The legacy of pipeline installation on the soil and vegetation of southeast Wisconsin wetlands

Abstract Installation of large-scale infrastructure, including pipelines, has the potential to damage soil and vegetation in wetlands within the path of construction by compacting soil, altering hydrology, decreasing plant diversity, and facilitating invasions of unwanted species. We sampled soil and vegetation in seven southeast Wisconsin wetlands eight years after they were crossed by a natural gas pipeline to compare areas inside and outside the pipeline corridor (land within 12 m of the pipe, where construction was permitted). Soils consistently showed evidence of compaction and hydrologic alteration. Across sites the pipeline corridor soil had 63% higher bulk density, 13% lower depth to refusal and 19% lower soil moisture ( P P Phalaris arundinacea and Glyceria maxima , vegetation either showed no change or positive changes in diversity and quality in the pipeline corridor. We suspect the net positive effects of pipeline installation on vegetation in some sites owes to (1) the presence of monotype-forming invasive species outside the pipeline corridor in those sites, (2) post-construction planting and subsequent maintenance-mowing of the pipeline corridor, and (3) colonization within the corridor by additional species (mostly upland species). However, our vegetation results do not undercut the overall negative impacts of pipeline installation on wetland soils, which were still observable eight years after construction. While soil might be the more consistent indicator of pipeline impacts in wetlands, the site-specific and sometimes-positive response of vegetation highlights (1) the need for better pre-construction surveys, so that impacts can be minimized at high-quality sites and (2) the potentially high return on post-construction planting and maintenance.

[1]  F. Shahrokhi.  Remote sensing of earth resources , 1972 .

[2]  Hongmei Zhao,et al.  Effects of Pipeline Construction on Wetland Ecosystems: Russia–China Oil Pipeline Project (Mohe-Daqing Section) , 2010, AMBIO.

[3]  G. Daily,et al.  The Nature and Value of Ecosystem Services: An Overview Highlighting Hydrologic Services , 2007 .

[4]  John Bell,et al.  A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models , 1997, Environmental Conservation.

[5]  W. Cody,et al.  Alien and invasive native vascular plants along the Norman Wells Pipeline, District of Mackenzie, Northwest Territories. , 2000 .

[6]  J. Zedler,et al.  Wetland resources : Status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability , 2005 .

[7]  F. Maestre,et al.  Ecosystem structure, function, and restoration success: Are they related? , 2006 .

[8]  Richard J. Hobbs,et al.  Frontiers inEcology and the Environment Management of novel ecosystems : are novel approaches required ? , 2008 .

[9]  Ian Phillip Vaughan,et al.  The continuing challenges of testing species distribution models , 2005 .

[10]  W. A. Patterson,et al.  Effects of road salt and Phragmites australis invasion on the vegetation of a Western Massachusetts calcareous lake-basin fen , 2001, Wetlands.

[11]  Susan M. Galatowitsch,et al.  Effects of Phalaris arundinacea and nitrate-N addition on the establishment of wetland plant communities , 2002 .

[12]  C. M. Rostagno,et al.  Efectos de la instalación de un gasoducto sobre algunas propiedades del suelo superficial y la cobertura vegetal en el NE de Chubut , 2008 .

[13]  G. Spoor.  Alleviation of soil compaction: requirements, equipment and techniques , 2006 .

[14]  J. Lambert,et al.  Competition between Glyceria Maxima and Phragmites Communis in the Region of Surlingham Broad: I. The Competition Mechanism , 1965 .

[15]  C. Johnston,et al.  Identifying and Characterizing Dominant Plants as an Indicator of Community Condition , 2007 .

[16]  M. Westoby,et al.  Opportunistic management for rangelands not at equilibrium. , 1989 .

[17]  E. Wenner,et al.  Effects of pipeline construction on the vegetation and macrofauna of two South Carolina, USA salt marshes , 1997, Wetlands.

[18]  J. Zedler,et al.  Understanding invasion as a process: the case of Phalaris arundinacea in wet prairies , 2007, Biological Invasions.

[19]  D. Strayer,et al.  Freshwater biodiversity conservation: recent progress and future challenges , 2010, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[20]  M. Arshad,et al.  Recovery of chemical and physical properties of boreal plain soils impacted by pipeline burial , 2000 .

[21]  D. S. Chanasyk,et al.  Soil temperature regime in mixed prairie rangeland after pipeline construction and operation , 1993 .

[22]  Variation in species composition and species richness within Phragmites australis dominated riparian zones , 2000, Plant Ecology.

[23]  E. Odum.  The strategy of ecosystem development. , 1969, Science.

[24]  R. E. Turner,et al.  Direct impacts of outer continental shelf activities on wetland loss in the central Gulf of Mexico , 1990 .

[25]  Bo Li,et al.  Spartina alterniflora invasions in the Yangtze River estuary, China: An overview of current status and ecosystem effects , 2009 .

[26]  R. Mcbride,et al.  Delineating the zone of topsoil disturbance around buried utilities on agricultural land , 1999 .

[27]  J. Gosselink,et al.  Environmental conditions of a backfilled pipeline canal four years after construction , 1988, Wetlands.

[28]  K. Gross,et al.  Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology. , 2004, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[29]  Charles M. Francis,et al.  Evaluating the Potential Impact of a Gas Pipeline on Whimbrel Breeding Habitat in the Outer Mackenzie Delta, Northwest Territories , 2009 .