NRCS Conservation Practices and Materials
Maryland 338: Prescribed Burning
This practice is utilized as another method to control unwanted or invasive species, as well as promote early successional plant growth. Early successional moist soil plants are a vital dietary source for waterfowl and other wildlife species.
Amazing Creatures in Longleaf Pine Flatwoods and Sandhills
A wide diversity of remarkable animals calls longleaf pine flatwoods and sandhills habitats home.
SE FireMap RFP - July 2019
SEFireMap Scoping RFP - circulated July, 2019.
Maryland 314: Brush Management
This standard allows for the removal and management of woody plants including invasive and noxious plants. Using this standard will allow landowners with existing degraded wetlands or waterfowl shallow water areas to clean up the area and return it to early successional vegetation.
Maryland 315: Herbaceous Weed Treatment
This standard allows for the removal or control of herbaceous weeds including invasive, noxious, and prohibited plants. This practice is applicable for areas that have excessive Phragmites australis growth allowing for removal and management of these areas to let native plants to reestablish.
Maryland 327: Conservation Cover
This standard is utilized for establishing vegetative cover to enhance wildlife habitat.
Maryland 658: Wetland Creation
This practice is utilized when building a wetland in an area that was not historically a wetland. If a site has non-hydric soils, this practice is used in the creation of wetland features including shallow water wetlands for waterfowl.
Maryland 646: Shallow Water Development and Management
This practice is supplemented in the creation of a shallow water area for waterfowl.
Maryland 645: Upland Wildlife Habitat Management
This practice consists of the management of food, cover, and shelter for wildlife which can be utilized for waterfowl nesting habitat.
Delaware 646: Shallow Water Development and Mangement
This practice is supplemented in the creation of a shallow water impoundment for waterfowl.
Delaware 645: Upland Wildlife Habitat Management
This practice consists of the management of food, cover, and shelter for wildlife which can be utilized for waterfowl nesting habitat.
Delaware 327: Conservation Cover
This standard is utilized for establishing vegetative cover to enhance wildlife habitat.
Delaware 315: Herbaceous Weed Treatment
This standard allows for the removal or control of herbaceous weeds including invasive, noxious, and prohibited plants. This practice is applicable for areas that have excessive Phragmites australis growth allowing for removal and management of these areas to let native plants to reestablish.
Delaware 314: Brush Management
This standard allows for the removal and management of woody plants including invasive and noxious plants. Using this standard will allow landowners with existing degraded wetlands or waterfowl impoundments to clean up the area and return it to early successional vegetation.
Delaware 657: Wetland Restoration
This standard consists of returning a wetland and its functions to a close representation of its original condition prior to being disturbed. It applies for areas with hydric soils that have been converted to non-wetland by filling, draining, or other hydrology changes.
Delaware 587: Structure for Water Control
This standard allows for the installation of a water control structure to provide the manipulation of water levels. The ability to control water levels in a shallow water waterfowl impoundment can allow for proper moist soil management techniques.
Delaware 378: Pond
This standard allows for an area to impound water through excavation or an earthen embankment. For waterfowl, a pond standard consisting of shallow excavation and a berm of less than 3 FT is suggested.
Delaware 356: Dike
This standard allows for the construction of an earthen berm to assist in controlling water levels for waterfowl management.
Regional abundance and local breeding productivity explain occupancy of restored habitats in a migratory songbird
Ecological restoration is a key tool in offsetting habitat loss that threatens biodiversity worldwide, but few projects are rigorously evaluated to determine if conservation objectives are achieved. We tested whether restoration outcomes for an imperiled bird, the Golden-winged Warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera; GWWA) met the assumptions of the ‘Field of Dreams’ hypothesis or whether local and regional population dynamics impacted restoration success. From 2015 to 18, we surveyed 514 points located in recently restored successional habitats. We used new- and published data on the survival of 341 nests and 258 fledglings to estimate GWWA breeding productivity. Occupancy and colonization of restored habitats were significantly higher in our Western Study Region (Minnesota and Wisconsin) than our Eastern Study Region (Maryland, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey), a pattern that mirrored broader regional population trends. At local scales, productivity was high in Eastern Pennsylvania (> 3 independent juveniles/pair/year) but low in Central Pennsylvania (1 juvenile/pair/year) while both Western and Central Minnesota hosted intermediate productivity (between 1 and 2 juveniles/pair/ year). Productivity and occupancy covaried locally in the Eastern Study Region, while occupancy was high in the Western Study Region, despite intermediate productivity. These differences have profound implications for restoration outcomes, as GWWA possessed robust capacity to respond to habitat restoration in both regions, but this capacity was conditional upon local productivity where the species is rare. Our findings suggest that, even when restoration efforts are focused on a single species and use comparable prescriptions, interactions among processes governing habitat selection, settlement, and productivity can yield variable restoration outcomes.
Multiscale drivers of restoration outcomes for an imperiled songbird
Habitat restoration is a cornerstone of conservation, particularly for habitat-limited species. However, restoration efforts are seldom rigorously monitored at meaningful spatial scales. Poor understanding of how species respond to habitat restoration programs limits conservation efficacy for habitat-restricted species like the Golden-winged Warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera, GWWA). We provide one of the first concerted assessments of a national conservation program aimed at restoring songbird habitat across its breeding range. We studied GWWA response to forest habitat restoration across two broad regions with opposing population trajectories and assessed factors driving species use of restored habitats across multiple spatial scales. From 2015 to 2017, we conducted 1,145 (n = 457 locations) and 519 point counts (n = 215 locations) across the Appalachian Mountains and Great Lakes (respectively) within restored habitats. Warbler abundance within restored habitats across the Great Lakes varied with latitude, longitude, elevation, forest type, and number of growing seasons. In the Appalachian Mountains, occupancy ( ^ ψ) varied with longitude, elevation, forest type, and number of growing seasons. Detections were restricted to areas within close proximity to population centers (usually <24 km) in the Appalachian Mountains, where GWWAs are rare ( ^ ψ= 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20–0.25), but not in the Great Lakes, whereGWWAs remain common ( ^ ψ= 0.87, 95% CI: 0.84–0.90). Our study suggests that, even when best management practices are carefully implemented, restoration outcomes vary within/across regions and with multiscale habitat attributes. Although assessments of concerted habitat restoration efforts remain uncommon, our study demonstrates the value of monitoring data in the adaptive management process for imperiled species.
