An Ecological Assessment for the Creation of the Kiwanis Environmental Education Preserve (KEEP)

The Kiwanis Club of Ann Arbor, a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation known for its thrift store sale and scholarships for high school students, envisioned a preserve to instill an environmental consciousness in young people in the Ann Arbor area. It is to this effect we conducted a thorough ecological evaluation of the urban forest situated within the 17-acre property belonging to the Kiwanis Club, utilizing field monitoring, geographical information systems, and hydrological modeling. This included an on-site investigation of the KEEP, surveying species of amphibians, mammals, and birds inhabiting the area from early spring through late fall of 2019. A vegetation assessment identified plant species and habitats with an overview of land cover development from 1960 through 2005 using aerial photographs. The water quality of the two on-site ponds, wetlands, and Honey Creek included measures of pH, oxidation-reduction potential, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, temperature, and metals. Additional analysis characterized benthic macroinvertebrates. Finally, hydrological modeling was conducted to characterize the potential rerouting of stormwater runoff into the two ponds to improve water quality. The findings of this comprehensive environmental assessment of the KEEP natural areas showed: 1) A multitude of habitat types allow for a wide range of wildlife and vegetation diversity, including amphibians, birds, mammals, grasses, shrubs, and trees. 2) Some terrestrial habitats have degraded due to an influx of invasive, nonnative species; while others have not and remain high quality. 3) The two ponds and wetlands are severely degraded in terms of physicochemical characteristics due to inadequate water renewal combined with large inputs of natural organic matter, e.g., leaves, algae, and duckweed. This prevents sustainable macroinvertebrate and fish communities. 4) Stormwater runoff from the KEEP building and parking lot are substantial during three seasons of the year and could be routed into the ponds to increase water flushing and renewal, thus improving water quality and allowing for the establishment of benthic and fish communities. Given the above four findings, the proximity of the property to urban and rural populations and schools, and the vision of KEEP leadership, there is tremendous potential for the creation of a unique and valuable educational resource. We recommend three primary site restoration actions: 1) Replant a subset of areas dominated with invasive plants using native species; 2) Route site runoff to one or two of the ponds to improve pond habitat. The pond habitat could also be improved by clearing outflow channels of excessive vegetation that impedes flow and creating a “fish wintering hole” near pond inflows; and 3) Provide improved drainage of the water-saturated forest area created in the past by installing and removing dirt berms. In addition to these restoration activities, future studies should establish a strategy for education kiosk(s) and boardwalks with educational signage. This could include a smartphone software interface with the KEEP database for visitors to learn about the biodiversity and habitats of the KEEP and how they interact in urban-rural areas. Our efforts build a strong foundation for the actualization of the KEEP.

[1]  K. Bergen,et al.  Mapping Forest and Surrounding Landscape Changes 1949-2015 at the University of Michigan's Historic Forestry Education Properties , 2018 .

[2]  Christopher J. Post,et al.  Developing and Evaluating an ESRI Story Map as an Educational Tool , 2018, Natural Sciences Education.

[3]  V. Ivetić,et al.  Direct Seeding in Reforestation – A Field Performance Review , 2017 .

[4]  Robert Fletcher,et al.  Connection with nature is an oxymoron: A political ecology of “nature-deficit disorder” , 2017 .

[5]  William A. Freyman,et al.  The Universal Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) Calculator: an online tool for ecological assessment and monitoring , 2016 .

[6]  M. Marta,et al.  Story Maps at school: teaching and learning stories with maps , 2015 .

[7]  P. Groffman,et al.  Measuring ecosystem capacity to provide regulating services: forest removal and recovery at Hubbard Brook (USA). , 2015, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[8]  R. Froese,et al.  Interpreting Stand Structure through Diameter Distributions , 2015 .

[9]  Timothy J. S. Whitfeld,et al.  Invasive earthworms interact with abiotic conditions to influence the invasion of common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) , 2014, Oecologia.

[10]  C. Dymond,et al.  Diversifying managed forests to increase resilience , 2014 .

[11]  Ágnes Zsóka,et al.  Greening due to environmental education? Environmental knowledge, attitudes, consumer behavior and everyday pro-environmental activities of Hungarian high school and university students , 2013 .

[12]  Todd E. Ristau,et al.  Chronic over browsing and biodiversity collapse in a forest understory in Pennsylvania: Results from a 60 year-old deer exclusion plot , 2011 .

[13]  R. D. Slack,et al.  Brown-Headed Cowbird Parasitism on Endangered Species: Relationships with Neighboring Avian Species , 2011 .

[14]  Joern Fischer,et al.  Revegetation in agricultural areas: the development of structural complexity and floristic diversity. , 2009, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[15]  M. Lefsky,et al.  Urban forest biomass estimates: is it important to use allometric relationships developed specifically for urban trees? , 2009, Urban Ecosystems.

[16]  A. Dash,et al.  Biological control of mosquito populations through frogs: opportunities & constrains. , 2008, The Indian journal of medical research.

[17]  R. G. Corace,et al.  An Experimental Approach to Testing the Efficacy of Management Treatments for Glossy Buckthorn at Seney National Wildlife Refuge, Upper Michigan , 2008, Ecological Restoration.

[18]  Roger D. Ottmar,et al.  Quantifying physical characteristics of wildland fuels using the Fuel Characteristic Classification System , 2007 .

[19]  K. Bergen,et al.  Observing succession on aspen-dominated landscapes using a remote sensing-ecosystem approach , 2007, Landscape Ecology.

[20]  L. Merrick,et al.  Natural Resource Ecology and Management 8-2007 Homogenization of Northern U . S . Great Lakes Forests Due to Land Use , 2017 .

[21]  D. Giblin,et al.  CONTROLLING PHALARIS ARUNDINACEA (REED CANARYGRASS) WITH LIVE WILLOW STAKES: A DENSITY-DEPENDENT RESPONSE , 2006 .

[22]  K. Grady,et al.  The invasive shrub European buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica, L.) alters soil properties in Midwestern U.S. woodlands , 2006 .

[23]  C. D’Antonio,et al.  COMPETITION BETWEEN NATIVE PERENNIAL AND EXOTIC ANNUAL GRASSES: IMPLICATIONS FOR AN HISTORICAL INVASION , 2004 .

[24]  E. Dambrine,et al.  Irreversible impact of past land use on forest soils and biodiversity , 2002 .

[25]  Robert Pitt,et al.  Stormwater Effects Handbook: A Toolbox for Watershed Managers, Scientists, and Engineers , 2001 .

[26]  M. Ter-Mikaelian,et al.  Biomass equations for sixty-five North American tree species , 1997 .

[27]  R. Barnett The effect of burial by squirrels on germination and survival of oak and hickory nuts , 1977 .

[28]  Álvarez Suárez Pedro,et al.  Developing sustainable environmental behavior in secondary education students (12-16) Analysis of a didactic strategy , 2010 .

[29]  Upper Michigan An Experimental Approach to Testing the Efficacy of Management Treatments for Glossy Buckthorn at Seney National Wildlife Refuge , 2008 .

[30]  B. A. Wagner Michigan Trees, Revised and Updated , 2004 .

[31]  D. Perala,et al.  Allometric biomass estimators for aspen-dominated ecosystems in the upper Great Lakes. Forest Service research paper , 1993 .

[32]  James R. Anderson,et al.  A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data , 1976 .

[33]  ABRAHAM THOMAS,et al.  Aerial Photography , 1919, Nature.