the U.S.-Canadian border (Gleason and Cronquist, 1991).
Another difficulty concerns the extension of North American species ranges following European
settlement. Western wheatgrass is found throughout Region 5. It is native to western states and
is usually considered an introduced species in eastern states, but the eastern boundary of the
native population is uncertain (Swink and Wilhelm, 1994). The problem of shifting species
range may also arise when vegetative patterns are considered prior to the arrival of Europeans.
"Weed" species were probably introduced by Native American agricultural practices to areas
outside their previous range. By convention, plants associated with Native American activities
are usually included with native plants, but, under the definition of native plants in the Beneficial
Landscape Practices Guidance, they are considered introduced species.
Despite the aforementioned complications, there is broad consensus regarding native
species lists; that is, the status of most species is unambiguous. However, not all populations of
-------
a given native species are equally desirable for use at any particular site. There are two
interrelated concerns: genetic diversity and local adoption. Species are only rarely genetically
uniform. Red pine is a notable example of a species with inherently low variability. More
commonly, the genetic makeup of a species varies throughout its range. Little bluestem is so
variable that the more distinctive types have been named, even though intergradations between
these variants are also common (Mohlenbrock, 1973). The advantages of high genetic diversity
include increased adaptability to varied conditions, reduce inbreeding, and an enlarged pool of
the raw material of evolution.
One expression of genetic diversity is the degree of variability within a single population
- both visible differentiations between individuals and less obvious variations in physiological
processes. An important consideration in native plant revegetation projects is not to reduce this
diversity. The use of native plants from large central nurseries is sometimes discouraged because
of concerns over low genetic diversity and dilution of local gene pools. One solution is to use a
variety of seed sources, that is, to collect or purchase seed from multiple locations.
Another expression of genetic diversity is that a species may develop distinct but
potentially interbreeding populations, called ecotypes, that are specifically adapted for conditions
in different habitats or regions. Examples of ecotypes at a regional scale may be seen by
comparing populations of a single species at different latitudes. Northern ecotypes are
genetically adapted for long day lengths and short growing seasons, while southern ecotypes are
adapted for shorter days and longer growing seasons (McMillan, 1965). For this reason, plants
from a southern seed source may fail in a northern location, and vice versa, because development
is out of synch with local climatic patterns.
Ecotypes also develop in response to habitat characteristics, such as moisture availability
(dry, moist, wet), acidity, salinity, or even contaminant levels (e.g., on mining tailings). Indian
grass is an example of a species that may be found over a wide range of moisture conditions
from dry woods to "marshy places" (Voss, 1972). The populations at the extremes would be
considered ecotypes if the adaptations to different moisture conditions were under genetic
control.
Appropriate ecotype selection is essential for successful revegetation. The procedures are
straightforward. First, use seed from the same or a somewhat southerly latitude to ensure proper
synchronization of development and climatic patterns. Experience with range reseeding has
shown that native grasses perform well as far as "several hundred" miles north of the seed source
(state regulations may be more restrictive), but are "decidedly lacking in vigor, production, and
period of growth" if planted south of the seed source (Pearse etal.. 1948). Secondly, when
feasible, consider obvious habitat characteristics, for example, seed from populations on drier
sunny sites may be better suited for conditions on well-drained and exposed landfill covers than
-------
seed from the same species on moist shaded sites.
Once again, it is important to avoid diluting the gene pool of the local ecotypes with the
genes of ecotypes that are not as well-adapted to local conditions. The introduction of a less
viable ecotype in a revegetation project may adversely affect nearby remnant native plant
populations through cross pollination and gene pool dilution.
III. Benefits and Costs of Restoration with Native Plants
Benefits
The environmental benefits of using native plants often include the following, depending
on the species:
* Improved soil quality and reduced soil erosion due to extensive root systems;
* Reduced runoff, which can lead to improved surface water quality;
* Enhanced groundwater recharge; •
* Reduced carbon dioxide emissions from reduced mowing;
* Increased wildlife habitats and associated biodiversity;
* Enhancement of existing native plant communities by acting as buffer zones or as
corridors between fragmented native landscapes; and
* Increased preservation of native plant gene pools
The use of native plants also leads to economic benefits from:
* Reduced use of pesticides, including herbicides (spot spraying for weeds vs.
traditional broadcast spraying);
* Reduced irrigation demands;
* Little or no weeding beyond the first five years; and
* Reduced mowing.
Besides environmental and economic benefits, the use of native wildflowers and grasses
provides aesthetic seasonal color changes, preserves an area's natural heritage, and can provide
educational and conservation opportunities.
Costs
Revegetation with native plants is frequently less expensive than traditional landscaping in
the long term if the project is well-planned up front and care is taken to establish and maintain
the native landscape until it is fully established. The difference between native landscaping and
prairie restoration is important for developing cost estimates for Superfund native plant
-------
revegetation projects. Native landscaping refers to the use of any (hopefully appropriate) naive
plants, but does not necessarily aim for a complete recreation of native plant communities.
Prairie restoration is specifically aimed at recreating whole plant communities, for which
extensive use of expensive forb seed is required. Forbs are the herbaceous plants (wildflowers)
other than grasses. Even though grasses are the dominant plants, most of the plant biodiversity
of prairie communities is due to the numerous prairie forb species. Forb seeds may account for
as much as 90% of the total seed cost of a prairie restoration (Shirley, 1994).
Significant savings can be realized for Superfund projects by primarily seeding grasses.
The grasses are largely responsible for erosion control and provision of wildlife habitat for
mammals and birds. Forbs should begin to naturally seed in following the establishment of
native grasses, unless the site is very isolated from any potential seed sources. The forbs add
color, possibly an important aspect for community acceptance, and provide most of the habitat
for insects and other invertebrates (especially butterflies).
Large commercial properties that apply native landscaping principles and techniques
instead of using traditional green turf have the potential for substantial cost savings over time.
The following example is a comparison of per acre cost using native vs. non-native species for
landscaping (Green Acres Workgroup, 1996).
Procedures &
Material Site
Preparation
Spray ing (1)
Irrigation (2)
Top Soil (3)
Tilling
Sod & Seeding
Seed & Seeding
Wild Flower
Planting (4)
First Year
Mowing
Total Installation
per Acre
Sodded Turf
Grasses
$ 140
$ 1,680
$ 4,480
$ 392
$5,964
$ 784
$ 13,440
Seeded Turf
Grass
$ 140
$ 1,680
$ 4,480
$ 392
$ 1,064
$ 672
$ 8,428
Prairie or Wetland
Seeding
$ 140
$ 4,480
$ 392
$ 1,232
$ 1,680
$ 196
$ 6,440 to
$8,120
-------
Subsequent
Annual Upkeep
per Acre (6)
$ 1,120
$ 1,120
S 168
(1) Spraying must be done on site with live, undesirable vegetation such as quack grass or
thistle.
(2) Irrigation cost figures assume an underground automatic system.
(3) Top soil is figured at an approximate 3-inch depth hauled in from off-site.
(4) Wild flower planting is optional. The figure is based on 1,000 seedlings installed
per acre planted.
(5) The higher figure accounts for additional cost for wildflower planting.
(6) Annual maintenance for turf grass includes 12 mowings per year plus fertilizer and
watering. Annual maintenance for prairie/wetland grasses includes annual bums,
occasional spot spraying or mowing.
This example demonstrates that even though the initial cost for native plant seeds and
seedlings can be higher than traditional turf grass seeds, the overall project costs should be less
for native landscaping because of decreased maintenance costs and greater long-term viability
(e.g., disease or drought resistance).
A native landscaping project at AT&T Bell Laboratories supplies another example of cost
savings at a commercial facility. For this project, the cost savings over 5 years, including
installation and maintenance, was estimated to be 12% for a native landscape compared to a
traditional landscape (Bonanno, 1992).
The Native Plant Workgroup has not yet obtained cost comparisons for native plant
revegetation at remedial sites, but the Workgroup still expect a notable savings in addition to the
benefits to the environment and community.
IV. Planning a Native Landscape
Compatibility with Area
Environmental conditions at the site and the current and future use of the site will greatly
influence its compatibility with native vegetation. A site revegetated with native plants may act
as a buffer zone to some higher quality ecosystem (such as industrial sites located near the
Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore). In some situations, native plants may have additional uses,
-------
such as reclamation of mining sites, wetland plants for water treatment, or native grasses and
forbs as cover systems for landfills. Project managers and others should keep in mind that there
are special engineering, plant establishment, and maintenance concerns when using native plants
to cover landfills. Such concerns may include compaction, low soil moisture/ nutrients, shallow
soils, landfill settling, and designing alternatives to maintenance bums. The Superfund Native
Plant Workgroup's initial work indicates that relatively short-rooted hill prairie species, such as
little blue-stem, may be best suited for use on landfills. The landfill cap design may require a
root growth barrier between the rooting and drainage zones.
Those undertaking native plant revegetation projects should also consider local zoning
requirements if land use is changed as part of the remedy (e.g., industrial to recreational). Local
"weed" ordinances or bans on burning may make the use of native plants at a site challenging.
Also, community acceptance should be considered when making the decision to use native
plants. Many communities may be strong proponents of using native vegetation and recognize
the ecological and educational opportunities of a site. There may be opportunities to form
partnerships with schools, nurseries, botanic gardens, and businesses when using and
maintaining native landscapes.
Timelines
A native landscape differs from a traditional landscape in many ways, including the way
it is planned, planted, and maintained. The plant types and species selected must fit the
conditions of the site and its requirements (salt tolerant, shorter species, taller species, sloped
areas, etc.).
Up to five growing seasons may be required to fully establish a native landscape. A
native plant revegetation project at an AT&T facility is a prime example (Johnson, Johnson &
Roy, Inc, 1992). The new landscape at native plant revegetation projects may appear unkept and
weedy for the first few years, but once the native plants are fully established, they successfully
suppress undesirable weeds. A native landscape may therefore require more intensive
management to establish than a traditional landscape, but the use of native plants will pay off in
the long term because of decreased maintenance demands.
Native landscapes planted by seed exhibit little above-ground growth during the initial
one to two growing seasons as they establish the extensive root systems needed to withstand heat
and cold, droughts, attacks from pests, fire, and grazing. A temporary plant mixture of annual
and short-lived perennial grasses and forbs often is used to compensate initially for the lack of
visible growth, to minimize soil erosion, and to retard growth of any invasive weedy species. In
the following seasons, the temporary matrix slowly gives way to the dominant native perennials.
weedy growth which occurs during the first and sometimes second growing season should
-------
be controlled by mowing or weed wacking. Native grasses emerge late in the initial growing
season and are 1 - to 2-inches tall by the end of the summer. At this initial stage, visual appeal of
the site primarily is due to annual and short-term perennial flowers at this stage.
Many forbs (prairie flowers) do not fully appear until the third or fourth growing season
at which time the annual and short-term perennial flowers begin to give way to native forbs.
Temporary cover grasses should be nearly gone, and the full complement of native grasses
should be established. During the third season, reseeding or spot transplanting native plants is
often undertaken to fill in bare spots or increase diversity. The remaining native prairie flowers
and other forbs become fully established during the fourth and fifth seasons.
Most practitioners recommend mowing the native landscape about two times per year for the
first couple years. This is especially important during the first growing season since seedlings
may die from being shaded out by fast-growing weeds. Mowing should be coupled with spot
spraying of weeds. Burning the native plant plot periodically once it is established is highly
recommended for many plant communities, although it is not necessary for all native plants and
usually can be replaced by infrequent (perhaps annual) mowing or haying.
Plant Selection
When revegetating a site with native plants, it is important to identify the site-specific
growing conditions. Although this is true of any vegetation project, with native plants it is
especially important since one goal is to select plants that thrive with minimal human
intervention. The environment of each site will pose certain limitations for plant growth that must be
modified by human action or tolerated by the vegetation. As with any vegetation project, the
establishment of native plants is affected by climatic factors, such as precipitation, temperature and
growing season length; and soil conditions, such as soil type, fertility, structure, pH, temperature,
moisture, presence of contaminants, slope, and topsoil depth.
Other criteria for identifying and selecting the most appropriate native plants include site
objectives and site conditions. If, for example, the goal of revegetating is to provide a cover crop
for temporary erosion control, choose quick growing plants such as oats or annual rye. Other
plants, such as the native switchgrass, are well-suited for ditch bottoms or very wet sites. The
native species ultimately selected should be compatible with site conditions (e.g., tolerant of salt,
trampling, wet or dry conditions, low or high soil fertility).
Appendix C includes access information for a number of plant databases that include
information about native plants. For Region 5 staff, a separate document is available which
provides State and local agencies and individual contacts that may be helpful in selecting
appropriate native plants and providing information on State and local requirements. This
document is entitled "Revegation of Superfund Sites with Native Plants: State-Specific
-------
Resources". Published literature such as that cited in this primer may also be useful.
Seed Sources and Availability
Obtaining quality native seed and plant materials for revegetating a site can present
challenges. Fortunately, native plant and seed sources exist in most Midwestern States. There
are ample supplies of many plant species, such as big blue stem, Indian grass, and switchgrass,
but other species may be in short supply.
Some States have specifications or recommendations for revegetating areas with native
plants. Some may require that naive plant seeds be harvested within the last two growing
seasons or that current test results are available for germination/viability. Many States want
information about the origin of native grass and flower seeds before they are used. Some States
have approved seed mixtures, or require purchase of seeds from approved vendors or local
sources.
Besides commercial seed dealers, there may be opportunities to collect seeds from areas
near the site. Local conservation or environmental groups may have information on nearby seed
collection areas.
The question then becomes: what is local? There is no single answer. Although not in
Region 5, the Iowa Ecotype Project is an innovative program that divides the State into three
zones for collection and distribution of native plant seeds for roadside and other native plant
projects (Shirley, 1994). The Minnesota roadside program mandates that seed sources originate
in Minnesota or nearby eastern Dakotas or northern Iowa. Another approach is to set distance
limits for seed sources. A countervailing consideration is to avoid exploitation of local seed
sources. This is particularly important for rare species, annuals, and highly fragmented remnant
populations. A conservative rule of thumb is to collect no more than 20% to 30% of the annual
seed production of common species to ensure that the long-term stability of the community is not
threatened (Thompson, 1992). Do not take seeds from rare plants.
It is important to note that local collection of seed does not, by itself, guarantee
appropriate ecotype selection for the revegetation site. Ecotypes also develop in response to
micro scale habitat differences. A classic example studied in Wales is Common Bent-Grass,
which flourishes on a wide range of habitats including sandy soils, pastures, woodlands, and old
mining wastes. Bent-Grass ecotypes evolved in each of these habitats, and are separated in the
landscape by as little as 50 meters (Bradshaw, 1959). In this situation, local seed collection
alone would not ensure an appropriate match between ecotype and site without consideration of
habitat as well.
Another method of revegetation is to plant rooted stock. This reduces the time required
for development of full vegetative cover and provides better control of species composition, but
-------
is greatly more expensive. The Beneficial Landscape Practices Guidance (Appendix B)
recommends that plants selected for Federal landscape projects or federally funded landscape
projects be nursery propagated. That guidance discourages collecting whole native plants from
wild populations unless rescued from imminent destruction.
V. Establishing and Maintaining a Native Landscape
The scale of revegetation at Superfund sites ranges from seeding small barren or scarred
areas to establishing extensive landfill covers. In general, the following steps take place when
revegetating a site: (1) the appropriate vegetation is selected for the intended use of the site, (2)
adjustments, if needed, are made to the topsoil to provide optimum conditions for establishment
and growth of that vegetation, (3) the vegetation is established at the correct seeding time with
proper techniques, (4) the established vegetation is managed, and (5) certairTminimum standards
are set to monitor and judge the success of the restoration program and to provide an indication
where additional efforts are needed (Gartner Lee Ltd., 1991).
Planting
Most cleanup sites will need soil preparation prior to planting (e.g., discing the seed bed).
Native flowers and grasses are either planted by seed or are propagated and container grown in
nurseries and individually planted as plugs (although this latter option is more expensive). Since
native plants develop slowly, a temporary cover of annual and short-lived grasses and forbs is
typically used for more immediate visual results, to control soil erosion, and to hinder growth of
weedy species. An intermediate mix, composed of perennial rye and black-eyed Susan, for
example, may also be applied in the second growing season for additional visual display and
erosion control.
The project manager should plan the planting program so as to set the seeds out at the
ideal time of year to allow them to take advantage of available moisture and growing conditions.
The seeds of native prairie plants must be covered by a thin layer of soil for proper germination
and initial growth. Several methods are available for planting native grass and forb seed. Seeds
can be individually planted and covered by hand, an expensive undertaking; or broadcast by hand
or by rotary broadcaster and raked to cover. Seed drills, developed for prairie restorations, are
recommended for larger projects. Hydroseeding is another option, but can be difficult with fluffy
seeds. It is often beneficial to firm the seed bed after seeding by using a machine cultipacker or,
for very small areas, by tamping the seed bed by foot. Mulch (straw or hay) is often applied to
shade the ground, conserve soil moisture, and reduce erosion although introduction of weed
seeds may be a concern.
-------
Maintenance
In some ways the maintenance of a native landscape is no different from any revegetation
project, including regular inspection and repair where needed. The major differences are that
well-selected native plants do not need regular watering or fertilizing following successful
establishment, and do not require frequent mowing. Most Midwestern native plants benefit from
regular burning that exposes and darkens the land surface, thereby absorbing more heat from the
sun and stimulating seed germination, as well as suppressing undesirable woody species and
weeds. Fortunately, mowing is an acceptable alternative to burning for many prairie plants, so
the practicality and legality of controlled bums.'are not site prerequisites for implementing native
landscaping. The frequency of mowing or burning depends on management objectives, such as
controlling competition, reducing litter build up, or maintaining specified plant heights, but is
usually required no more than once or twice per year for prairie maintenance purposes.
Monitoring and Evaluation
The final step in establishing a stand of native vegetation is to design and implement a
monitoring program to evaluate the success of the revegetation. Sites may be divided into
transects or plots to record species occurrences, relative abundance, and percent cover. Certain
minimum standards should be identified to determine the relative success of the revegetation
project and to help assess areas where additional efforts are required. For example, numeric
criteria should be established for species type, number, and percent ground cover. Evaluation of
erosion losses would also be important for landfill covers. Corrective measures include
replanting, interseeding, or spot treatment of erosion problem areas. Sites will often need yearly
inspections for the first 5 or 6 years. Following this, every 5 years may be appropriate.
Monitoring activities might provide excellent opportunities for community involvement.
VII. Conclusions
The use of native plants to revegetate Superfund sites makes good sense, although it will
not be desirable or practical at every site. Native plant landscaping often reduces mowing
frequency, reduces use of water, pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, and reduces overall
maintenance costs compared with conventional landscaping. In addition, native plant
revegetation provides wildlife habitat, aesthetic appeal, and positive examples for other areas in
need of revegetation. If properly implemented, native revegetation is also beneficial for
-------
maintaining genetic diversity.
There is a dearth of information on native plant revegetation of disturbed sites such as
landfills, so it may be prudent to establish test plots on some sites to evaluate the success of
selected native species. To tap the expertise in Region 5 states, a cooperative effort of State and
other Federal agencies as well as universities and other interested parties, should be considered.
A lot of work remains to make this vision a practical reality. The Region 5 States contain
many places revegetated with native plants, many of thse within the last few years. Our Agency
needs to build on this experience by encouraging Superfund project managers and other decision
makers to use native plants wherever possible. To help in this effort, the attached appendices
include sample document language and several case studies. A separate document listing state
resources and contacts is also available for Region 5 staff.
-------
REFERENCES
[Note: These include references cited in the text and others available from the Superfund
Native Plant Workgroup. Some references are incomplete at this time.]
Argonne National Laboratory, Department of Energy, Proceedings of the Special Session on the
Rehabilitation of U.S. Army Training Lands, 2nd Annual Conference of the Society for
Ecological Restoration, May 3, 1990.
Biesboer, David, and Robert Jacobson, Screening and Selection of Salt Tolerance in Native
Warm Season Grasses. (Report available from National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA 21161.)
Bonanno, A. F., Alternative Landscaping for AT&T Campus (memo dated 12/9/92).
Bradshaw, A.D. 1959. Population differentiation inAgrostis tennis Sibth. I. Morphological
differentiation. New Phytol 58:208-227.
Coffin, B. and L. Pfannmuller (eds.), Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna. University of
Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. 474 p.
Critical Area Planting (Acre) (miscellaneous).
Curtis, J.T., 1959, The Vegetation of Wisconsin, reprinted in 1971, University of Wisconsin
Press, Madison, 657pp.
Davis, B.N.K., Habitat Creation for Butterflies on a Landfill Site (article by United Kingdom
entomologist dated 10/8/89).
Decker, A. M., Why Seedings Fail (notes from Iowa State University's Forages. 4th Edition,
1985).
Egan, David, Growing Green: Prairie Nurseries Raise Native Plants and Consciousness in the
Upper Midwest (article from Restoration and Management Notes, summer of 1994).
Gartner Lee, Ltd., 1991, Manual for Establishing Vegetation on Landfills in Ontario.
Environment Ontario, Ontario, Canada. (ISBN-0-772907586-8) 71 p.
Oilman, Ed, Standardized Procedures for Planting Vegetation on Completed Sanitary Landfills
(EPA 600/2-83/055) Rutgers University, July 1982.
Gleason, H.A. and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States
and Adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York Botanical Garden, Bronx. 910 p.
-------
Green Acres Workgroup, 1996, Natural Landscaping Toolkit: A Guidebook for Local Officials
on Natural Landscaping (in preparation), Lee Ann Naue & Bevin Horn, co-chairs.
Harlow, Susan, Conservation Grasses Renew (Turf North article of October 1994).
Harty, Francis, How Illinois Kicked the Exotic Habit" Biological Pollution: The Control and
Impact of Invasive Exotic Species.
Hinchman, Ray, A Greener Way to Handle Wastewater & Avoid High Disposal Costs (ECON
article dated September 1994).
Hinchman, Ray, Biotreatment of Produced Waters - Progress Report (abstract).
Hinchman, Ray, The Grass Can Be Cleaner on'the Other Side of the Fence (Argonne National
Laboratory's Logos article, summer 1994). -
Homoya, Michael, Invasive Exotic Plants in Indiana Natural Areas (Indiana Dept. of Natural
Resources fact sheet).
Integrated Roadside Vegetation Management (IRVM) Technical Manual - Evaluating
Establishment Success (article of March 1992).
IRVM Technical Manual - Temporary Erosion Control (article of December 1990)
Iowa, IRVM and Sustain ability in Roadsides (writeup).
Iowa, IRVM: A Program for Promoting Safety, Beauty and Conservation of Iowa's Roadsides
(writeup).
Iowa, 1994 Seed Cost Comparison (writeup).
Iowa Soil & Water Conservation Society, Sources of Native Seeds and Plants (pamphlet of
1994).
Jacobson, Robert, Changes in MN/DOT Specification for 1995 (Minnesota Dept. of
Transportation memo of December 1994).
Jacobson, Robert, Seeding Manual for Native Seed Mixes: Minnesota Department of
Transportation 1994/1995 (MN/DOT Turf Establishment Unit, Office of Environmental
Services, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, MN 44128).
Johnson, Johnson & Roy, Inc., 1992, Native Landscape Master Plan for Sears Merchandise
Group Comples, Hoffman Estates, Illinois.
-------
Landers, R. Q., Roadside Vegetation Management (Ames Conservation Council article of
September 1972).
Landers, R. Q., The Use of Prairie Grasses and Forbs in Iowa Roadside and Park Landscapes
(Iowa State University article).
Landers, Roger and Robert Kowalski, Using Iowa's Prairie Species to Fight Roadside Weeds
(article).
Madison, Wisconsin, The Great Wisconsin Prairie (article dated 4/14/94)
McMillan, C. 1965. The role of ecotypic variation in the distribution of the central grassland of
North America. Ecol Monogr 29:287-308.
McMillan, C. 1959. Ecotypic differentiation within four North American prairie grasses. II.
Behavioral variation within transplanted community fractions. Am JBot 52:55-65.
Mn/DOT Office of Environmental Services, Explore Minnesota Wildflowers (pamphlet
produced by Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, Office of Environmental Services MS620, 3485
Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, MN 55128).
Mn/DNR and MN/DOT, Native Grasses: Why all the fuss??? (pamphlet produced June 1992 by
Minnesota Department of Transportation, Integrated Roadside Resource Management Program
in cooperation with Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Roadsides for Wildlife
Program).
Mn/DNR, Roadside Wildlife (writeup produced by Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources).
Mohlenbrock, R. 1973. The Illustrated Flora of Illinois. Grasses, panicum to dathonia. Southern
Illinois University Press, Carbondale. 378 p.
National Wildflower Research Center (Texas), Recreating a Prairie (writeup).
New, J.F. & Associates, Native Plants and Seeds (list of live plants and seeds available from J.F.
New & Associates, Inc., 708 Roosevelt Rd., Box 243, Walkerton, IN 46574, (219) 586-3400).
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission and Openlands Project, Northeastern Illinois
Regional Greenways Plan (map of Greenway opportunities and executive summary).
Ode, Arthur H., A Rationale for the Use of Prairie Species in Roadside Vegetation Management
(article of Milwaukee County Park Commission).
Ownbey, Gerald B and Thomas Morley, Vascular Plants of Minnesota: A Checklist and Atlas
(University of Minnesota Press, 1991).
-------
Pearse, C., A. Plummer and 13. Savage. 1948. Restoring the range by reseeding. pp. 227-233 in
Grass. The Yearbook of Agriculture 1948. U.S. Dept. Agricul., Washington D.C.
Peven, Robert Paul, Reclamation of Landfill Soils with Native Prairie Vegetation, 1985 M.S.
thesis in Landscape Architecture, University of Wisconsin - Madison.
Prairie Establishment"(writeup).
Schramm, Peter, Prairie Restoration: A Twenty-Five Year Perspective on Establishment &
Management (1990 article of Knox College, Proceedings of the 12th American Prairie
Conference).
Schwegman, John, Illinoensis: Newsletter of the Illinois Native Plant Conservation Program -
IDOC (Jan. 1995 newsletter of the Illinois Dept of Conservation).
Shirley, S. 1994. Restoring the Tallgrass Prairie. Univ of Iowa Press, Iowa City. 330 p.
Soil Conservation Service, Technical Guide: Natural Resource Conservation (guide of misc.
information for IL, OH and WT).
Soil Conservation Service, The Field Office Technical Guide: A Guide to Good Conservation
(pamphlet).
Swink, F. and G. Wilhelm. 1994. Plants of the Chicago Region. 4th ed. Indiana Academy of
Sciences, Indianapolis. 921 p.
Traub, Jo Lynn and Norm Niedergang, Use of Native Vegetation for Closure/Capping of Landfill
Sites (U.S. EPA memo dated 5/3/93).
U.S. EPA, Availability of the Presidential Memorandum for the Heads of the Executive
Departments and Agencies on Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Practices on
Federal Landscaped Grounds (Off. Federal Environmental Executive memo, 8/22/94).
U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Admin., Office of Environment and Planning,
Greener Roadsides (U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 400 Seventh
St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20590).
Univ. of Northern Iowa, Reader's Digest (Nov. 1994 newsletter, Vol. 6, No. 3).
Univ. of Northern Iowa, Integrated Roadside Vegetation Management (Office for Integrated
Roadside Vegetation Management pamphlet).
Univ. of Northern Iowa, The Roadside Almanac (Office for Integrated Roadside Vegetation
Management (IRVM) pamphlet).
-------
Univ. of Northern Iowa, A Landowner's Guide to Controlling Roadside Disturbances (Soil
Conservation Service pamphlet).
Univ. of Northern Iowa, A Landowner's Guide to Roadside Burning (Soil Conservation Service
pamphlet).
Univ. of Northern Iowa, A Landowner's Guide to Roadside Management (Soil Conservation
Service pamphlet).
Voss, E. 1972. Michigan Flora Part I Gymnosperms and Monocots. Cranbrook Institute of
Science, Bloomfield Hills. 488 p.
Varland, Ken and Greg Breining, Making Roadsides into Prairies (Fall of 1989 article in
Pheasants Forever).
White, John, Preserving Genetic Diversity (Aug. 1994 misc. presentation to Illinois Nature
Preserves Commission).
Whitmore, Lynn, On the Native Trail (August 1989 article in Seed World).
Wildflower Assoc. of Michigan, Minutes of Native Seed Meeting (minutes of 6/15/93 Seed
Committee meeting).
Wildflower Assoc. of Michigan, Report to MI Dept. of Agriculture on the Current and Future
Status of Michigan Wildflower Seed Production, and Recommendations (Jan. 190 report of Seed
Comm.).
Wilhelm, Gerould and Douglas Ladd, Natural Area Assessment in the Chicago Region (The
Morton Arboretum's article from Trans. 53rd N. A. Wildlife & Natural Resources Conference,
1988).
Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation, Native Seed Specifications for Peters Wetland Mitigation
Project (1995 specifications).
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
UNITES STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 5
May 3, 1993
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Use of Native Vegetation for Closure/Capping of Landfill Sites
FROM: Jodi Traub, Acting Associate Division Director
Office of Superfund
Norm Niedergang, Acting Associate Division Director
Office of RCRA
TO: Superfund Remedial Project Managers/RCRA Permitting and Enforcement
Branch Staff
We recently met with Curtis Sharp and Dan Lawson of the Soil Conservation Service (SCS),
U.S. Department of Agriculture, regarding the use of native vegetation as cover material when
capping a site. Curtis represents the SCS National Plant Materials Program. The National Plant
Materials Program provides technical assistance, identifies native plants that meet a designated
need, and can make the best plants available for the task. The purpose is to provide plants that
conserve soil and eliminate erosion.
The SCS has 25 centers throughout the nation based upon physiographic areas. These centers
have the ability to identify native plants from the area and to produce them to assure their genetic
viability.
We would like to identify several sites within the Region where cover materials will soon be
chosen and work with the SCS to identify native plants and to raise sufficient quantities for a
site. Use of native vegetation has advantages that we may be able to exploit, while we still want
to maintain the integrity of the cap; native vegetation may be able to accomplish this while
reducing operation and maintenance costs. The SCS can tailor the seed mixture so that the roots
do not exceed a specified depth and the root system of the native plants usually are thicker, thus
being more resistant to erosion. By using native plants, the tolerance to heavy Spring rainfall
and Summer drought will be increased. In working with SCS there are issues that must be
considered, i.e., the ability to assure plant genetic specificity for the area, ability to provide
plants to you within a timeframe, etc. These issues can be addressed once sites have been
identified and additional discussion with SCS are held.
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
-2-
If you believe you have a candidate site or would like more information please contact Dan
Lawson at 3-8356 or Bill Franz at 6-7500. Bill is in Planning and Management Division and has
been working with Dan to get this program implemented.
-------
Federal Register: August 10, 1995 (Volume 60, Number 154)]
Page 40837-40841
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5275-6]
Office of the Federal Environmental Executive; Guidance for
Presidential Memorandum on Environmentally and Economically Beneficial
Landscape Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds
AGENCY: Office of the Federal Environmental Executive, EPA.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This document announces guidance developed by the interagency workgroup
under the direction of the Federal Environmental Executive to assist federal agencies in the
implementation of environmentally and economically beneficial landscape practices. This
guidance is in response to the requirements of the executive memorandum on
Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Landscape Practices on Federal Landscaped
Grounds.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Debra Yap, (202) 260-9291.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 26, 1994, the President issued a memorandum
to Federal agencies addressing landscape management practices on federal landscaped grounds.
In developing the implementing guidance, the Federal Environmental Executive sought public
comment through a Federal Register "Notice, Review & Comment." This guidance,
as written by the interagency taskforce, represents the culmination of discussions among
interested parties, industry and government, and the responses to the Federal Register Notice. 1
\1\ Federal Register, Vol. 59, No. 161, Monday August 22, 1994.
The Executive Memorandum was incorporated and printed in the Notice,
Review & Comment.
The principles identified here provide a framework for the use of environmentally and
economically beneficial landscape practices on managed federal lands and federally-funded
projects. They are meant to improve and expand upon current principles of landscape design,
implementation and management. They are intended to assist in federal planning and
decision-making and can be incorporated into federal agency guidance/policy for landscape
-------
management practices.
As identified in the memorandum the guidance focuses on 5 (five) guiding principles: (1) Use
regionally native plants (see definition below) for landscaping; (2) Design, use or promote
construction practices that minimize adverse effects on the natural habitat; (3)
Seek to prevent pollution; (4) Implement water and energy efficient practices; (5) Create outdoor
demonstration projects.
This guidance is intended to promote principles of''sustainable landscape design and
management" which recognizes the interconnection of natural resources, human resources, site
design, building design, energy management, water supply, waste prevention, and facility
maintenance and operation. In general, sustainable design embodies the concept that,
* * * * human civilization is an integral part of the natural world
and that nature must be preserved and perpetuated if the human
community is to sustain itself indefinitely.2
\2\ p. 4, Guiding Principles of Sustainable Design, U.S.
Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Denver Service
Center, September 1993.
Sustainable landscape management seeks to minimize impact on the environment and maximize
the value received for the dollars expended.
Sustainable landscape design is economically beneficial in its principle of evaluating and
optimizing the full life-cycle of products and processes: cost is considered from initial design
through the life of the project. For example, although sustainable site design and
development may have a higher initial cost, it may prove economical over the life of the project.
[[Page 40838]]
In this example, a well-designed and implemented plan can result in healthier, longer-lived
plantings which rely less on pesticides and fertilizers, minimize water use, require less
maintenance, and increase erosion control. Sustainable landscape design considers the
characteristics of the site and soil, intended effect and use of the developed area, in addition to
the selection of plants.
It is not the intent of this guidance to supersede federal agency directives, policy, or other
guidance which relate to the mission of that agency or to health and safety concerns. It is not
intended to supersede agency objectives or guiding principles such as those
pertaining to the National Park Service's four primary management zones—natural, cultural, park
development, special use—and their subzones; or those pertaining to the Forest Service's National
Hierarchy and Recreation Opportunity Spectrum classification systems. Finally, this guidance
does not advocate replacement of existing landscapes, unless it is cost-effective to do so.
Intent of Guiding Principles
The following describes the intent of the implementing guidance and discusses opportunities
-------
for federal initiatives. These opportunities are not all-inclusive and federal agencies are
encouraged to
investigate other initiatives for environmentally and economically beneficial landscaping
practices.
1. Use Regionally Native Plants for Landscaping
In the selection of plants for managed federal lands and federally-funded projects, the federal
government has the opportunity to choose plants which are aesthetically pleasing, require
minimal care, and reflect a ''sense of place," i.e. the physical, or symbolic representations of a
community or area. By carefully selecting the "right plants for the right place" and matching
plant characteristics to site and soil conditions, federal agencies can promote sustainable
landscapes. Characteristics of sustainable landscapes include: minimizing water use, reducing the
need for pesticides and fertilizers, reducing maintenance costs, utilizing hardy plants, and
increasing erosion control. Where the appropriate conditions exist, regionally
native plants offer the advantages of natural adaptation to the climatic and geologic
environments. In addition, use of regionally native plants can promote regional identity, and
enhance wildlife
habitat and biodiversity.
2. Design, Use or Promote Construction Practices That Minimize Adverse Effects on the Natural
Habitat
Construction practices can adversely affect and alter natural and other habitat. Federal projects
can be sited, designed, and constructed to minimize that impact. Federal agencies can incorporate
elements of sustainable design into their architectural and engineering plans and
specifications for projects planned, designed, and constructed by federal agency or contractor
personnel.
Structures can be integrated with the existing plant and animal communities and cultural
(human) environments. Considerations include such elements as: ecology of the site; human
factors (i.e. historic issues, mission, adjacent land use, and local culture, neighboring
communities); water/energy use; pollution prevention and other special issues.
Impact on existing vegetation can be minimized by protecting and integrating plants into the
site design. Analyses of the soil and subsurface material are important to the later success of
existing and future plantings. These analyses can also indicate the existence of toxic or other
undesirable material.
Additional beneficial construction practices which minimize adverse impacts to natural habitat
include the proper disposal of construction waste and debris such as paints and other chemicals,
concrete, and other building material.
3. Seek to Prevent Pollution
Pollution prevention is a national policy and one of the principles of sustainable landscape
management. The primary tenet is: whenever feasible, pollution should be prevented or reduced
at the source, and where pollution cannot be prevented, it should be recycled in an
environmentally safe manner. Executive Order 12856, "Federal Compliance with
-------
Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements" was issued to ensure that
* * * * all Federal agencies conduct their facility management and
acquisition activities so that, to the maximum extent practicable,
the quantity of toxic chemicals entering any wastestream, including
any releases to the environment, is reduced as expeditiously as
possible through source reduction; that waste that is generated is
recycled to the maximum extent practicable; and that any wastes
remaining are stored, treated or disposed of in a manner protective
of public health and the environment * * * 3
\3\ Executive Order 12856 of August 3, 1993 "Federal Compliance
with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements",
Federal Register Vol. 58, No. 150, Friday, August 6, 1993.
In keeping with the executive order and the principles of sustainable landscapes practices, the
following initiatives have been identified as having a salutary effect on landscape management.
Manage Pesticides and Fertilizers
The improper use of pesticides and fertilizers contributes to the pollution of both surface and
groundwater in the United States. Using effective landscape management practices, and
appropriate application of pesticides and fertilizers, federal agencies may minimize that
impact on water quality as well as to other aspects of the environment.
Further, federal agencies may better manage soil amendments and fertilizers by utilizing soil
and plant tissue samples analyses which can indicate soil deficiencies and nutrient use. The
recommended method of managing pests and pesticides is called Integrated Pest Management
or IPM as described below.
Use IPM
Through the use of appropriate control measures and proper application, IPM can result in a
reduction in the use of chemicals contained in pesticides which may adversely impact human
health and the environment. Integrated Pest Management is a decision-making process
which considers cultural, mechanical, biological, and chemical controls of pests. Control
mechanisms are selected as each situation warrants. Where chemical control is used, specific pest
populations are targeted when they are most vulnerable rather than indiscriminate application of
these chemicals.
Minimize Runoff
Uncontrolled runoff adversely impacts the environment: (1) As a major contributor to soil
erosion; and (2) the primary vehicle for chemical pollutants to be introduced into the
environment (particularly non-point source runoff). Federal agencies can ameliorate adverse
impacts associated with run-off through a variety of preventative mechanisms: physical;
vegetative, and operational. For example, grasses have been demonstrated to be a viable
mechanism for minimizing run-off and controlling soil erosion. A viable method of managing
the
pollutants associated with the first flush of stormwater run-off is bioretention of the storm water
-------
in an appropriately landscaped area.
[[Page 40839]]
Recycle Landscape Trimmings
Federal agencies have the opportunity to effect both good landscape management practices
and good waste management practices by recycling and using recycled landscape trimmings. A
significant portion of what is treated as waste is comprised of leaves, grass clippings, plant
trimmings, and woody material. These elements are a desirable resource for composted material,
mulches, and landscape amendments. By using these products, federal agencies can effectively
and economically enrich the soil, promote plant growth, preserve soil moisture, reduce
erosion, and inhibit weed growth.
4. Implement Water and Energy Efficient Practices
Irrigating lawns and landscapes can account for a significant proportion o_f total water use,
particularly during peak watering season. Reducing the inefficient irrigation of lawns and
landscapes with potable water can reduce water cost, and_the energy usage/cost
associated with water pumping. In addition, water use efficiency can relieve the increasing
demand being placed on water resources, distribution systems, and wastewater treatment
systems.
Federal facilities can effectively reduce water use and conserve potable waterjlirough a
number of practices. For example, water usage can be reduced through the use of mulches and
careful selection and siting of plants. Plants adapted to local conditions can be selected so
supplemental water will not be required after an initial establishment period of 3-5 years. Other
water-efficient landscape practices include: determining the water requirements for discrete
water-use zones; using and maintaining efficient irrigation systems; and watering only as
needed. A water-efficient and cost-effective manner of irrigation which is becoming increasingly
popular, where available, is the use of recycled or reclaimed water.
Recent legislation, as well as recent executive orders, reflect the federal government's
commitment to energy and water conservation. Water-efficient landscape practices contribute
two-fold: first, to the conservation of fresh, potable water; and second, to the conservation
of energy associated with the distribution and treatment of water. Landscape practices may also
directly impact energy conservation by siting plants to provide shade and cooling to paved
surfaces and building structures resulting in reduced building cooling loads. Conversely, plants
may also be sited such that they optimize solar heat gain and inhibit heat loss during cooler
periods to reduce building heating loads.
To assist agencies in meeting the energy and water conservation requirements mandated by the
Energy Policy Act of 1992 [Public Law 102-486, October 24, 1992], the Department of Energy
was directed to establish the Federal Energy Efficiency Fund. Administered by the Federal
Energy Management Program office, the fund provides grants to agencies for energy and water
conserving projects. Grant proposals are competitively assessed for their technical and economic
effectiveness. Water conserving landscapes are eligible to compete for grants under
this fund.
-------
5. Create Outdoor Demonstration Projects
Landscape demonstration projects promote public awareness and education and can be a
catalyst for similar initiatives by the general public as well as other governmental agencies. They
can also aid in the development and expansion of beneficial techniques and technologies.
Outdoor demonstration projects are an effective method of promoting and sharing information
about environmentally sensitive landscape approaches and the use of environmentally and
economically beneficial landscape practices. Outdoor demonstration projects can also showcase
partnership opportunities among industry, academia, and other governmental agencies.
Cooperative agreements can assist in the development of technologies and techniques in such
areas as recycled or reclaimed water use.
Other Initiatives
To further promote and demonstrate that environmentally beneficial practices can be both
beautiful and economical, the Executive Memorandum identified a numberjof initiatives. These
include: (1) The establishment of annual awards to recognize outstanding efforts in site .
design, and development, landscaping management practices of agencies and individual
employees; and (2) the requirement for the Department of Agriculture to conduct research on the
sustainability, propagation and use of native plants.
• Establishment of Annual Award
The Office of the Federal Environmental Executive in conjunction with the Department of
Energy's Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), has established an annual award
recognizing outstanding efforts by agencies and individual employees in the demonstration of
beneficial landscape management practices. This annual award has been incorporated
into FEMP's Annual Federal Energy and Water Conservation Award Program. In October 1995,
the winners of the first annual Beneficial Landscape Practices award will be announced.
• Research by the Department of Agriculture in Cooperation With Other Agencies on
Suitability, Propagation and Use of Native Plants for Landscaping
As identified in the National Performance Review, Accompanying Report: Reinventing
Environmental Management, barriers to the use of native plants include: limited availability of
native plants; lack of knowledge about the use, maintenance, and propagation of native plants;
the more prevalent use of exotic species; and the spread of invasive exotics. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture possesses experience and expertise in the development of plants,
management of federal lands, and conservation of soils. By working with other federal agencies,
universities, botanic gardens, arboreta, and commercial nurseries, the USDA's Agricultural
Research Service and Natural Resource and Conservation Service can further the use of native
plant species in the landscape. In addition, the USDA has been directed to make information
available to agencies and the public on the suitability, propagation and use of native plants for
landscaping.
Guidelines
-------
Applicability
These guidelines are meant to assist Federal decision-making at the agency and facility level.
Where cost effective and to the maximum extent practicable, they shall be incorporated into
agency guidance and policy and reflected in agency landscape management practices, site
design, and development. These guidelines apply to decisions regarding landscape management
practices, site design, and development on Federal grounds and at Federal projects in any state of
the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other territory or
possession over which the United States has jurisdiction. Federal facilities located outside the
customs territory of
[[Page 40840]]
the United States and Federal agencies at overseas U.S. facilities are encouraged to abide by the
principles set forth in the Executive Memorandum and these guidelines. Where Federal funding
is provided to support landscaping projects on non-federal lands, these guidelines
shall also apply.
The policies and recommendations set out in this document are not final action, but are
intended solely as interpretive guidance for implementation of the Executive Memorandum on
Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Landscape Practices on Federal Landscape
Grounds by affected Federal government agencies. This Guidance does not supersede Federal
agency policies or directives or established regulation. Nothing in this document shall create any
right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable by any party against the United
States, its agencies or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person.
Definitions
Native Plant
A native plant species is one that occurs naturally in a particular region, ecosystem and/or
habitat without direct or indirect human actions.
Pesticide
A pesticide is "any substance or mixture of substances: (a) For preventing, destroying,
repelling, or mitigating any pest, or (b) for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant."
[FIFRA Section 2(u)]
Pest
A pest is "(1) any insect, rodent, nematode, fungus, weed, or (2) any other form of terrestrial
or aquatic plant or animal life or virus, bacteria, or other micro-organism (except viruses,
bacteria, or other micro-organisms on or in living man or other living animals) which the
Administrator declares to be a pest." [FIFRA Section 2 (t)]
Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
-------
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) provides a mandate and a framework for
federal agencies to consider all reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of their actions.
Where Federal projects or federally-funded activities or projects considered in the NEPA process
include landscape considerations, draft and final NEPA documentation and Record of Decision
for the proposed action and alternatives, as applicable, shall reflect the recommendations
established in this Guidance.
1. Use of Regionally Native Plants for Landscaping
Federal agencies, Federal projects or federally-funded projects, shall incorporate regionally
native plants in site design and implementation where cost-effective and to the maximum extent
practicable. Federal agencies shall strive to avoid or minimize adverse impacts of proposed
actions or projects on existing communities of native plants.
Federal agencies shall ensure that the appropriate site and soil analyses are performed during
pre-design stages of the project. To aid in proper plant selection and to ensure success of the
plantings, analyses should match plant characteristics with site and soil conditions. Site design
and implementation as well as plant selection shall incorporate such considerations as their
biological needs, minimal plant care, low water use, and minimal need for fertilizers and
pesticides.
Plants selected shall be in character with the project site plant communities. Those plants
selected for Federal landscape projects or federally-funded landscape projects shall be nursery
propagated from sources as close as practicable to the project area. Native plants collected from
existing indigenous populations shall not be used unless they are salvaged from an area where
they would otherwise be destroyed in the near-term. Where native plant seeds are to be used for
federal
projects, they should be unadulterated by other plant species. Federal agencies should ensure that
appropriate actions are taken to support the success of native plant species used for Federal or
federally-funded landscaping projects.
2. Design, Use, or Promote Construction Practices That Minimize Adverse
Impacts on the Natural Habitat
Federal agencies, Federal projects or federally-funded projects shall avoid or minimize adverse
impacts to natural habitat. During preliminary selection of sites for Federal or federally-funded
projects, Federal agencies shall avoid sites which are relatively undisturbed. If such areas cannot
be avoided, Federal agencies should employ construction practices and procedures which
minimize adverse impacts to natural habitat and incorporate existing vegetation and
associated natural habitat into the project. Where new projects require use of a relatively
undisturbed site, site clearing and preparation should be limited in order to prevent unnecessary
adverse impacts. Where adverse impacts to natural habitat occur as a result of Federal
or federally-funded projects, Federal agencies shall mitigate impacts to natural habitat on-site
-------
where feasible. On-site and off-site compensatory mitigation shall fully reflect lost natural
habitat
values.
Federal site design and development should consider: environmental elements, human factors,
context, sustainability, and pertinent special issues. Development of the site should include
assessments of the soil and subsurface material.
Project decision-makers, including designers, contract supervisors, contractors, field
inspectors, site or facility master planners, and maintenance personnel shall either be
knowledgeable of or informed of likely project related impacts to natural habitat. Where existing
plantings are incorporated into the site design, they shall be adequately protected from
construction activities. Project plans and specifications shall include explicit direction regarding
construction
practices to meet the goals of this guidance. On-site project managers and contractors shall
ensure that practices which minimize impacts to natural habitat are followed during project
construction. Such practices may include site management to control soil erosion and non-point
source run-off and proper disposal of construction material and debris. Where practicable,
personnel responsible for on-site construction practices, including contractors and construction
inspectors, shall be knowledgeable about natural habitat-resources.
3. Seek to Prevent Pollution
Federal agencies, Federal projects or federally-funded projects shall use chemical management
practices which reduce or eliminate pollution associated with the use of chemical fertilizers and
pesticides. Wherever practicable, Federal agencies shall employ practices which avoid or
minimize the need for using fertilizers and pesticides. These practices include, but are not limited
to: selection of plant species that do not require chemical fertilizers and pesticides; use of
landscape management products and practices that limit growth of "weed" species; use of
integrated pest management techniques and practices; use of chemical pesticides which
biodegrade, and use of slow-release fertilizers.
Federal agencies shall recycle and/or compost leaves, grass clippings, and landscape
trimmings for further use as both soil amendments and mulches. Woody debris such as tree
trunks,
[[Page 40841]]
stumps, limbs, etc., resulting from federally-funded activities shall also be recycled as
appropriate.
Federal agencies shall use landscape management practices, including plant selection and
placement, which control and minimize soil erosion, runoff of chemicals, and pollution of
groundwater. Federal agencies shall also consider energy and water conservation benefits in the
siting and selection of plants.
Federal agencies and facilities subject to the requirements of Executive Order 12856 shall
identify those chemicals used at their facilities for landscape management and develop
alternative landscape management practices to reduce or eliminate the use of those chemicals.
4. Implement Water and Energy Efficient Landscape Practices
-------
Federal agencies, Federal projects or federally-funded projects, shall use water-efficient
landscape design and management practices. These practices (such as Xeriscape) shall include
planning and designing landscaping projects with consideration to: watering requirements,
existing vegetation, topography, climate, intended use of the property and water-use zones. In
addition, facility managers shall conduct soil analyses and, as appropriate, amend the soil at the
project site to improve its ability to support plants and retain water. Initial site design as well as
the addition of plants in established areas shall seek to establish water-use zones and promote
efficient
irrigation practices.
Where irrigation systems have been installed, irrigation scheduling should be adjusted
seasonally to the evapo-transpiration rate (ET) for the plants in that particular climate.
Irrigation with recycled or reclaimed water, where practicable, shall serve as a preferred
alternative to the use of potable water. Finally, Federal agencies and facilities, Federal projects
and
federally-funded projects, are encouraged to use water audits to identify additional opportunities
for water-efficient landscape practices.
5. Create Outdoor Demonstration Projects
Federal agencies, Federal projects or federally-funded projects, shall create and maintain
outdoor demonstration projects exhibiting and promoting the benefits of economically and
environmentally sound landscaping practices. These exhibits may include the selection and use
of native plant species and the use of water-efficient and energy-conserving practices. Exhibits
may include small scale projects, such as interpretive or wildlife, gardens, that focus on
environmentally sound landscape management practices, site design, and development
appropriate for residential, commercial, and institutional application. Additionally,
demonstration projects may highlight larger projects, such as wetland or grassland restoration or
woodland rehabilitation, that are more likely implemented by groups or state and local
governments. Federal agencies are encouraged to form public/private partnerships with groups
such as educational institutions, arboreta, commercial nurseries, botanic gardens and garden
clubs, to advance the
goals of the Executive Memorandum. Federal agencies are encouraged to work with and share
information with other interested nonfederal parties to promote the use of environmentally and
economically sound landscaping practices.
Fran McPoland,
Federal Environmental Executive.
[FR Doc. 95-19795 Filed 8-9-95; 8:45 am]
-------
APPENDIX C
-------
PLANT DATABASES
Several databases exist that include information about native plants. The Native Plant Work
Group is currently determining how user friendly they are and if the data would be useful to
Region 5 in its effort to revegetate Superfund sites with native plants. It is also determining if
these databases are using common data.
BONAP (BIOTA OF NORTH AMERICA PROGRAM)
Through publications and digital data, the University of North Carolina's (UNC'S) BONAP
offers information on a variety of biological fields including rarity, weediness, nativity,
insectivory, plant habitat, duration, biogeography, hardiness, medical value, horticultural values,
etc. Currently several thousand fields are being maintained in a relational database at BONAP.
The UNC recently expanded the geographic scope of BONAP to include the entire northern
world (north of the 24th parallel) and presently track nearly 80,000 accepted taxa. The data
found in the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service's PLANTS
database were provided by BONAP. (See PLANTS database below.)
For additional information, call:
University of North Carolina
North Carolina Botanical Gardens
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Contact: John Kartesz
Phone:(919)962-0578
FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT WITH WETLAND CATEGORIES AND
COMPUTER APPLICATION PROGRAMS FOR THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
The Michigan Natural Heritage Program, in partnership with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Rose Lake Plant Materials Center,
has developed the Floristic Quality Assessment with Wetland Categories and Computer
Application Programs for the State of Michigan. Applications of this system include the
identification of remnant habitats of native floristic significance, comparison between
sites, long-term monitoring of floristic quality, monitoring the progress of habitat
restoration, and the use of National Wetland Categories to assist in identification of
wetlands. The Natural Heritage Program is using the same quality assessment system
that Floyd Swink and Gerould Wilhelm used for the Chicago Region.
For additional information, call:
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Natural Heritage Program, Wildlife Division
Stevens T. Mason Building, 5th Floor
-------
Box 30444
Lansing, Michigan 48909-7944
Phone:(517)373-1263
Fax: (517)373-6705
PLANTS DATABASE
The U.S Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service has developed the
National Plant Information Database (PLANTS).
PLANTS provides a single source of standardized information about plants. It provides
standardized plant names, symbols, and other plant attribute information. This standardized
information permits scientists and other persons interested in plants across disciplines to freely
exchange accurate plant-related information because the are all using the same plant names and
symbols.
PLANTS also provides a link that allows downloading PLANTS data from the state selected via
FTP.
The data found in PLANTs for the plants known to occur within North America were provided
under a cooperative agreement by John Kartesz Biota of North America Program (BONAP). (See
BONAP above.)
The Internet URL address is
http://trident.ftc/nrcs/usda.gov/plants/plnts_hni.htnil
REVEG/XD
Under the sponsorship of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAEC), Argonne National
Laboratory (ANL) developed Reveg/XD, a computer program that assists users in analyzing
problems and making decisions about appropriate plant species for revegetation projects. ANL
has used Reveg/XD to assist with the development of seed mixture and revegetation-species
requirements for several rehabilitation projects at Army installations, as well as for routine use as
a single source of extensive, species-specific information on plants. USAGE further developed
program as VegSpec. See the discussion of VegSpec below.
r a discussion of Reveg/XD, refer to:
Hinchman, R.R. and W.A. Mego. Reveg/XD: A computer program for revegetational
restoration. In Proceedings of the Special Session on the Rehabilitation of U.S. Army
-------
Training Lands, Second Annual Conference of the Society for Ecological Restoration,
held in Chicago, Illinois, April 29-May 3, 1990. pp. 71-92.
For additional information, call:
Argonne National Laboratory
Center for Environmental Restoration Systems
ES - Building 62
9700 Cass Avenue
Argonne, IL 60439
Contacts: Ray Hinchman, Ph.D.; botanist and plant physiologist
Phone:(708)252-3391
Fax: (708) 252-6407
Stan Zellner, agronomist
Phone:(708)252-3394
R. Hinchman and S. Zellner have been involved with revegetation of disturbed areas on
military installations for several years.
VEGSPEC
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), National Resources Conservation Service, and
National Biological Service are cooperatively developing a decision support system, VegSpec, to
select plant species for land reclamation projects. Land reclamation practices for which VegSpec
was developed include cover crops, critical area plantings, windbreaks, filter strips, pasture
planting, range planting, and tree planting. VegSpec user is required to identify the desired
practice, soil series, nearest climate station, and minimal site information to arrive at a list of
plant species adapted to the site. List can be restricted by identifying specific purposes for which
practice is intended, e.g., native plant community restoration. User may further limit list of
acceptable plants by identifying objectives and/or constraints associated with the selected
purposes, such as fire tolerance, season of growth, etc. VegSpec uses expert rules to compare
combined user input and system-generated derivatives with a plants database containing
approximately 1,500 species. Plants that meet all criteria are listed for user review.
After users selects from list of suitable species, VegSpec helps calculate seeding rate and
evaluates mixture for potential compatibility problems. Program then helps user design planting
operation.
According to USAGE, one version of VegSpec is complete and undergoing testing. The
majority of the functionality has been migrated to the graphical user interface version, which
should be available during 1996. Complete geographical information system capability should
be available in 1997.
T T.S. EPA Region 5 currently does not have the hardware or operating system to run this
-------
program.
For additional information, call:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Construction Engineering Research Laboratories (CERL)
PO Box 9005
Champaign, IL 61826-9005
Contact: Steven D. Warren, Ph.D.
Phone:(217)398-5455
Fax: (217) 398-5470
e-mail: s-warren@cecer.army.mil
-------
APPENDIX D
Note: It is likely that many more examples and case studies exist in Region 5 than are included
here. Please submit any additional information to James Chapman of the Technical Support
Section.
-------
WOODSTOCK MUNICIPAL LANDFILL SUPERFUND SITE
Woodstock, Illinois
Contact: John O'Grady
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture, are entering
into an Interagency Agreement (IAG) to provide consultative technical services and oversight to
the U.S. EPA and its contractors, for the purposes of determining: (1) the suitability of a natural
prairie grass cap as part of the Remedial Action for the Woodstock Municipal Landfill Site
(the Landfill) in Woodstock, Illinois; and (2) providing that such a cap is suitable, the
requirements of such a cap to maintain consistency with the Unilateral Administrative Order
(UAO) under Section 3.06 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA) for Remedial Design and Remedial Action at the Landfill. The
NRCS will provide consultative technical services and oversight during the planning, design,
and implementation of the various re vegetation,, stabilization, and erosion control measures that
have been outlined in the Work Plan.
At the U.S. EPA's direction, and in conjunction with the.consultant(s) for the City of Woodstock,
Illinois (the City) and Allied Signal, Inc. (ASI), the NRCS will collect and provide preplanning
and planning information on soils, water, air, plant and animal resources, as well as human
resources. Work items include, but are not limited to: (a) problem identification; (b)
identification of
off-site impacts; (c) completion of inventories and evaluations where data gaps exist; and
(d) assessment of public input and acceptance.
The NRCS will develop a planting plan for vegetating the Landfill in a manner that will protect
the integrity of the cap, be aesthetically pleasing and environmentally and ecologically
acceptable. The NRCS will assist the U.S. EPA and the Consultant with environmental plant
collection, assembly and increase (if local ecotypes are not available to implement the planting
plans). Upon request
by the U.S. EPA, the NRCS will provide consultative technical services to the City and ASI for
the purpose of aiding in the development of revegetation and stabilization engineering work
plans prepared pursuant to the Order.
-------
TORCH LAKE SUPERFUND SITE
Michigan
Contact: John Kuhns
Use of Native Plants
The Torch Lake site consists of the remnants of 100 years of copper mining and processing.
Copper ore milling and smelting produced large volumes of ore tailings (known locally as stamp
sands) and slag. These waste materials contain high levels of copper, as well as arsenic,
chromium, lead and other metals. Over 200 million tons of stamp sands were deposited into
Torch Lake. The benthic (bottom dwelling) ecosystem in Torch Lake is severely suppressed as a
result. Erosion from the extensive stampsand piles along the shoreline continuously loads copper
contamination to the sediments, rendering the natural lake sedimentation process inadequate to
provide for the recovery of the lake bottom. By stabilizing the lake side stamp sands through the
chosen Remedial Action (stabilization and vegetation of the stampsand piles), natural processes
could take over and promote the recovery of the benthic ecosystem.
U.S. EPA has worked closely with the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS,
formerly the Soil Conservation Service) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop a
vegetation plan for the stampsand piles. The NRCS has done field trials with a wide variety of
plant material mixes, including native grasses, legumes and woody plants. Although the
conditions at the site are very inhospitable (lacking in nutrients, it is mostly unvegetated and
looks like a "moonscape"), the NRCS is working to pin down the right mix of added soils, soil
amendments, and hardy plant species to make the vegetation of these piles successful. Native
plant species will figure into these plans to the extent possible. .
Results thus far: Native willows which were planted as part of a woody plant/windbreak field
trial survived but did not increase significantly in size. During the summer of 1994, sandy loam
from a nearby road construction project was spread over a 5 acre test plot. The NRCS carefully
laid out a small test grid, planted several different seed mixes and watered the grid throughout
the summer. By the second month, several of the introduced seed mixtures were doing quite
well, however, much more notable was the vigorous unaided colonization of the plot by
opportunistic native species.
Due to fiscal year 1996 funding difficulties, implementation of the NRCS' plans has not yet
commenced. EPA is hopeful that the placement of cover material and planting of the site can
begin in 1997.
-------
ALBION-SHERIDAN TOWNSHIP LANDFILL SUPERFUND SITE
Albion, Michigan
Contact: Leah Evison
Example language from Record of Decision signed March 28, 1995:
The Presidential Memorandum on Environmentally and Economically Beneficial
Practices, signed on April 26, 1994 and published in the Federal Register on August 22,
1994 (59 FR 43122), encourages Federal agencies to incorporate the use of native plants
wherever practicable into landscape projects, in order to reduce the use of chemical
fertilizers and pesticides, reduce water usage, reduce maintenance costs and preserve
natural habitats. Therefore, pre-design studies will be performed to determine whether
seeding the vegetative soil layer on the surface of this landfill with native species is
practical and cost-effective, considering both short-term and long-term costs. If U.S.
EPA determines that the use of native species is practical and results in the same or less
cost in the long-term than the use of traditional species, native species will be used.
Example language from Statement of Work for unilateral Administrative Order issued October
11,1995:
Respondents shall perform pre-design studies to determine the short-term and long-term
costs and practicability of seeding the vegetative soil layer with native species (59 FR
43122). If U.S. EPA determines that it is practical and the same or less cost than
traditional species, native species shall be used by the Respondents.
Current Status (May 1996):
The PRPs are in the process of doing pre-design studies to determine if they will use
native species. At this point, it looks likely.
------- |