whole book (37 MB PDF) - Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team

Restoring British Columbia’s 

Garry Oak 

Ecosystems 

PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES




PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES

Published by the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT) 

© Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT) 

2011, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada 

ISBN: 978-0-9732181-4-5 

Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and Practices 

is available as a free download at www.goert.ca/restoration. 

Please contact GOERT for more information: 

Email: info@goert.ca 

Phone: 250-383-3427 

Website: www.goert.ca

Acknowledgements 

Completing Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and Practices would 

not have been possible without the dedicated work of the following people, many of whom spent 

evenings and weekends working on it over several years. 

Project Team 

The idea to embark on the development of this guide came out of the April 2007 meeting of 

the Restoration and Management Recovery Implementation Group (RIG) of the Garry Oak 

Ecosystems Recovery Team. Coordinated by Don Eastman and Conan Webb, the hard work of the 

project team has finally brought this idea to life! 

Lead Authors 

Brenda Costanzo, Don Eastman, Christian Engelstoft, Michelle Gorman, Richard Hebda, Fred 

Hook, Ted Lea, Carolyn MacDonald, Dave Polster, Shyanne Smith, Kersti Vaino, Conan Webb 

Contributing Authors 

Jenny Eastman, Matt Fairbarns, Todd Golumbia, Chris Junck, Carrina Maslovat, Robert Maxwell, 

Mike Meagher, James Miskelly, Duncan Morrison, Thomas Munson, Brian Nyberg , Aimée 

Pelletier, Raj Prasad, Hans Roemer 

Case Study Authors 

Irvin Banman, Trudy Chatwin, David Clements, Brenda Costanzo, Nathalie Dechaine, Lisa 

Dumoulin, Christian Engelstoft, Tim Ennis, Matt Fairbarns, Jennifer Heron, Chris Junck, Carrina 

Maslovat, Moralea Milne, Thomas Munson, Siriol Paquet, Aimée Pelletier, Dave Polster, Tara 

Todesco, Conan Webb 

Editors 

David Clements, Tracey D. Hooper, Kathryn Martell, Carolyn Masson 

Other Contributors and Reviewers 

Carmen Cadrin, Todd Carnahan, Lisa Dumoulin, Amanda Evans, Emily Gonzales, Todd Kohler, 

Nicole Kroeker, Lora Lea, Mike Miller 

Workshop 

We appreciate the suggestions and ideas that came from those who participated in the 

development workshop for this publication in November 2009. Thank you! 

Facilitator: Judith Cullington & Associates 

Participants: Brenda Beckwith, Patricia Boyle, Don Closson, Kristina Coleman, Brenda 

Costanzo, Nathalie Dechaine, Brittany Dewar, Don Eastman, Roy Fletcher, Marilyn Fuchs, 

Hal Gibbard, Michelle Gorman, Louise Goulet, Fred Hook, Jane Hunter, Chris Junck, Ted Lea, 

Carolyn MacDonald, Carolyn Masson, Marian McCoy, Mike Meagher, Amy Medve, Moralea 

Milne, Thomas Munson, Aimée Pelletier, Dave Polster, Ken Poskitt, Raj Prasad, June Pretzer, 

Jeff Ralph, Art Robinson, Betsy Rose, Val Schaefer, Andrea Schiller, Brian Starzomski, Lise 

Townsend, Kersti Vaino, Rob Walker, Conan Webb, Tom Wheeler, Merrie-Ellen Wilcox, 

Tom Wood

Organizations 

Thanks to the following organizations and agencies for their in-kind support of this project: 

Aruncus Consulting, BC Ministry of Environment, Biolinx Environmental Research Ltd., City 

of Victoria, District of Saanich, Nature Conservancy of Canada, Pacific Forestry Centre, Parks 

Canada Agency, Royal BC Museum 

Photography and Illustrations 

Thanks to the many people who contributed their photos and illustrations. Please see credits in 

captions throughout the publication. 

Design & Layout 

Annie Weeks, Beacon Hill Communications Group 

Printing 

Hemlock Printers Ltd. 

Financial Support 

Initial financial support provided by Parks Canada Agency and the Government of Canada 

through the Federal Department of the Environment allowed us to begin this project 

and hold the 2009 workshop. Parks Canada Agency has also provided considerable ongoing 

annual support for this project, including staff salaries and editing and publishing costs. CRD 

Environmental Sustainability provided seed funds toward printing, and our credit union, 

Vancity, provided additional funds through an enviroFund grant to support the publishing and 

distribution of this guide. Thank you for seeing the value in this project and helping us to make it 

a reality.

Lead Authors 

Brenda Costanzo, M.Sc., P.Ag. 

Brenda is the Senior Vegetation Specialist with the Ecosystems 

Protection and Sustainability Branch in the BC Ministry of 

Environment. She is the co-author of Native Plants in the Coastal 

Garden (2002), with April Pettinger, published by Whitecap Books. 

Brenda began learning about native plant gardening and propagation 

while at the Royal BC Museum in the late 1970s. In the mid-1980s 

she designed and installed the first phase of the native plant garden 

at Swan Lake Christmas Hill Nature Sanctuary in Victoria. In the 

mid-1990s she worked with students at the University of Victoria to 

design the first native plant garden on campus. As well, she has coinstructed 

a Restoration of Natural Systems course at UVic entitled 

“Selection and Propagation of Native Plants for Ecosystem Restoration,” 

and has instructed community education classes on native plant 

propagation. Brenda has been with GOERT since its inception. 

Don Eastman, Ph.D., R. P. Bio. 

Don is a (mostly retired) wildlife biologist with more than 35 years 

experience in wildlife research and conservation. He graduated with 

a Master’s degree in Natural History from the University of Aberdeen 

in 1964, and received a doctorate in Plant Science from the University 

of British Columbia in 1977. For most of his career (1965-1997), Don 

worked at the BC Ministry of Environment as a wildlife research 

biologist, studying the ecology and conservation of a wide range of 

vertebrates across B.C., with particular reference to impacts of land use 

activities. Also during this period he represented B.C. on the national 

committee that developed the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy. After 

retiring from the provincial government, he worked for five years as the 

Faculty Coordinator of the Restoration of Natural Systems Program at 

the University of Victoria. Don is an Adjunct Associate Professor at the 

university and has taught courses on wildlife conservation and ecological 

restoration; he continues his university involvement through graduate 

students. Since his second retirement, he has remained engaged in a 

variety of conservation and ecological restoration activities, especially in 

those dealing with species and ecosystems at risk.

Christian Engelstoft, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. 

Christian has over 20 years of experience in wildlife inventories and 

environmental studies in British Columbia and internationally and 

is the co-owner of Biolinx Environmental Research Ltd. (Sidney, 

BC). He has developed and implemented inventory and monitoring 

protocols for a variety of wildlife, including deer, otters, marine birds, 

the Northern Goshawk, turtles, reptiles, amphibians, and gastropods. 

He has particular interest in the Endangered Sharp-tailed Snake and 

other reptiles on the Gulf Islands and Vancouver Island. He has also 

worked closely with local conservation groups with public education 

and outreach. Currently, he is a member of GOERT’s Restoration and 

Management RIG and the Western Painted Turtle Recovery Team, and is 

the scientific advisor to the Sharp-tailed Snake Recovery Team. 

Richard Hebda, Ph.D. 

Richard has a Ph.D. in Botany from the University of British Columbia 

and has been a Curator (Botany and Earth History) at the Royal British 

Columbia Museum for more than 31 years and an adjunct faculty 

member (Biology, Earth and Ocean Sciences, Environmental Studies) at 

the University of Victoria for more than 26 years. He was the first faculty 

coordinator of the Restoration of Natural Systems Program at UVic 

and the Province of B.C.’s expert advisor on Burns Bog (purchased as a 

globally unique ecosystem). He studies vegetation and climate history 

of British Columbia; Ethnobotany of B.C. First Nations; climate change 

and its impacts; restoration of natural systems and processes; ecology 

and origins of Garry Oak and alpine ecosystems; and botany of grasses. 

Richard, with his graduate students, is author of 100+ scientific papers; 

200+ popular articles mainly on bulbs and native plants and climate 

change; (co) author of four books and major reports; and (co) editor of 

three books. 

Fred Hook 

Fred is the Environmental Technician for City of Victoria Parks. He 

worked in the City’s nurseries for more than 10 years growing exotic and 

native plants before taking on the job of looking after Victoria’s natural 

areas. He has a Bachelor of Fine Arts from UVic in sculpture, a diploma 

in Education, a diploma in Cultural Resource Management (restoration 

of heritage landscapes) and is currently working on a Restoration of 

Natural Systems diploma at the University of Victoria. Fred’s botanical 

knowledge is self-taught. In the process of making more than 1000 

collections for the Devonian Botanic Garden at University of Alberta, 

Fred and his wife honed their skills at keying out plants and assessing 

the ecological characteristics of a site.

Michelle Gorman, Ph.D. 

Michelle is an entomologist with more than 30 years of experience 

in integrated pest management and insect and plant interactions, 

including vectoring plant diseases and invasive species management. 

She graduated from the University of Victoria with a B.Sc. in 1975, 

from Montana State University in 1979 with a M.Sc., with a major in 

Entomology and a minor in Plant Physiology, and from North Dakota 

State University in 1982 with a Ph.D. in Entomology and a minor 

in Plant Pathology. Michelle works for City of Victoria Parks as the 

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Coordinator, and she co-chairs the 

Municipal Committee of the B.C. Plant Protection Advisory Council. 

She is a member of the Restoration and Management RIG of GOERT 

and co-chairs its Invasive Species Steering Committee. She looks for the 

delicate balance of pest management in context with environmental 

conservation. 

Ted Lea, R.P. Bio. (Ret.) 

Ted is a terrestrial vegetation ecologist who worked for 35 years with 

the BC Ministry of Environment. He has been involved in ecosystem 

mapping, including historical ecosystem mapping, species at risk and 

ecosystem at risk conservation and management, and invasive species 

management. He has done historical ecosystem mapping for the Garry 

Oak ecosystem areas of Vancouver Island, as well as historical ecosystem 

mapping in the Okanagan and Similkameen valleys, where he mapped 

using 1938 air photographs and extrapolated ecological conditions back 

to pre-European settlement time. 

Carolyn MacDonald 

Carolyn is an Environmental Education Officer with the District of 

Saanich. Her work with Saanich includes leading public invasive 

species programs, ecological restoration projects and other education 

and outreach programs. She chaired and coordinated the Garry Oak 

Restoration Project (GORP), www.saanich.ca/gorp, for almost ten 

years and has served on the GOERT Restoration and Management RIG 

since 2007. Carolyn is on the Board of GOERT and the Invasive Plant 

Council of BC. She enjoys writing and has worked on a number of 

manuals, including co-authoring and leading the partnership project 

for Garry Oak Ecosystems of BC: An Educator’s Guide (2006). Carolyn’s 

background is in education, environmental education, and ecological 

restoration.

Dave Polster, M.Sc., R.P. Bio. 

Dave is a plant ecologist with over 30 years of experience in vegetation 

studies, reclamation and invasive species management. He has 

developed a wide variety of reclamation techniques for mines, industrial 

developments and steep/unstable slopes, as well as techniques for the 

re-establishment of riparian and aquatic habitats. Dave has provided 

on-site design and direction in the development of reclamation and 

bioengineering systems for restoration of severely damaged ecosystems. 

He pioneered the concept of successional reclamation where the aim 

of the reclamation program is the re-integration of the disturbed site 

into the natural processes of vegetation succession. He has applied his 

knowledge of ecology to solving problems of unwanted and invasive 

vegetation. He has authored numerous papers and teaches graduate 

level courses on these topics. 

Shyanne Smith, M.Sc. 

Shyanne has more than 9 years’ experience working on species and 

ecosystems at risk recovery and conservation in Canada. She has worked 

closely with a variety of stakeholder groups as a team or project lead, and 

has authored or co-authored several species at risk recovery planning 

documents. An ecologist with a background in biogeography, species at 

risk inventory, recovery planning and field botany, Shyanne completed 

her M.Sc. on historical stand dynamics in Garry Oak ecosystems in 2007. 

Shyanne was the RIG Coordinator with GOERT for three years before 

taking on the roles of Program Manager and recovery team co-chair in 

December 2008. She currently oversees the Garry Oak ecosystems 

recovery program (see www.goert.ca) supported by six core staff. Key 

project areas include species at risk landholder contact, recovery 

planning, local government and First Nations outreach, recovery project 

implementation and support, and public communications.

Kersti Vaino, B.Sc.-E.S. 

Kersti specializes in terrestrial biology and has experience in species 

at risk biology, vegetation and habitat ecology, and invasive species 

management. In 2001, she completed a degree in environmental science 

at Royal Roads University. She spent the following years working in a 

number of positions in the environmental field where she gained a range 

of experience in field biology, including inventory of species at risk, 

assessing habitat use by grizzly bears, and studying the effects of salmon 

farming on sea lice infestations in wild salmon populations. Kersti 

spent two years working with GOERT where she helped coordinate 

the recovery of plant species at risk in these sensitive ecosystems. Her 

work involved mapping of species at risk occurrences and their habitat, 

coordinating restoration projects, preparing documents for recovery 

planning, and preparing resources for restoration practitioners and 

land managers. Kersti also has an interest in GIS and has developed 

geodatabases to track the occurrence of species and ecosystems at risk. 

In 2010, she relocated to Squamish, B.C. where she works with Cascade 

Environmental Resource Group. 

Conan Webb, B.Sc. 

Conan has been working on the conservation of rare species and 

ecosystems since 2002. His work has been focused primarily on Garry 

Oak ecosystems and rare plants found therein; however, he has also 

worked with other species in various capacities. Conan has spent the 

last few years working for the Species at Risk program at Parks Canada 

focusing on Garry Oak restoration at Fort Rodd Hill National Historic 

Site and Gulf Islands National Park Reserve, including species at risk 

and invasive species research and management. He is a member of 

GOERT and chairs the Restoration and Management RIG. His current 

position with Parks Canada is focused on recovery planning for species 

at risk in Garry Oak ecosystems.




PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 

PART I Setting the Stage 

Chapter 1 Introduction 

PART II Understanding Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Chapter 2 Distribution and Description 

Chapter 3 Natural Processes and Disturbance 

Chapter 4 Species and Ecosystems at Risk 

PART III Planning for Restoration 

Chapter 5 Restoration Planning 

Chapter 6 Outreach and Public Involvement 

Chapter 7 Ecological Inventory and Monitoring 

PART IV Implementing Restoration 

Chapter 8 Restoration Strategies 

Chapter 9 Alien Invasive Species 

Chapter 10 Species Propagation and Supply 

PART V Conclusion and Glossary 

Chapter 11 Conclusion and Glossary






Chapter 1 

Introduction 

Contents 

1.1 The Need To Restore Garry Oak Ecosystems.............................3 

1.2 Organization of this Guide.........................................................5 

1.3 Strategic Working Principles......................................................6 

1.4 Experience Beyond the Canadian Region.................................8 

1.5 Restoration for All Concerned...................................................8 

1.6 References .................................................................................9 

Part I Setting the Stage 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team www.goert.ca/restoration 

1-1


1-2 

Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and Practices


Chapter 1 

Introduction 

by Don Eastman, in collaboration with Brenda Costanzo, Richard Hebda, Ted Lea, Carolyn 

MacDonald, Mike Meagher, Brian Nyberg, Hans Roemer, and Kersti Vaino 

Restored Garry Oak ecosystem at Mt. Tzuhalem Ecological Reserve, Duncan, B.C. Photo: Dawn Fizzard 

1.1 The Need To Restore Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Over recent decades, individuals, organizations, and governments around the world have 

recognized the decline in our natural heritage, what these days we call “biological diversity” or 

“biodiversity” (Wilson 1992). The concern is not only that we are losing the diversity of life, which 

has value in its own right, but also that we are losing the many services biodiversity provides us 

(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). The status of British Columbia’s biodiversity was 

summarized comprehensively in a recent report, Taking Nature’s Pulse (Austin et al. 2008). 

Among many topics, the report assessed the conservation status of provincial ecosystems, and 

determined that the Coastal Douglas-fir biogeoclimatic zone, which includes Garry Oak and 



1-3


associated ecosystems, was one of the most imperilled. The impacts of urban and agricultural 

development on this zone were particularly noted. 

Garry Oak ecosystems are among the rarest ecosystems in Canada, and the area that they occupy 

continues to decline (Fuchs 2001). Their precarious situation was convincingly demonstrated by 

Lea (2006), who showed that the range of Garry Oak ecosystems has shrunk by more than 95% 

since the time of European contact. Losing these ecosystems has had an adverse impact on many 

animal and plant species—more than 100 species associated with Garry Oak 

ecosystems are considered at risk provincially, and 55 of these species are 

federally listed under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) (GOERT 2009). 


ecosystems are 

defined as those 

ecosystems with 

naturally occurring 

Garry Oak (Quercus 

garryana) trees, 

plus a complex 

of the following 

closely related 

ecosystems: 

coastal bluff, 

maritime meadow, 

vernal pool, 

grassland, and 

rock outcrop. 

For the purposes of this guide, Garry Oak ecosystems are defined as those 

ecosystems with naturally occurring Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) trees, 

plus a complex of the following closely related ecosystems: coastal bluff, 

maritime meadow, vernal pool, grassland, and rock outcrop. These latter 

habitats may not necessarily contain Garry Oak trees, however, they have 

the assemblages of plants and animals normally associated with Garry Oak 

ecosystems. Also included are transitional forest ecosystems containing 

Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Arbutus (Arbutus menziesii), and Garry 

Oak trees. All of these habitats contain some semblance of the ecological 

processes and communities that prevailed before European settlement. 

The endangered status of Garry Oak ecosystems in Canada results from three 

main causes: 

Habitat loss due to conversion of land for urban, industrial, and agricultural 

purposes. These losses are largely irreversible. 

Habitat fragmentation, whereby once-connected habitat patches have 

become isolated and reduced in size. This partitioning has negative impacts 

on species persistence and ecosystem integrity. Fragmentation of habitats prevents dispersal and 

genetic interchange among populations of plants and animals, and reduces the size of habitat 

patches so much that they can no longer support the full complement of Garry Oak ecosystem 

species. 

Habitat degradation results mostly from the spread of invasive species and the loss of 

natural disturbance regimes, such as fire. Consequently, even the small remnants of Garry Oak 

ecosystems are compromised and continue to be degraded by a variety of human activities. 

The dire status of Garry Oak ecosystems in Canada is now widely recognized by all levels of 

government, by not-for-profit environmental organizations, and by the general public. In 

response to the endangered status of these ecosystems, the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team 

(GOERT) was established. GOERT coordinates efforts to protect and restore endangered Garry 

Oak and associated ecosystems and the species at risk that inhabit them. GOERT is a collaborative 

partnership of all levels of government, non-governmental organizations, academic institutions, 

First Nations, volunteers, and consultants. It is the primary organization leading and coordinating 

efforts to protect and recover Garry Oak and associated ecosystems in Canada. 

Since its founding in 1999, GOERT has spearheaded development of a recovery strategy for 

1-4 



Garry Oak ecosystems (www.goert.ca/documents/RSDr_Feb02.pdf). The strategy has two major 

components: protection and recovery (Fuchs 2001). The need for protection has been emphasized 

by educating the public and by providing sound scientific data. More and more lands have been 

safeguarded, either through outright purchase or through other mechanisms such as conservation 

covenants. The second focus, restoration, involves undertaking activities that enable damaged sites 

and threatened species to recover, or at least to move along pathways to recovery. 

Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and Practices addresses the second 

focus of the strategy. Its purpose is to provide the best available information about approaches, 

strategies, and methods for restoration. To achieve this purpose, this guide 

summarizes the principles and concepts of restoration, reviews the ecology 

of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems, and provides a wealth of practical 

information on restoration techniques. 

Ecological restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of ecosystems 

that are damaged, degraded, or destroyed (Society for Ecological Restoration 

International, 2004). Considerable efforts, both by government and nongovernment 

organizations, often acting in concert, have gone into restoring 

Garry Oak ecosystems. Restoration efforts have ranged from private 

individuals converting their backyards into Garry Oak habitat, to communitybased 

removal of invasive species, such as Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius), 

from parklands, to studies of ecological processes and practical techniques. 

Some lessons learned from these activities have been recorded, but not always 

in readily accessible sources; other lessons have not been written down but 

reside in the minds of seasoned practitioners. 

This guide is 

meant to be a 

comprehensive, 

straightforward, 

and reliable source 

of knowledge 

that will assist 

the reader in 

the practice 

of ecological 

restoration of Garry 

Oak ecosystems. 

Thus, the knowledge of how to restore Garry Oak ecosystems is widely 

scattered and not readily accessible. This guide is meant to be a comprehensive, straightforward, 

and reliable source of knowledge that will assist the reader in the practice of ecological restoration 

of Garry Oak ecosystems. It is not intended to be a scientific treatise, although sound science is 

fundamental to good ecological restoration. Instead, it is a technically-oriented user’s guide on how 

best to approach restoration. It is intended to provide a synthesis of current knowledge and practice 

that will contribute to successful restoration of these endangered ecosystems. 

1.2 Organization of This Guide 

Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and Practices consists of eleven 

chapters grouped into five parts. 

Part I introduces the publication and presents key principles used to guide restoration (Chapter 1). 

Part II provides the background understanding of Garry Oak ecosystems that is needed to 

undertake restoration. Chapter 2 sketches the geographic scope of Garry Oak ecosystems in Canada 

and describes the ecological units that make up Garry Oak ecosystems. The next two chapters 

provide important ecological perspectives: the natural disturbance processes that historically 

shaped these ecosystems (Chapter 3) and the endangered species and ecosystems that are 

associated with Garry Oaks (Chapter 4). 



1-5


Part III focuses on how to undertake a restoration project. Chapter 5 addresses project initiation 

and planning by specifically explaining the organizational structure of a restoration project. Then, 

Chapter 6 addresses the importance of outreach and how to engage the public. The final chapter 

in this part, Chapter 7, provides principles and practices for inventory and monitoring, and key 

elements of an adaptive management approach to restoration. 

Part IV explores ways of implementing restoration projects. Chapter 8 outlines various strategies 

and approaches that can be used in restoration. The thorny issue of dealing with invasive 

species forms the content of Chapter 9. The propagation and supply of native species for use in 

restoration is the subject of Chapter 10. 

Part V summarizes key points made throughout the publication in the concluding Chapter 11. 

1.3 Strategic Working Principles 

The authors adopted six principles to guide the scope and content of the 

publication, and the team encourages all practitioners to consider following 

them in their restoration projects. The six principles are: 

1. Put protection before restoration 

2. Adopt an eco-cultural approach 

3. Apply the best available knowledge 

4. Apply adaptive management 

5. Set clear objectives 

6. Document all phases of all restoration projects 

Restoration, 

no matter how 

well executed, 

will never recreate 

what has 

been damaged, 

degraded, or 

destroyed. 

Protection is the first priority in the conservation of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems. 

Whenever possible, current Garry Oak and associated ecosystems must be protected, whether 

by outright purchase, by conservation covenant, or by some similar means that ensures their 

long-term security. The reason for highlighting this principle is that restoration, no matter how 

well executed, will never re-create what has been damaged, degraded, or destroyed. The focus on 

protection serves to emphasize that restoration is not an acceptable excuse for the loss of these 

ecosystems in the past and certainly not in the future. 

The second principle encourages restoration practitioners to adopt a definition of ecological 

restoration that includes both human culture and the conventional biophysical elements or 

dimensions. Good ecological restoration requires the application of the best available ecological 

knowledge in a human context, where humans are considered to be part of ecosystems and 

are meaningfully involved in all stages of the restoration process from planning to after-care. 

Experience demonstrates repeatedly that unless as many people as possible are consulted and 

involved at the start of the process, restoration projects are likely to fail. Given the tremendous 

amount of effort that usually goes into restoration projects, it is critical to involve people in order 

to ensure long-term success (Sauer 1998). 

The third principle emphasizes the importance of using the best available knowledge. In this 

publication, knowledge includes understanding gained from scientific research, as well as 

traditional and local ecological knowledge and practice. As part of this approach, we recognize 

1-6 



that our understanding of ecological restoration techniques and methods continually improves; 

users of this guide should view its content as a starting point. This publication is intended as a 

living document and will be updated periodically. Please check the GOERT website for updates 

(www.goert.ca/restoration). 

The fourth principle—the application of adaptive management—could be described as “learning 

by doing”. However, “learning by doing” oversimplifies the real meaning of the concept and 

overlooks the important features and benefits that make up adaptive management (Holling 

1978; Walters 1986). The concept of adaptive management arose from the realization that land 

management activities, including ecological restoration, are often experimental because their 

outcomes cannot be predicted with certainty; their results will be known only after ecosystems 

have responded to treatments. This uncertainty is a common feature of Garry 

Oak restoration projects. For example, mowing and mulching are being used 

to replace fire as a disturbance agent in projects like the ongoing restoration 

at the Somenos Garry Oak Protected Area near Duncan, B.C. The long-term 

outcome of these techniques in terms of how well they replicate burning has 

yet to be seen. 

To learn as much as possible from management experiments, adaptive 

management practitioners use a systematic process to plan, conduct, and 

learn from their activities. Nyberg (1998) summarized adaptive management 

as a series of steps: 

i. problem assessment 

ii. project design 

iii. implementation 

iv. monitoring 

v. evaluation 

vi. adjustment of future decisions 

By identifying knowledge gaps and uncertainties during problem assessment, then deliberately 

designing the management treatment or program to address these gaps, practitioners can achieve 

both on-the-ground results and—just as importantly—gain new knowledge about how and 

why the ecosystem responded the way it did. Note that careful monitoring of field results is a 

critical step in the adaptive management process because it ensures that reliable information is 

gathered to address the knowledge gaps and uncertainties identified at the outset. The vital role 

of monitoring cannot be overstated, and all Garry Oak restoration initiatives must include a welldesigned 

monitoring component. 

The fifth principle of setting clear objectives is closely related to adaptive management and is 

central to successful restoration (Hebda 2010). Project objectives drive the actions of a project, 

set criteria for evaluating success, and directly shape budgets. A project with unclear objectives 

may generate confusion among the participants, can lead to selecting incorrect methods, and 

may lead to conflicts when making decisions. It is hard to communicate to the public and to 

project supporters if the project’s desired outcomes and targets are not clear. The importance 

of establishing clear, shared objectives cannot be overstated, for it can determine the success or 

failure of a restoration project. Furthermore, adaptive management decisions cannot be made 

The vital role 

of monitoring 

in restoration 

projects cannot be 

over-emphasized; 

all Garry Oak 

restoration 

initiatives 

must include a 

well-designed 

monitoring 

component. 



1-7


without clear objectives for the management actions taken. 

The sixth principle of documenting project activities may seem obvious. Yet for so many projects 

there are only brief or scattered records of what was attempted and what actually happened. 

Restoration is a recent field of activity, and the literature is only beginning to accumulate. Thus, 

even the most basic observations are critical to advancing our understanding, and it is especially 

important to document failures so that unsuccessful approaches are not repeated. All new 

knowledge needs to be compiled and passed on to future restoration projects and practitioners. 

1.4 Experience Beyond the Canadian Region 

Restoration work does not exist in a vacuum, and there is much useful information available 

in other regions, including those with Garry Oaks and other oak species. There is considerable 

interest in oak ecosystems in the various Mediterranean climatic zones around the world, as 

demonstrated by the recent publication Cork Oak Woodlands on the Edge: Ecology, Adaptive 

Management, and Restoration (Aronson et al. 2009). In this publication, the editors state that 

“cork oak woodlands can be viewed as a system on the edge of radical change and at clear risk 

of collapse” (p. 5), a statement that sounds all too familiar to those working on Garry Oak 

ecosystems. 

While there is much we can learn from work in these other ecosystems, it is important to realize 

that there are unique aspects to be considered closer to home within the context of southern 

British Columbia. Considerable work has been completed and continues to be done in similar 

oak-meadow-dominated ecosystems in Washington and Oregon (e.g., Vesely et al. 2004). Much 

can be gained by continued (and enhanced) communication and collaboration with Garry Oak 

restoration efforts in these neighbouring states. An excellent example of this collaboration is 

the “Cascadia Prairie-Oaks Partnership” that was highlighted at a recent conference (March 

24–27, 2010) in Washington state, and which spans both Canada and the United States. The 

Prairie Landowner Guide for Western Washington (The Nature Conservancy 2011) has recently 

become available at www.southsoundprairies.org, and Restoring the Pacific Northwest: The Art 

and Science of Ecological Restoration in Cascadia (Apostol and Sinclair 2006) provides another 

good example of integration of restoration work across the region, and includes a chapter on oak 

woodlands and savannahs. 

1.5 Restoration for All Concerned 

There is a clear need to restore Garry Oak ecosystems because many serious issues threaten their 

existence. In addition to providing ecological and biological benefits, restoration activities and 

projects provide participating individuals, communities, and organizations with opportunities 

to gain a remarkable sense of accomplishment and to reconnect in a meaningful way with the 

natural world around us. Even though restoration seems to be a never-ending process, it creates 

a long-term connection between participants and their natural surroundings. It is our hope that 

this guide will be a valuable aid both to restoring Garry Oak ecosystems and to building human 

and natural communities in our special places. We encourage you to apply what we offer here 

to your restoration efforts, and to add your knowledge and experience to the growing body of 

knowledge on successful restoration. We wish you well in all you do for restoration! 

1-8 



1.6 References 

Apostol, D. and M. Sinclair (editors). 2006. Restoring the Pacific Northwest: the art and science of 

ecological restoration in Cascadia. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

Aronson, J., J.S. Pereira, and J.G. Pausas (editors). 2009. Cork oak woodlands on the edge: ecology, 

adaptive management and restoration. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

Austin, M.A., D.A. Buffett, D.J. Nicolson, G.G.E. Scudder, and V. Stevens (editors). 2008. Taking 

nature’s pulse: the status of biodiversity in British Columbia. Biodiversity BC, Victoria, B.C. 

www.biodiversitybc.org (Accessed March 30, 2010). 

Fuchs, M.A. 2001. Towards a recovery strategy for Garry Oak and associated ecosystems in 

Canada: ecological assessment and literature review. Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife 

Service, Pacific and Yukon Region. Technical Report GBEI/EC-00-030. 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2009. Species at risk. www.goert.ca/pubs_at_ 

risk.php (Accessed Jan. 20, 2010). 

Hebda, R.J. 2010. Course guide and course manual ER311: principles and concepts of ecological 

restoration. Division of Continuing Studies, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

Holling, C.S. (editor). 1978. Adaptive environmental assessment and management. John Wiley & 

Sons, Toronto, Ont. 

Lea, T. 2006. Historical Garry Oak ecosystems of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, pre- 

European contact to the present. Davidsonia 17(2):34-50. 

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island 

Press, Washington, D.C. 

Nyberg, J.B. 1998. Statistics and the practice of adaptive management. In: V. Sit and B. Taylor 

(editors). Statistical methods for adaptive management studies. B.C. Ministry of Forests, 

Research Branch, Victoria, B.C. Land Management Handbook 42, pp. 1-8. 

Sauer, L.J. 1998. The once and future forest: a guide to forest restoration strategies. Island Press, 

Washington, D.C. 

Society for Ecological Restoration International. 2004. The SER primer on ecological restoration. 

Version 2. October, 2004. Society for Ecological Restoration International, Tucson, Ariz. 

www.ser.org/content/ecological_restoration_primer.asp (Accessed January 28, 2009). 

The Nature Conservancy and E.S.A. Adolfson. 2011. Prairie Landowner Guide for western 

Washington. www.southsoundprairies.org (Accessed 2011). 

Vesely, D., G. Tucker, and R. O’Keefe. 2004. A landowner’s guide for restoring and managing 

Oregon white oak habitats. United States Bureau of Land Management, Salem District, 

Oregon. www.blm.gov/or/districts/salem/files/white_oak_guide.pdf (Accessed March 30, 

2010). 

Walters, C.J. 1986. Adaptive management of renewable resources. McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y. 

Wilson, E. O. 1992. The diversity of life. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. 



1-9


1-10 







Chapter 2 

Distribution and Description 

Contents 

2.1 Introduction................................................................................3 

2.1.1 The Setting...........................................................................4 

2.2 Current Distribution...................................................................5 

2.3 Historical and Present Day Distribution....................................6 

2.4 Current Suitability of Climate for Garry Oak Ecosystems ........6 

2.5 Ecosystem Classification and Uses in Restoration...................8 

Key to Restoration Ecosystem Units..............................................9 

2.5.1 Garry Oak Woodlands....................................................... 10 

2.5.2 Maritime Meadows............................................................ 11 

2.5.3 Vernal Pools........................................................................12 

Part II Understanding Garry Oak Ecosystems 


2-1


2.5.4 Vernal Seeps...................................................................... 13 

2.5.5 Coastal Bluffs .................................................................... 13 

2.5.6 Douglas-fir Plant Communities......................................... 14 

2.5.7 Restoration Ecosystem Units........................................... 15 

2.6 Successional Perspective and Implications for Restoration . 19 

2.7 Acknowledgements.................................................................20 

2.8 References................................................................................21 

Appendix 2.1 ..................................................................................24 

Historical (pre-European settlement) and Present Day 

Distribution of Garry Oak Ecosystems .....................................24 

2-2 



Chapter 2 

Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems: 

Distribution and Description 

by Ted Lea 

Figure 2.1 Looking west toward Fort Victoria in the late 1840s. Plants shown include camas (Camassia spp.), Woolly 

Sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum), Barestem Desert-parsley (Lomatium nudicaule), and Spring Gold (Lomatium 

utriculatum). Painting by Michael Kluckner (Kluckner 1986; used with permission). 

2.1 Introduction 

When Europeans first arrived in Victoria in the early 1840s they found a landscape and vegetation that 

was quite different than it is today (Figure 2.1). James Douglas noted that more than two-thirds of the 

land between the Inner Harbour and Gonzales Point was “Prairie Land” (Kluckner 1986). For centuries, 

First Nations people had set fires throughout the range of Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) ecosystems to 

burn off trees and shrubs and promote the growth of edible root crops, such as camas (Camassia spp.) 

and Bracken Fern (Pteridium aquilinum), and to create openings for hunting ungulates, such as deer and 

Roosevelt Elk (Cervus canadensis roosevelti) (Turner 1999). This created the areas of prairie land noted by 



2-3


Douglas. The oldest detailed map of the Victoria region was drawn in 1842 by Adolphus Lee Lewis, who 

accompanied James Douglas (Figure 2.2). It shows the extent of cleared areas, forests, Garry Oak trees, 

and riparian areas. European settlers eventually halted the burning by the Aboriginal people. Shrubsized 

Garry Oaks, then larger oak trees, rapidly became established (B. Beckwith, pers. comm. 2010). 

Photographs and maps made 20 to 40 years after Lewis’s map showed a far more extensive distribution 

of Garry Oak trees. Further succession resulted in Douglas-fir-dominated communities on many sites 

(see Chapter 3). 

Figure 2.2 Ground plan of the portion 

of Vancouver Island selected for new 

establishment by James Douglas 

Esqr. 1842. Hudson’s Bay Company 

Archives, Archives of Manitoba; used 

with permission. 

LEGEND 

dark areas: woods and forests 

lighter areas: ‘plains’ or open 

parkland 

dots within light areas: Garry 

Oak trees 

enclosed darkest areas: 

riparian areas such as Bowker 

Creek 

This chapter describes where Garry Oak and associated ecosystems currently exist, where they occurred 

in the past and where they could exist based on current climatic conditions. Chapter 3 (Natural Processes 

and Disturbance) describes where these ecosystems could occur in the future with global climate change. 

This chapter also provides a general introduction to the classification of plant communities within Garry 

Oak and associated ecosystems, and it presents a classification system of Restoration Ecosystem Units 

that is used throughout this guide to help restoration practitioners determine what plant communities 

can be returned to which sites (see Section 2.5.7). 

2.1.1 The Setting 

The Garry Oak landscape lies within a rain shadow zone in the lee of the Olympic and Vancouver Island 

Mountains, and has a mild, winter-wet, summer-dry modified Mediterranean climate. This area is 

comprised of inner coast and islands with elevations ranging from sea level to 550 m on ridge tops and 

mountains. Geologically, this region is complex. It is composed of a folded and faulted sedimentary 

basin, metamorphic contact zones with exotic terranes, granitic intrusions, and both glacial and colluvial 

2-4 



surface overlays. Soils have been organically enriched with Ah horizons and are often shallowly underlain 

by bedrock. Persistent exposure to insolation, wind, or sea spray is common. Periodic fire is thought to 

have typified the natural disturbance regime, as in other oak woodlands of the Pacific Northwest. At a 

landscape scale, plant communities are most strongly influenced by site-level moisture regime, elevation, 

and amount of surface bedrock (exposed or with shallow humus). At the plant community scale, the most 

important distinguishing variables are site mineral soil exposure, soil coarse fragments, and geographic 

area, followed by topographic drainage, soil texture, depth to bedrock, percent downed wood, and 

elevation (Erickson and Meidinger 2007). 

2.2 Current Distribution 

The distribution of Garry Oak (Oregon White Oak) is restricted to the western portion of North America, 

mainly close to the Pacific Ocean. In British Columbia, Garry Oak and associated ecosystems occur 

primarily on southeastern Vancouver Island, the adjacent Gulf Islands, and a couple of locations on the 

mainland, namely Sumas Mountain and Yale (Figure 2.3). The locations on the mainland are related to 

the distribution of Garry Oak in Washington State, which approaches the British Columbia border. The 

North American distribution of Garry Oak extends through Washington and Oregon State into northern 

California (Figure 2.4). Unlike in British Columbia, a fair amount of Garry Oak occurs in the interior 

portions of these states. 

The current distribution of Garry Oak ecosystems in Canada is centered mainly around Victoria, Duncan, 

Nanaimo, and Comox (Lea 2006; Appendix 2.1). These ecosystems also occur on most of the southern Gulf 

Islands, although only their distribution on Salt Spring, Denman, and Hornby Islands has been mapped. 

On most other surrounding Gulf Islands, Garry Oak occurs on warm, steeper, south-facing slopes or on 

rock outcrops. For example, significant areas of Garry Oak occur along the coastlines of Gabriola and 

Pender Islands. 

Figure 2.3 Current 

distribution of Garry 

Oak ecosystems in 

British Columbia. 

Map © Province of 

British Columbia 



2-5


Figure 2.4 Current global 

distribution of Garry Oak 

ecosystems. Map © Province 

of British Columbia 

2.3 Historical and Present Day Distribution 

Pollen in soil cores sampled on southern Vancouver Island and the adjacent mainland suggests 

that the range of Garry Oak woodlands in Canada was more extensive several thousand years ago 

than it is today (R. Hebda, pers. comm. 2010; Brown and Hebda 2002; Pellat et al. 2001; Walker 

and Pellatt 2001). According to pollen analysis, Garry Oak first occurred in British Columbia 

around 9500 ybp 1 and was most common from about 8000 ybp to 6000 ybp. After that, the 

distribution of Garry Oak was similar to present day (Pellatt et al. 2001). 

The distribution of Garry Oak ecosystems, including prairies, prior to European settlement 

and for the present day has been mapped (Lea 2006; Appendix 2.1). The maps cover most of the 

distribution of Garry Oak ecosystems on Vancouver Island, and include minor occurrences on 

many of the Gulf Islands (see Section 2.2). Significant losses of deep soil ecosystems have occurred 

within these areas due to agricultural and urban development, as is reflected in the present day 

distribution. Shallow soil ecosystems have been less impacted by development. 

2.4 Current Suitability of Climate for Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Figure 2. 5 shows where planting of Garry Oak could be successful based on current climatic 

conditions, if appropriate sites are chosen. These sites include areas with deep soils on average to 

1 ybp - years before present 

2-6 



Figure 2.5 Areas that currently have suitable climate for supporting Garry Oak ecosystems. Royal BC Museum n.d. 

drier sites with gentle slopes or warm aspects, and shallow soils. This indicates 

that Garry Oak and associated ecosystems could be established beyond their 

current range, in areas such as the Sunshine Coast and the lower Fraser Valley, 

which are believed to have supported Garry Oak in the past (R. Hebda, pers. 

comm. 2010). 

Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping (TEM) has been done for the entire Coastal 

Douglas-fir biogeoclimatic zone (Madrone 2008), which corresponds with 

much of the area where current climatic conditions could support Garry 

Oak. This mapping will allow restoration practitioners to determine where 

connectivity between existing Garry Oak communities could be developed so 

that these communities can expand as climate warming occurs. Many areas, 

such as the Sunshine Coast, already support many of the species that occur in 

Garry Oak and its associated ecosystems. 

The results of this Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping for the Coastal Douglas-fir 

biogeoclimatic zone (CDFmm) and the Coastal Western Hemlock portion 

that is surrounded by CDFmm (CWHxm) indicate that the following mapped 

ecosystem units have the potential to support Garry Oak and its associated 

species or could be maintained as associated ecosystems (Table 2.1). 

Garry Oak and 

associated 

ecosystems could 

be established 

beyond their 

current range, in 

areas such as the 

Sunshine Coast 

and the lower 

Fraser Valley, 

which are believed 

to have supported 

Garry Oak in the 

past. 

The Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping for these zones is available on the provincial government 

EcoCat website (www.env.gov.bc.ca/ecocat). 



2-7


Table 2.1 Ecosystem map units that could support Garry Oak and associated ecosystems (from Madrone 2008). 

TEM Map Code 

Site Series Number 

Name 

CDFmm 1 

FC 

OR 

SC 

GO 

OM 

QB 

DS 

DA 

DO 

CWHxm 2 

AM 

FC 

QB 

SC 

00 

00 

00 

00 

00 

00 

01 

02 

03 

00 

00 

00 

00 

Fescue – Camas 

Oceanspray – Rose 

Cladina – Wallace’s Selaginella 

Garry Oak – Oceanspray 

Garry Oak – Moss 

Garry Oak – Brome/mixed grasses 

Douglas-fir − Salal (officially known as Douglas fir/Dull Oregongrape; 

gentle slopes and warm aspects only, not cool aspects) 

Douglas-fir − Shore Pine − Arbutus 

Douglas-fir − Oniongrass 

Arbutus − Hairy Manzanita 

Fescue − Camas 

Garry Oak − Brome/mixed grasses 

Cladina − Wallace’s Selaginella 

1 Coastal Douglas-fir moist maritime biogeoclimatic subzone 

2 Coastal Western Hemlock very dry maritime subzone 

2.5 Ecosystem Classification and Uses in Restoration 

This section briefly describes the plant communities that are found in Garry Oak and associated 

ecosystems. It is intended to provide enough information for restoration practitioners to 

determine which plant communities could be developed on sites that are being restored. These 

communities are described in detail in Erickson and Meidinger (2007), Erickson (1995), and 

Parks Canada Agency (2006a, b, c; 2008). The information provided in this section is particularly 

relevant to creating new plant communities on sites that no longer have significant cover of native 

flora. The more detailed descriptions provided in Erickson and Meidinger (2007) can be used 

when working on relatively natural sites with Garry Oak woodlands. There is no similar plant 

community classification for associated ecosystems, such as maritime meadows or vernal pools; 

therefore, it is recommended that a knowledgeable local botanist be involved in determining 

appropriate activities when creating or restoring fairly natural areas, especially if species at risk 

could be present. Refer to Chapter 4: Species and Ecosystems at Risk, for further information 

about special considerations at a site that may contain at-risk species. 

Communities often occur in mosaics across the landscape, and site conditions can change over 

very short distances and time periods. Site conditions will determine what plant communities can 

be supported on a piece of land, so they are the first attributes that should be determined before 

restoration begins. The key below provides a means to determine which plant communities may 

be appropriate for a particular property based on site conditions. 

2-8 



Key to Restoration Ecosystem Units 

1a. Forests dominated by coniferous species, such as Douglas-fir. Restoration Ecosystem 

Unit #8: Douglas-fir Communities. 

1b. Not forests dominated by coniferous species. Go to step 2. 

2a. Steep slopes (greater than 30% slope) along the coastline dominated by small trees, 

shrubs, and herbs. Restoration Ecosystem Unit # 7: Coastal Bluff Communities. 

2b. Gentle slopes or steeper slopes dominated by open stands of Garry Oak. Go to step 3. 

3a. Depressional areas where water accumulates in the winter and early spring; variety of 

soils conditions, which prevent percolation of water. Restoration Ecosystem #6: Vernal 

Pool Communities. 

3b. Generally well-drained soils, either on deep or shallow soils. Go to step 4. 

4a. Low-elevation, treeless areas along the coastline; soils are often shallow, frequently 

10–20 cm deep, but usually less than 50 cm of soil over bedrock; parent material may 

consist of till or glaciomarine clay, silt, or loam. Restoration Unit #5: Maritime Meadow 

Communities. 

4b. Other conditions. Go to step 5. 

5a. Areas of shallow soil over bedrock. Go to step 6. 

5b. Areas with deeper soil. Go to step 8. 

6a. Sites (often microsites) with significant seepage throughout the growing season. 

Restoration Unit #4: Shallow Soil Seepage Communities. 

6b. Well to rapidly drained soils with limited seepage during the growing season. 

Go to step 7. 

7. Restoration Unit #3: Shallow Soil Garry Oak Communities. Steps for 7a, 7b, and 7c 

are taken directly from Erickson and Meidinger (2007) for bedrock or other rocky, xeric 

landscapes, usually dominated by bryophytes or sparse, deep-rooted shrubs. 

7a. Primarily uniform bedrock, usually dominated by bryophytes. Warm aspects, exposed 

sites on rapidly drained topography, high site mineral soil exposure, trees if present may 

include Douglas-fir and Arbutus at relatively high cover. Garry Oak – Racomitrium 

elongatum – Wallace’s Selaginella plant association. 

7b. Cool aspects, topographically protected sites but with high mineral soil exposure and 

high percent soil coarse fragments. Garry Oak – Dicranum scoparium plant association. 

7c. Dry colluvial sites primarily underlain by fractured rock talus; if bedrock present, then 

cracked and fissured, not uniform; usually dominated by sparse, deep-rooted shrubs. 

Garry Oak – Hairy Honeysuckle plant association. 



2-9


8a. Deep soil; average moisture conditions; gentle to steep slope. Go to step 9. 

8b. Deep soil; wetter than average moisture conditions; receiving moisture from upslope. 

Often subhygric sites. Go to step 11. 

9. Restoration Unit #1: Deep Soil, Average Moisture Garry Oak Communities. Steps 9a, 10a, 

and 10b are taken directly from Erickson and Meidinger (2007) for less xeric landscapes 

with a surface soil mantle. 

9a. Usually dominated by grassy herbaceous species; high percentage of soil coarse 

fragments. Garry Oak – Roemer’s Fescue plant association. 

9b. Gentle to steep slopes with soil mantle, usually dominated by native herbaceous 

vegetation. Go to step 10. 

10a. Less xeric, often submesic gentle to moderate mid-slopes, sometimes with high mineral 

soil exposure cover; light to moderate native shrub understorey, usually dominated 

in early season by herbaceous forb species or later by herbaceous grasses. Garry Oak – 

Common Camas – Blue Wildrye plant association. 

10b. Mesic to submesic gentle lower slopes, sometimes cool, protected, or wetter 

topographic sites including basins and gentle topography; soils relatively deep, mediumtextured 

with low or moderate percent coarse fragments; light to moderate native 

shrub understorey; usually dominated in early season by herbaceous forb species or later 

by herbaceous grasses. Garry Oak – Great Camas – Blue Wildrye plant association. 

11. Restoration Unit #2: Deep Soil, Wetter Garry Oak Communities. Step 11 is taken 

directly from Erickson and Meidinger (2007) for wetter topographic sites; cool sites 

receiving moisture additions off bedrock, and wet, mesic to subhygric, deep-soil 

sites usually dominated by dense cover of native shrubs, including dense, multi-layered 

native shrub thickets. Garry Oak – Oceanspray – Common Snowberry plant association. 

2.5.1 Garry Oak Woodlands 

Garry Oak ecosystems have been described in general by Parks Canada Agency (2006a), and in 

detail by Roemer (1972), Erickson (1995), and Erickson and Meidinger (2007). Originally, two 

major types were recognized within the Garry Oak ecosystem: parkland and scrub oak. 

The parkland community type, which occurs on deep soils (Pojar 1980a, 1980b), supported 

common understorey plants, including Common Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Common 

Camas (Camassia quamash), Great Camas (Camassia leichtlinii), Fawn Lily (Erythronium 

oregonum), various graminoid species (grasses, sedges, and rushes), and Bracken Fern (Pteridium 

aquilinum). Almost all of this community type has disappeared because it occupied areas that 

were most suitable for growing crops. Those areas started being cleared for agriculture and 

urban development in the 1840s. While many large Garry Oak trees remain, the original plant 

communities beneath them have been replaced by lawns, roads, agricultural fields, or concrete. 

A few examples of this community type remain in the Nature Conservancy of Canada’s Cowichan 

2-10 



Garry Oak Preserve, in a stand in Beacon Hill Park in Victoria, and in the Department of National 

Defence lands at Rocky Point in the District of Metchosin. 

The scrub oak community type occurs on shallow soils and rock outcrops. The oak trees are 

often of lower stature than those growing on deep soils. The understories of these rock outcrop 

communities were originally dominated by many spring-flowering perennial forbs, grasses, and 

mosses, but now they often contain extensive cover of invasive alien species such as Scotch Broom 

(Cytisus scoparius), agronomic grasses, and other weeds. More of this community type remains, 

probably because many of the rocky habitats that support it were difficult to develop. Many scrub 

oak sites are now in protected areas such as Mount Tzuhalem Ecological Reserve, Mount Tolmie 

Park, and Mount Douglas Park. 

These deep soil and shallow soil Garry Oak woodlands occur as patches within the Coastal 

Douglas-fir biogeoclimatic zone as a result of climatic, edaphic, and cultural factors (see Fuchs 

2001). Recent classification of these two community types is described in detail in Erickson and 

Meidinger (2007). The authors defined seven Garry Oak plant associations, which are subdivided 

into 16 plant community types and six sub-communities. These plant communities are combined 

in Section 2.5.7. 

2.5.2 Maritime Meadows 

Maritime meadow plant communities in British Columbia have not been formally recognized or 

described. They are typically low-elevation, herb-dominated communities that occur within 3 

km of the coastline (Parks Canada Agency 2006b). Much of the original area occupied by these 

ecosystems has been developed for housing, and it is believed that less than 200 ha remain (Parks 

Canada Agency 2006b). Environmental conditions of these ecosystems have been well described 

in the recovery strategy for maritime meadow species at risk (Parks Canada Agency 2006b, 2008). 

Tree species are mostly or completely absent. The shrub layer is typically sparse and composed of 

combinations of Tall Oregon-grape (Mahonia aquifolium), Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana), Common 

Snowberry, and Trailing Blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and may include sparse trees such as Garry 

Oak or Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Under natural conditions, the well-developed 

herb layer tends to be dominated by a mix of forbs and graminoids. Forbs that may dominate 

the community include Common Camas, Great Camas, Wild Strawberry (Fragaria virginiana), 

Field Chickweed (Cerastium arvense), Pacific Sanicle (Sanicula crassicaulis), Barestem Desertparsley 

(Lomatium nudicaule), Woolly Sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum), Puget Sound Gumweed 

(Grindelia stricta), and Bracken Fern. Other less common forbs include Common Yarrow (Achillea 

millefolium), Hooker’s Onion (Allium acuminatum), Slimleaf Onion (Allium amplectens), 

Chocolate Lily (Fritillaria affinis), Fool’s Onion (Triteleia hyacinthina, White Triteleia), Spring 

Gold (Lomatium utriculatum), Cleavers (Galium aparine), Thrift (Armeria maritima), and 

Western Buttercup (Ranunculus occidentalis). The most commonly occurring native graminoids 

are California Oatgrass (Danthonia californica), Tufted Hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa), Red 

Fescue 2 (Festuca rubra), Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus), and Pacific Woodrush (Luzula comosa). 

2 Red Fescue is a species complex with both native and non-native elements, sometimes described as sub-species, and 

with confused taxonomy. 



2-11


Cover of the moss layer is often quite limited. Many invasive alien plant species dominate these 

sites (Parks Canada Agency 2008). These species are discussed in Chapter 9 (Alien Invasive 

Species). 

Soil depth, parent material, and the percent of coarse fragments vary considerably among sites. 

Soils are often shallow, from 10–20 cm deep, but occasionally there is 30 cm or more of soil 

over bedrock. The parent material may consist of till or glaciomarine clay, silt, or loam. Coarse 

fragments are often abundant in the soil but may be almost absent. The soil tends to be well to 

rapidly drained. In the early growing season (October to March), the soil tends to remain moist. 

Soil moisture levels diminish as the growing season progresses, and by mid-summer significant 

water deficits occur for prolonged periods. Sites usually occur between 1 and 15 m above sea level 

(Parks Canada Agency 2008). 

Maritime meadow ecosystems with more than 5% cover of California Oatgrass, Roemer’s 

Fescue (Festuca roemeri), and/or native elements of Red Fescue have been described for the 

Puget Trough in Washington State, but other maritime meadow ecosystems in this area have not 

been classified (Chappell 2006). 

2.5.3 Vernal Pools 

Vernal pools are Vernal pool plant communities in British Columbia have not been formally 

spatially discrete, recognized or described. Vernal pools are spatially discrete, seasonally 

seasonally flooded flooded depressions that form on top of impermeable layers such as hardpan, 

depressions that claypan, or bedrock (Parks Canada Agency 2006c). The pools on Vancouver 

form on top of 

Island tend to be of two types: those formed by rock depressions and those 

forming on clay soils (Parks Canada Agency 2006c). They occur under 

impermeable 

Mediterranean-type climatic conditions that include relatively high levels 

layers such as 

of precipitation in winter and early spring, followed by complete or partial 

hardpan, claypan, 

drying in summer. Environmental conditions have been well described in the 

or bedrock. 

recovery strategy for maritime meadow species at risk (Parks Canada Agency 

2006c) and by the Parks Canada Agency (2008). Today, most of the remaining 

vernal pool/vernal seep habitat on Vancouver Island is confined to isolated 

coastal bluffs on the southeast side of the island, and to small undeveloped islands adjacent to the 

coast (Parks Canada Agency 2006c). Vernal pools, swales, and seeps are scattered throughout the 

Gulf Islands and along the Vancouver Island coast as far north as Campbell River and Mitlenatch 

Island. Harewood Plains, near the City of Nanaimo, is an important vernal pool and seepage area 

(Parks Canada Agency 2006c). 

Trees and shrubs are absent. The herb layer is dominated by forbs with a lesser component of 

graminoids. Vernal pools have a variety of dominant plants, with annual plants being the most 

common. Some of the plants species found on Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands include 

Scouler’s Popcornflower (Plagiobothrys scouleri), Blinks (Montia fontana), Water-starwort 

(Callitriche spp.), Nuttall’s Quillwort (Isoetes nuttallii), Macoun’s Meadowfoam (Limnanthes 

macounii), Puget Sound Gumweed, Lowland Cudweed (Gnaphalium palustre), Tiny Mousetail 

(Myosurus minimus), Dwarf Owl-clover (Triphysaria pusilla), Erect Pygmyweed (Crassula 

connata var. connata), Yellow Monkey-flower (Mimulus guttatus), Toad Rush (Juncus bufonius), 

White-tipped Clover (Trifolium variegatum), and Long-spurred Plectritis (Plectritis macrocera). 

Perennial native forbs are not common but can include Thrift and Hooded Ladies’ Tresses 

2-12 



(Spiranthes romanzoffiana). The moss layer may be present and common on some sites. Many 

alien invasive plant species dominate these sites (Parks Canada Agency 2006c, 2008). 

Soils are imperfectly drained. In the early growing season (December to February), the water table 

is at or near the soil surface. Seepage diminishes as the growing season progresses. Winter seepage 

waterlogs the soil, creating conditions that are unsuitable for most woody or tall herbaceous 

species. Summer drought creates conditions that are unsuitable for those woody and tall 

herbaceous species that tolerate winter flooding. Parent material usually consists of glacio-marine 

clay-loam. The soils commonly consist of thin (1–20 cm deep) deposits over level bedrock. Coarse 

fragments are scarce in the soil and absent at the surface (Parks Canada Agency 2008). 

2.5.4 Vernal Seeps 

Vernal seep plant communities in British Columbia have not been formally recognized or 

described. Vernal seeps have shallow groundwater flow that emerges on sloping terrain, usually 

on the lower slopes of shallow soil and rock dominated hillsides (Parks Canada Agency 2006c). 

Seeps differ from vernal pools in that they are not usually associated with prolonged inundation; 

however, like vernal pools, they tend to dry up by late spring or early summer and thus present 

plants with similar challenges (Parks Canada Agency 2006c). 

The ground cover is dominated by bryophytes and low annual herbs. The most abundant native 

species are bryophytes, particularly the Grey Rock-moss (Racomitrium elongatum) and Bryum 

miniatum. A number of native annual herbs may be present, most notably Yellow Monkey-flower, 

Fool’s Onion, Small-leaved Montia (Montia parvifolia), Sea Blush (Plectritis congesta), Largeflowered 

Blue-eyed Mary (Collinsia grandiflora), Cup Clover (Trifolium cyathiferum), Smooth 

Fringecup (Lithophragma glabrum), Blinks, Narrow-leaved Montia (Montia linearis), Grassland 

Saxifrage (Saxifraga integrifolia), and Tomcat Clover (Trifolium willdenowii). Three bulb-forming 

species—Common Camas, Fool’s Onion, and Harvest Brodiaea (Brodiaea coronaria)—are 

often present, as is Wallace’s Selaginella (Selaginella wallacei), which may be abundant. Native 

graminoids are uncommon or absent. Most of the native plant species found in vernal seeps are 

habitat specialists and are not generally found in drier habitats (Parks Canada Agency 2006c, 

2008). 

The slope of vernal seep sites is usually greater than 35%; however, plants tend to occur on small, 

nearly level to moderately sloping benches. Soils tend to be very shallow, from 0.5 to 10 cm thick. 

Parent material tends to consist of weathered bedrock and slope-wash, and is generally rich in 

organic matter and often has a significant component of sand and/or fine gravel. Rock outcrops 

are generally present within or immediately adjacent to vernal seeps. The soil tends to be well- to 

rapidly-drained. In the early growing season (January to March), the soil tends to remain moist or 

wet as a result of near constant seepage. The soil moisture level diminishes as the growing season 

progresses, and by late spring, the soil experiences significant water deficits for prolonged periods. 

The soil surface is characterized by relatively small amounts of exposed mineral soil and fine litter 

(Parks Canada Agency 2008). 

2.5.5 Coastal Bluffs 

Coastal bluff plant communities in British Columbia have not been formally recognized or 

described. Two categories of the coastal bluff ecosystem have been identified: vegetated rocky 



2-13


islets and shorelines, and vegetated coastal cliffs and bluffs (Ward et al. 1998). These areas are 

subjected to harsh environmental conditions such as crashing waves, winds, heat, storms, and 

salt spray. Coastal bluff ecosystems are often intermixed with other ecosystems such as Garry Oak 

woodlands, maritime meadows, and vernal pools. 

Trees, when present, are sparse and may be stunted or windblown. Species include Arbutus 

(Arbutus menziesii), Garry Oak, Douglas-fir, and occasionally Seaside Juniper (Juniperus 

maritima). Shrub cover is usually limited but may include Tall Oregon-grape, Saskatoon 

(Amelanchier alnifolia), Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), and Common Snowberry. The 

herb layer consists mainly of graminoids, including Roemer’s Fescue, Alaska Brome (Bromus 

sitchensis), Long-Stoloned Sedge (Carex inops), and Red Fescue, with a few herb species such as 

Stonecrops (Sedum spp.), Small-flowered Alumroot (Heuchera micrantha), strawberries (Fragaria 

spp.), Nodding Onion (Allium cernuum), Death-camas (Zigadenus venenosus), Sea Blush, 

Wallace’s Selaginella, and Puget Sound Gumweed. Harvest Brodiaea and Menzies’ Larkspur 

(Delphinium menziesii) occur less often. The moss and lichen layer is diverse and typically 

includes Racomitrium elongatum, Syntrichia ruralis, and on exposed rock, Polytrichum piliferum 

(Ward et al. 1998). 

Coastal bluffs are usually rock-dominated and lack soils or have a shallow veneer of soil in rock 

crevices and depressions that allows vegetation to grow. Soils are usually very dry and nutrient 

poor and may have high salinity due to salt spray. Due to the surrounding harsh environment, it 

takes many years for organic matter to accumulate and distinct soil horizons to develop. Soils are 

usually sand to sandy-loams. Steep slopes limit the accumulation of organic matter to bedrock 

fissures on cliffs and bluffs (Ward et al. 1998). 

2.5.6 Douglas-fir Plant Communities 

Restoration 

Many of the deep soil sites that currently support Garry Oak can also support 

Ecosystem Units, Douglas-fir communities. Within the Coastal Douglas-fir biogeoclimatic 

developed for 

zone, many of the Douglas-fir communities are red- or blue-listed by the BC 

this publication, Conservation Data Center (see Chapter 4: Species and Ecosystems at Risk). 

provide restoration The Douglas-fir communities are considered the end point in succession 

practitioners 

for these sites (see Section 2.6), and ecologically are acceptable to restore 

of Garry Oak 

to on these sites. Douglas-fir communities have been described by Roemer 

(1972), McMinn et al. (1976), Green and Klinka (1994), and Madrone (2008). 

and associated 

Tree species commonly found on these sites include Douglas-fir, Western 

ecosystems with 

Redcedar (Thuja plicata), and Grand Fir (Abies grandis). Common shrubs are 

information that 

Salal (Gaultheria shallon), Red Huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), and 

can be used at a 

Dull Oregon-grape (Mahonia nervosa). Sword Fern (Polystichum munitum) 

broad scale. 

and Bracken Fern occur in the herb layer. Mosses are common and include 

Hylocomium splendens, Kindbergia oregana, Plagiothecium undulatum, 

and Rhytidiadelphus loreus. The plant communities where restoration of 

Garry Oak and associated species would be successful include Douglas-fir/Dull Oregon-grape 

(CDFmm/01), but only on gentle slopes and steeper warm aspects, not cool aspects; Douglas-fir/ 

Arbutus (CDFmm/02); and Douglas-fir/Alaska Oniongrass (CDFmm/03). 

2-14 



2.5.7 Restoration Ecosystem Units 

To aid the restoration of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems, the authors of this publication 

have developed broad ecological units called Restoration Ecosystem Units (REUs). These units are 

used throughout this publication to provide restoration practitioners with information that can 

be used at a broad scale. If practitioners require vegetation classification information for a site, 

they can refer to Erickson and Meidinger (2007). 

Table 2.2 Restoration ecosystem units and their plant associations. 

Restoration 

Ecosystems Unit 

No. and Name 

Restoration 

Ecosystem Unit 

Description 

Common Native Plant Species 

Plant 

Associations 1 

REU #1: 

Deep Soil, Average 

Moisture Garry 

Oak Communities 

Deep soil; variety of 

soil conditions; 

average or mesic 

moisture; 

low elevations; 

gentle slopes to 

moderate and 

steep south- facing 

slopes; 

usually over 

deeper bedrock 

Tree layer 

Garry Oak, Douglas-fir 

Shrub layer 

Common Snowberry, Tall Oregongrape 

Herb layer 

Common Camas, Great Camas, White 

Fawn Lily, Western Buttercup, 

Broad-leaved Shootingstar 

(Dodecatheon hendersonii), Sea Blush, 

Pacific Sanicle, Cleavers, Harvest 

Brodiaea, Spring Gold, Miner’s-lettuce 

(Claytonia spp.), Blue Wildrye, 

California Brome (Bromus carinatus), 

Alaska Oniongrass (Melica subulata), 

Long-Stoloned Sedge 

Garry Oak – 

Common Camas – 

Blue Wildrye 

Garry Oak – Great 

Camas – Blue 

Wildrye 

Moss layer 

Racomitrium elongatum 

REU #2: 

Deep Soil, Wetter 


Communities 

Deep soil; 

wetter than 

average moisture; 

lower slopes that 

receive moisture 

from above; 

wetter subhygric 

Tree layer 

Garry Oak, Oregon Ash (Fraxinus 

latifolia), Douglas-fir 

Shrub layer 

Common Snowberry, Oceanspray, 

Nootka Rose, Indian-plum (Oemleria 

cerasiformis), Western Trumpet 

(Lonicera ciliosa), Tall Oregon-grape 


Oceanspray – 

Common 

Snowberry 

Herb layer 

Cleavers, Great Camas, White Fawn 

Lily, Chocolate Lily, American Vetch 

(Vicia americana), Blue Wildrye, 

California Brome, Long-stoloned Sedge 

Moss layer 

Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus 

1 From Erickson and Meidinger (2007) and Green and Klinka (1994) 



2-15


Restoration 


No. and Name 

Restoration 


Description 


Plant 


REU #3: 

Shallow Soil Garry 


Primarily underlain 

by bedrock or 

fractured rock; if 

bedrock, then 

cracked and 

fissured, not 

uniform; 

also found on talus 

or coarse colluvial 

material and at the 

margins of bedrock 

or other rocky xeric 

landscapes; 

occupies a variety 

of slope positions— 

usually moistureshedding, 

gentle 

upper slope 

positions or steeper 

south- facing slopes 

Tree layer 

Garry Oak, Arbutus, Douglas-fir 

Shrub layer 

Common Snowberry, Oceanspray 

Herb layer 

Common Camas, Hairy Honeysuckle 

(Lonicera hispidula), Common Yarrow, 

Small-flowered Birds-foot trefoil (Lotus 

micranthus), Small-flowered Blue-eyed 

Mary (Collinsia parviflora), Woolly 

Sunflower, Broad-leaved Stonecrop 

(Sedum spathulifolium), Cleavers, 

Pacific Sanicle, Sea Blush, Satinflower 

(Olsynium douglasii), Wallace’s 

Selaginella, California Brome, Blue 

Wildrye, Licorice Fern (Polypodium 

glycyrrhiza), Roemer’s Fescue 

Moss layer 

Abundant with Racomitrium elongatum, 

Dicranum scoparium, Polytrichum 

juniperinum 


Roemer’s Fescue 

Garry Oak – Hairy 

Honeysuckle 

Garry oak – Grey 

Rock-moss – 

Wallace’s 

Selaginella 


Broom-moss 

Garry Oak – Hairy 

Honeysuckle 

REU #4: 

Shallow Soil 

Seepage 

Communities 

Shallow soil 

seepage areas 

where water slowly 

flows in the winter 

and early spring; 

very dry in summer 

Tree layer: absent 

Shrub layer: absent 

Herb layer 

Blue-eyed Mary (Collinsia sp.), Smooth 

Fringecup, Blinks, Narrow-leaved 

Montia, Grassland Saxifrage, Tomcat 

Clover, Common Camas, Fool’s Onion, 

Harvest Brodiaea, Wallace’s Selaginella 

None defined 

Moss layer 

Usually abundant with Racomitrium 

elongatum and Bryum miniatum, and 

significant lichen growth, mainly on 

rock outcrops or very shallow soil 


2-16 



Restoration 


No. and Name 

Restoration 


Description 


Plant 


REU #5: 

Maritime Meadow 

Communities 

Low-elevation, 

treeless areas along 

the coastline; soils 

are less than 50 cm 

deep and are over 

bedrock; parent 

material may 

consist of till or 

glaciomarine clay, 

silt, or loam 

Tree layer 

Sparse, usually Garry Oak or Douglas-fir 

Shrub layer 

Sparse and composed of 

Tall Oregon-grape, Nootka Rose, 

Common Snowberry, and Trailing 

Blackberry 

Herb layer 

Common Camas, Great Camas, Wild 

Strawberry, Field Chickweed, Pacific 

Sanicle, Barestem Desert-parsley, 

Woolly Sunflower, Puget Sound 

Gumweed, Bracken Fern, Common 

Yarrow, Hooker’s Onion, Slimleaf 

Onion, Chocolate Lily, Fool’s Onion, 

Spring Gold, Cleavers, Thrift, Western 

Buttercup, California Oatgrass, Tufted 

Hairgrass, Red Fescue, Blue Wildrye, 

Pacific Woodrush 

Non-defined 

Moss layer: typically sparse 

REU #6: 

Vernal Pool 

Communities 

Depressional areas 

where standing 

water accumulates 

in the winter and 

early spring; soil 

conditions prevent 

percolation of 

water; dry in 

summer 

Tree layer: absent 

Shrub layer: absent 

Herb layer 

Variety of species including Scouler’s 

Popcornflower, Water Chickweed 

(Myosoton aquaticum), Waterstarwort, 

Nuttall’s Quillwort, Macoun’s 

Meadowfoam, Puget Sound 

Gumweed, Lowland Cudweed, Tiny 

Mousetail, Dwarf Owl-clover, Erect 

Pygmyweed, Yellow Monkey-flower, 

Toad Rush, White-tipped Clover, 

Long-spurred Plectritis, Blinks, Thrift, 

Hooded Ladies’ Tresses 

Non-defined 

Moss layer 

May be present and common on 

some sites 




2-17


Restoration 


No. and Name 

Restoration 


Description 


Plant 


REU #7: 

Coastal Bluff 

Communities 

Steep slopes (over 

30% slope) along 

the ocean; 

dominated by 

shrubs and herbs 

Tree layer 

Arbutus, Garry Oak, Douglas-fir, 

Seaside Juniper 

Shrub layer 

Tall Oregon-grape, Saskatoon, 

Oceanspray, and Common Snowberry 

Non-defined 

Herb layer 

Roemer’s Fescue, Alaska Brome, 

Long-stoloned Sedge, Red Fescue, 

stonecrops, Small-flowered Alumroot, 

strawberries, Nodding Onion, 

Death-camas, Sea Blush, Wallace’s 

Selaginella, Puget Sound Gumweed 

Moss layer: sparse 

REU #8: 

Douglas-fir 

communities 

Variety of site 

conditions, but 

mostly deep, moist 

soils, gently sloping 

over bedrock 

Tree layer 

Douglas-fir, Western Redcedar, 

Grand Fir 

Shrub layer 

Salal, Red Huckleberry, Dull 

Oregon-grape 

Douglas-fir / Dull 

Oregon-grape 

(also known as 

Douglas-fir − Salal) 

Douglas-fir − Shore 

Pine − Arbutus 

Herb layer 

Sword Fern, Bracken Fern, Alaska 

Oniongrass 

Douglas-fir − 

Oniongrass 

Moss layer 

Hylocomium splendens, Kindbergia 

oregana, Plagiothecium undulatum, and 

Rhytidiadelphus loreus 


2-18 



2.6 Successional Perspective and Implications for Restoration 

As the beginning of this chapter indicates, changes to Garry Oak ecosystems can occur quite 

quickly. Areas that originally supported prairie quickly succeeded to stands of Garry Oak when 

burning ceased. Over time, stands dominated by coniferous trees, such as Douglas-fir, developed 

mainly on sites with deep soil. On sites with shallow soil, Garry Oak communities may never be 

replaced by Douglas-fir. 

Restoration workers often seem to select a particular successional community 

and try to manage their area to that “ideal state.” In the case of Garry Oak 

stands, this is often an oak savannah or oak woodland with a meadow-like 

understorey of camas, Fawn Lily, and other attractive flowers, but many other 

stages could also be appropriate (see Peter and Harrington 2004). Restoration 

practitioners can use successional information to determine which vegetation 

communities or stages could occur on the site they wish to restore, and what 

may happen to a particular community over time if it is not actively managed. 

For example, many deep soil areas that support Garry Oak communities can 

also support dense shrubby communities or coniferous forest (Roemer 1972). 

Therefore, shrubby species, such as snowberry or Indian-plum, or coniferous 

species, such as Douglas-fir, may establish on sites where restoration 

practitioners are attempting to maintain a Garry Oak woodland with a forb/ 

graminoid understorey. 

Restoration 

practitioners can 

use sucessional 

information 

to determine 

which vegetation 

communities or 

stages could occur 

on the site they 

wish to restore, and 

what may happen 

to a particular 

community over 

time if it is not 

actively managed. 

A variety of successional pathways can occur in deep soil sites in the Puget 

Sound area (Figure 2.6; Peter and Harrington 2004). These sites can support 

open prairie dominated by forbs and graminoids; parkland or woodland 

Garry Oak communities; dense shrub-dominated communities; or Douglasfir 

communities all on the same site depending on disturbance history 

and intensity. Successional stages often existed in mosaics across the landscape depending 

on disturbance history (Lea 2006). Much of the area that historically supported Garry Oak 

ecosystems included sites where a Douglas-fir/Salal/Dull Oregon-grape community would be the 

climax plant community (McMinn et al. 1976). 

In the past, the First Nations people regularly burned much of southeastern Vancouver Island to 

maintain important wildlife habitat and plant resources such as camas, and other root crops such 

as Bracken Fern (Roemer 1972; Turner 1999). Paleoecological evidence indicates that this burning 

allowed Garry Oak woodlands to persist over the last several thousand years by preventing 

succession to coniferous forest (Pellatt et al. 2001). Historical records indicate that the resulting 

landscape was a matrix of open prairies, rich meadows, and shrub thickets (MacDougall et al. 

2004). Many Garry Oak woodland ecosystems (particularly the more mesic, deeper soil sites) 

depend on fire to maintain an open canopy and understorey, and remove thatch accumulation. 

Fire suppression also changes hydrological and nutrient regimes, which could negatively affect the 

species within these ecosystems. The expansion of shrubs is evident in portions of the Garry Oak 

woodlands at the Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve and at Somenos Lake, where Common Snowberry 

dominates the understorey vegetation. Snowberry appears to effectively shade out and eliminate 

most herbaceous species (Parks Canada Agency 2006a). Detailed successional relationships are 

also defined within each plant community described by Erickson and Meidinger (2007) and 



2-19


Herb, shrub, 

seedling 

Prairie 

Succession 

Frequently 

repeated fire 

Fire 

Oak 

savannah 


woodland 

Shrub, sapling, 

herb 

Tree, shrub, 

herb 


forest 

Climax 

Douglas-fir forest 

Catastophic 

Disturbance 

(Fire) 

Figure 2.6 Successional pathways in deep soil sites in the Puget Sound area (modified from Peter and Harrington 2004). 

Erickson (1995). These considerations of succession shed much light on the restoration process, 

since restoration must take into consideration the dynamic nature of Garry Oak communities. 

Chapter 3 (Natural Processes and Disturbance) provides a more in-depth look at fire and 

succession in relation to restoration. 

2.7 Acknowledgements 

Thanks to Brenda Costanzo, Carmen Cadrin, and Matt Fairbarns for information on maritime 

meadows and vernal pools; to Mike Miller for information on vernal pools and seeps; and to Lora 

Lea for review of the chapter. 

2-20 




Beckwith, B. 2010. Personal Communication. Assistant professor, University of Victoria School of 

Environmental Studies, Restoration of Natural Systems Program. 

Brown, K.J. and R.J. Hebda. 2002. Origin, development, and dynamics of coastal temperate conifer 

rainforests of southern Vancouver Island, Canada. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 32: 

352-372. 

Chappell, C.B. 2006. Upland plant associations of the Puget Trough ecoregion, Washington 

Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, Olympia, Washington. Natural 

Heritage Rep. 2006-01. www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/communities/pdf/intro.pdf (Accessed 

Mar. 6, 2010). 

Erickson, W. 1993. Garry oak ecosystems. Ecosystems in British Columbia at risk series. B.C. 

Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Wildlife Branch, Conservation Data Centre. www. 

env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/garryoak.pdf (Accessed March 10, 2010). 

Erickson, W. 1995. Classification and interpretation of Garry oak (Quercus garryana) plant 

communities and ecosystems in southwestern British Columbia. MSc thesis. University of 

Victoria, Department of Geography, Victoria, B.C. 

Erickson, W.R. and D.V. Meidinger. 2007. Garry oak (Quercus garryana) plant communities in 

British Columbia: a guide to identification. B.C. Ministry of Forests and Range, Research 

Branch, Victoria, B.C. Technical Report 040. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Tr/Tr040.pdf 

(Accessed Mar. 6, 2010). 

Fuchs, M.A. 2001. Towards a recovery strategy for Garry Oak and associated ecosystems in Canada: 

ecological assessment and literature review. Technical Report GBEI/EC-00-030. Environment 

Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Pacific and Yukon Region. 

Green, R. N. and K. Klinka. 1994. A field guide to site identification and interpretation for the 

Vancouver Forest Region. B.C. Ministry of Forests. Vancouver, B.C. 

Hebda, R. 2010. Personal Communication. Curator of Botany and Earth History, Royal British 

Columbia Museum. 

Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, Archives of Manitoba. Ground Plan of portion of Vancouver 

Island selected for New Establishment taken by James Douglas Esqr. Drawn by Adolphus Lee 

Lewes, L.S., 1842. HBCA G.2/25 [T11146]. 

Kluckner, M. 1986. Victoria—the way it was. Whitecap Books, North Vancouver, B.C. 


European contact to the present. Davidsonia 17(2):34-50. www.davidsonia.org/files/17_2_lea. 

pdf (Accessed 6 Mar. 2010). 

MacDougall, A.S., B.R. Beckwith, and C.Y. Maslovat. 2004. Defining conservation strategies with 

historical perspectives: a case study from a degraded oak grassland ecosystem. Conservation 

Biology 18 (2): 455-465. 

Madrone Environmental Services Ltd. (Madrone) 2008. Terrestrial ecosystem mapping of the 

coastal Douglas-fir biogeoclimatic zone. Prepared for the Integrated Land Management 

Bureau, Duncan, B.C. http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/acat/public/viewReport.do?reportId=15273 

(Accessed 6 Mar. 2010). 



2-21


McMinn, R.G., S. Eis, H.E. Hirvonen, E.T. Oswald, and J.P. Senyk. 1976. Native vegetation in 

British Columbia’s Capital Region. Environment Canada, Forest Service, Victoria, B.C. 

Parks Canada Agency. 2006a. Recovery strategy for multi-species at risk in Garry oak woodlands 

in Canada. In: Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Parks Canada Agency, Ottawa, 

Ont. www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/rs%5FGarry%5FOak%5FWoodland%5F0 

806%5Fe%2Epdf (Accessed 6 Mar. 2010). 

Parks Canada Agency. 2006b. Recovery strategy for multi-species at risk in maritime meadows 

associated with Garry oak ecosystems in Canada. In: Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy 

Series. Parks Canada Agency, Ottawa, Ont. www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/rs 

%5Fmaritime%5Fmeadow%5F0806%5FE%2Epdf (Accessed 6 Mar. 2010). 

Parks Canada Agency. 2006c. Recovery strategy for multi-species at risk in vernal pools and other 

ephemeral wet areas in Garry oak and associated ecosystems in Canada. In: Species at Risk Act 

Recovery Strategy Series. Parks Canada Agency, Ottawa, Ont. www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_ 

sara/files/plans/rs%5FVernal%5Fpool%5F0806%5Fe%2Epdf (Accessed 6 Mar. 2010). 

Parks Canada Agency. 2008. Report on potential critical habitat in Garry oak ecosystems. March 

31, 2008. Victoria, B.C. 

Pellatt, M.G., Hebda, R.J. & Mathewes, R.W. (2001). High resolution Holocene vegetation and 

climate from Core 1034B, ODP Leg 169S, Saanich Inlet, Canada. Marine Geology, 174: 211-222. 

Peter, D. and C. Harrington. 2004. Quercus garryana acorn production study. USDA Forest 

Service, PNW Research Station, Olympia, Wash. www.fs.fed.us/pnw/olympia/silv/oakstudies/acorn_survey/survey-background.shtml 


Pojar, J. 1980a. Threatened forest ecosystems of British Columbia. In: Proceedings of the 

Symposium: Threatened and Endangered Species and Habitats in British Columbia and the 

Yukon. R. Stace-Smith, L. Johns, and P. Joslin (editors). Federation of BC Naturalists, Douglas 

College, and B.C. Ministry of Environment, pp 28-39. 

Pojar, J. 1980b. Threatened habitats of rare vascular plants in British Columbia. In: Proceedings 

of the Symposium: Threatened and Endangered Species and Habitats in British Columbia 

and the Yukon. R. Stace-Smith, L. Johns, and P. Joslin (editors). Federation of BC Naturalists, 

Douglas College, and B.C. Ministry of Environment, pp 40-48. 

Roemer, H. 1972. Forest vegetation and environments on the Saanich Peninsula, Vancouver Island. 

PhD thesis. University of Victoria, Department of Biology, Victoria, B.C. 

Royal British Columbia Museum. No Date. Map of Garry oak potential – baseline. Royal BC 

Museum, Canadian Institute for Climate Studies, Canadian Center for Climate Modeling 

and Analysis, UVic Geography, Fortis BC, BC Ministry of Environment, and B.C. Ministry 

of Forests. http://pacificclimate.org/resources/climateimpacts/rbcmuseum/index. 

cgi?oak (Accessed March 23, 2010). 

Turner, N.J. 1999. Time to burn: traditional use of fire to enhance resource production by 

Aboriginal peoples in British Columbia. In: Indians, fire and the land in the Pacific Northwest. 

R. Boyd (editor). Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Ore. pp. 194-211. 

Walker, I.R. and M.G. Pellatt. 2001.Climate change and impacts in southern British Columbia—a 

palaeoenvironmental perspective. Climate Change Action Fund. Unpublished report. 

2-22 



Ward, P., G. Radcliffe, J. Kirkby, J. Illingworth, and C. Cadrin. 1998. Sensitive ecosystems 

inventory: East Vancouver Island and Gulf Islands 1993–1997. Volume 1: Methodology, 

ecological descriptions and results. Canadian Wildlife Service, Pacific and Yukon Region, 

British Columbia. Technical Report Series No. 320. http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/acat/ 

documents/r2124/SEI_4206_rpt1_1111625239116_8be42252200c4f0283b18cac66eed366.pdf 




2-23


Appendix 2.1 

Historical (pre-European settlement) and Present Day Distribution of Garry 

Oak Ecosystems 

Figure A2.1 Historical Garry Oak Ecosystems of Greater Victoria and Saanich Peninsula (pre-European settlement). 

2-24 



Figure A2.2 Present day (1997) Garry Oak Ecosystems of Greater Victoria and Saanich Peninsula. 



2-25


Figure A2.3 Historical Garry Oak Ecosystems of Cowichan Valley (pre-European settlement). 

2-26 



Figure A2.4 Present day (2006) Garry Oak Ecosystems of Cowichan Valley. 



2-27


Figure A2.5 Historical Garry Oak Ecosystems of Nanaimo (pre-European settlement). 

2-28 



Figure A2.6 Present day (2006) Garry Oak Ecosystems of Nanaimo. 



2-29


Figure A2.7 Historical Garry Oak Ecosystems of Comox Valley (pre-European settlement). 

2-30 



Figure A2.8 Present day Garry Oak Ecosystems of Comox Valley. 



2-31


2-32 







Chapter 3 

Natural Processes and Disturbance 

Contents 

3.1 Introduction................................................................................3 

3.1.1 Ecosystem Function.............................................................4 

3.1.2 Role of Disturbance.............................................................5 

3.2 Stand Dynamics in Savannah Systems: General Principles......7 

3.3 Stand Dynamics in Oak Savannahs and Prairies in the 

Pacific Northwest.............................................................................9 

3.3.1 Role of Fire and other Environmental Controls 

and Site Conditions .................................................................... 11 

3.3.2 Disturbance and Alien Invasive Species........................... 19 

3.3.3 Herbivory ..........................................................................20 

3.3.4 Plant Disease .................................................................... 23 



3-1


3.3.5 Climate Change and Garry Oak Ecosystems....................29 

3.4 Summary of Restoration Considerations................................ 32 

3.4.1 Understanding Site History.............................................. 32 

3.4.2 Garry Oak Ecosystems Stand Dynamics and 

Disturbances..............................................................................34 

3.5 References ...............................................................................34 

3-2 



Chapter 3 

Natural Processes and Disturbance 

by Shyanne Smith in collaboration with Duncan Morrison, Richard Hebda, Matt Fairbarns, 

and Christian Engelstoft 

Figure 3.1 Intact deep soil woodland at Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve. Photo: Shyanne Smith 


What is the goal of your site restoration? This should be one of your first questions as you design 

a restoration project. Given that we cannot predict community change and often do not even 

know what an ecosystem might have been like prior to human influence (Parks Canada Agency 

2000; Samways 2000; Choi 2004), how do we determine what to restore to? Restoration need 

not attempt to predict what a particular ecosystem would be without human interference, but 

rather should attempt to restore processes and attributes (Hebda 1999). For example, prescribed 1 

burning, livestock grazing, or mowing and native plant seeding may be used as restoration 

1 Prescribed fires are fires deliberately set by managers to produce disturbances or conditions that are beneficial to an 

ecosystem or that achieve management objectives. 



3-3


surrogates to replace the lighting of frequent fires and bulb digging by First Nations (Anderson 

and Barbour 2003) that would have historically maintained some Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) 

savannahs. Given the impacts of climate change, land use practices including fire suppression, 

and introduction of invasive alien species, we are unlikely to be able to restore to a specific 

historical condition and introduction of such a state is also not likely desirable 

due to the current stressors and changing climate (Harris et al. 2006). 

Understanding 

historical 

composition, 

structure, and 

processes is the 

first step toward 

restoring a 

degraded site to a 

functional, resilient 

ecosystem. 

Understanding historical composition, structure, and processes, however, 

is the first step toward restoring a degraded site to a functional, resilient 

ecosystem. 

A basic understanding of prairie, savannah, and woodland systems and their 

maintenance is an important foundation for interpreting site conditions 

and determining appropriate methods for implementing restoration. This 

chapter outlines principles of stand dynamics, some of the natural processes 

(dynamic interactions between living and non-living elements), and historical 

disturbances to consider when designing a restoration plan for Garry Oak and 

associated ecosystems. 

We first generally discuss ecosystem function and role of disturbance (Section 

3.1.1. and Section 3.1.2). We then discuss the concept of stand dynamics 

(Section 3.2), and apply this to our local systems and explain the roles of fire, 

alien invasive species, herbivory, plant disease, and climate change in the dynamics of Garry 

Oak and associated ecosystems (Section 3.3). We conclude (Section 3.4) by summarizing key 

restoration considerations that relate to natural processes and disturbances. 

3.1.1 Ecosystem Function 

Four fundamental processes govern ecosystems: water cycling, nutrient cycling, energy flow, and 

succession. Water cycling involves the capture, storage, and release of water from precipitation, 

surface flow, and subsurface flow, as well as water uptake and release by organisms. Plans for 

restoration should consider how each action will affect water cycling. Physical disturbances, such 

as ditches, irrigation channels, water bars, or even removal of vegetation or trail blazing, may 

disrupt the supply of water to a site. The loss of wetlands, which serve as sponges, reduces the 

ability of a site to store and gradually release water. Changes in vegetation structure, such as tree 

in-growth into a meadow, may increase rainfall interception water uptake from the soil and thus 

reduce the availability of water to other species. The capacity of soil to absorb and store water may 

be significantly reduced by even seemingly minor changes, such as the replacement of perennial 

species by annual grasses or by trampling which reduces soil porosity. 

Changes in nutrient cycling may also have profound effects on ecosystem structure and 

function. For instance, nitrogen 2 often limits plant growth in natural ecosystems in our region. 

Much of our native flora is well-adapted to nitrogen-poor conditions. An increase in the amount 

of nitrogen available for plant growth may benefit numerous alien species that are profligate 

nitrogen users and give them a competitive edge over native plants. Soil nitrogen levels may be 

2 The key component of proteins that constitute much of biological tissue. 

3-4 



boosted by inputs from nearby agricultural and urban activities. Some alien invasive species 

may even increase the availability of nitrogen; for instance, Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) 

has a symbiotic relationship with nitrogen-fixing bacteria that are attached to their roots. The 

extra boost of nitrogen helps broom plants grow vigorously and may increase the amount of soil 

nitrogen available to other invasive plants. Micro-organisms and soil fauna (such as earthworms) 

break down decaying vegetation and release nutrients that are then recycled in the ecosystem. 

Rainwater could flush many of these nutrients deep into the soil, but plant roots can intercept 

and recycle many nutrients. Changes in plant community composition may alter the rooting zone 

structure enough to reduce the recycling of nutrients within the soil. 

Energy cycling is driven by the ability of plants to capture energy from sunlight, carbon from 

the atmosphere, and water from the soil to create sugars which fuel ecosystems. Plants, animals, 

fungi, and bacteria use these fuels to drive their life processes, and as the fuels are used up, the 

carbon they contain is released back into the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide. Rapid 

and effective carbon cycling may be blocked in some ecosystems, resulting in a buildup of plant 

litter, wood, and soil organic matter. An increase in plant litter may reduce the ability of light 

rainfalls to replenish soil moisture and may prevent some plants from successfully seeding into 

some areas. Low levels of soil organic matter, on the other hand, tend to reduce the ability of the 

soil to act as a sponge and store water for plant growth. Herbaceous plants, particularly grasses, 

“pump” large amounts of carbon into the upper soil as their old roots die and decay. Trees and 

shrubs, in contrast, release a greater proportion of their dead tissue onto the soil surface as litter. 

Ecological succession is an ongoing process that follows a more or less predictable sequence of 

changes, that at times causes lakes to be overgrown and eventually end up in the current climax 

forest ecosystem. The successional trajectory is influenced by local circumstances such as weather, 

stochastic events, and seed sources. This is also a “force” many management objectives aim to 

keep at bay. For example, Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) or Grand Fir (Abies grandis) ingrowth 

is driven by natural succession. At times, ecosystems stabilize at intermediate succession 

stages until circumstances change. The lessons from considering these general processes are: 

1) Successful restoration may involve preliminary assessment of more than stand composition 

and structure 

2) Barriers to successful restoration may not be apparent immediately and their detection may 

require a strategy that considers principles of ecological function such as those described by 

Harwell et al. (1999) as Essential Ecosystem Characteristics 

3.1.2 Role of Disturbance 

The current widespread decrease in species diversity in prairies and increasing encroachment 

of prairies and open savannahs are examples of the need for active management of disturbancebased 

ecosystems 3 . Such early- to mid-successional ecosystems, such as deep soil Garry Oak 

communities, depend on disturbance to prevent succession into conifer forest. Ecological 

disturbance can be defined broadly as “any relatively discrete event in time that disrupts 

3 Most ecosystems are “disturbance-based” to some degree, meaning that they are occasionally impacted by disturbance, 

but savannah or grassland systems like the Garry Oak ecosystems discussed exhibit high levels of disturbance. 



3-5


Ecological 

disturbance can 

be defined broadly 

as “any relatively 

discrete event in 

time that disrupts 

ecosystem, 

community 

or population 

structure and 

changes resource, 

substrate 

availability, or 

the physical 

environment”. 

ecosystem, community or population structure and changes resource, 

substrate availability, or the physical environment” (White and Pickett 

1985). Thus, disturbance includes processes that historically operated in 

Garry Oak ecosystems, such as fires and bulb digging, or simulations of such 

disturbances, such as mowing or weeding. 

If the integrity of ecosystems that have historically been maintained by 

First Nations is to be protected, management must implement actions that 

simulate First Nations management activities (Anderson and Barbour 2003). 

Re-introducing disturbance, however, does not necessarily mean that plant 

communities will respond the same way as they did historically. 

There are three potential difficulties with re-introducing disturbances: 

1) Historical dynamics are not fully understood because they functioned in 

ways that are not apparent today 

2) Historical disturbances do not function as before due to factors such 

as habitat loss, population decline, and community change due to invasive 

species 

3) There are high costs and risks associated with re-introducing 

disturbance in the modern (settled) landscape (MacDougall and 

Turkington 2006, 2007) 

Because present conditions and species composition differ from the historical state, the same 

disturbance will not necessarily have the same effect as it did historically (Hobbs and Huenneke 

1992) and our understanding of how plant communities respond to disturbance is still limited 

due to the complexity of the process. Disturbances interact with other ecosystem-level processes 

such as production, biomass accumulation, energetics, and nutrient cycling, and change the 

structure and dynamics of natural communities. Because historical disturbances have largely been 

suppressed in our natural areas, plant communities have tended to become dominated by a few 

competitive, often invasive, species (Wilsey and Polley 2006). 

In addition, different anthropogenically driven disturbances, such as increased herbivore pressure, 

eutrophication (i.e., excess nutrients in aquatic systems), and soil disruption have facilitated the 

establishment of alien invasive species worldwide (Jenkins and Pimm 2003). 

There are three potential difficulties with re-introducing disturbances: 

1. Historical dynamics are not fully understood because they functioned in ways that are not 

apparent today 

2. Historical disturbances do not function as before due to factors such as habitat loss, 

population decline, and community change due to invasive species 

3. There are high costs and risks associated with re-introducing disturbance in the modern 

(settled) landscape (MacDougall and Turkington 2006, 2007) 

3-6 



The suppression of historical disturbances may also be maintaining the 

dominance of alien invasive species in many cases (MacDougall and 

Turkington 2005). Because disturbance plays an important role in influencing 

the structure and composition of ecosystems, it is imperative to understand 

the historical disturbance patterns at a particular restoration site, as well as 

the current disturbances, and their influence on ecosystem composition and 

structure and ultimately on restoration goals. 

3.2 Stand Dynamics in Savannah Systems: General 

Principles 

The term “stand dynamics” generally refers to changes in forest stand 

structure 4 over time, including stand behaviour, during and following 

disturbances. Stand dynamics, therefore, encompasses natural processes and 

disturbances that affect the species and structure of an ecosystem that has a 

tree component. 

A basic 

understanding of 

prairie, savannah, 

and woodland 

systems and their 

maintenance is 

an important 

foundation for 

interpreting site 

conditions and 

determining 

appropriate 

methods for 

implementing 

restoration. 

Savannahs are broadly defined as tree-grass or woody-herbaceous 

communities and are characterized by the co-dominance of tree and 

herbaceous layers (Scholes and Archer 1997). These communities typically experience a drought 

season, which limits tree growth. Savannahs are generally classified as a state between open 

prairie or meadow and closed-canopy 5 woodland. 

Savannahs are not simply prairies with trees. Pavlovic et al. (2006) found that the species 

composition in oak woodlands in Indiana was most strongly influenced by the amount of canopy 

cover rather than by other environmental factors, at least at a fine scale (at a broader level, soil 

productivity was the primary variable). Similar findings were obtained for oak woodlands and 

savannahs in California: vegetation in the understorey of oak savannahs and woodlands was 

different and more productive than vegetation in open grasslands. The oak understorey also 

reacted differently than vegetation in open grasslands to both the presence and removal of grazing 

pressure (Frost et al. 1997). 

A number of studies describe the encroachment of trees into savannahs, 

but the conditions that maintain savannah communities vary and are poorly Savannahs are 

understood (Sankaran et al. 2004); therefore, questions remain about how 

not simply prairies 

savannahs develop, how trees and the ground layer of vegetation interact, and with trees. 

how savannahs are maintained (Scholes and Archer 1997; Jeltsch et al. 2000). 

Descriptions of savannahs worldwide (including temperate North American 

savannahs) reveal a general pattern of transition into forest over the last 50–300 

years (Archer 1989; Scholes and Archer 1997; Foster and Shaff 2003; Moore and Huffman 2004). 

4 Stand structure refers to forest structure in terms of tree species and/or sizes of trees. 

5 A closed canopy is created by sufficient shading by trees that have grown enough to fill any gaps that allow light to 

penetrate to the ground surface. 



3-7


It is important 

to consider 

disturbance in 

light of your 

restoration goals, 

the current state 

of your restoration 

site, and potential 

effects of 

disturbance given 

the changed 

conditions. 

Climatic and soil characteristics, fire, herbivory, biotic interactions, and 

human activity have all been identified as factors involved in this transitional 

process. Although there have been many attempts to create comprehensive 

models of savannah dynamics, the variability among sites means that a 

careful assessment of site-specific conditions is necessary before beginning 

restoration. 

The process of forest encroachment has become an important management 

concern for North American savannahs (Arno and Gruell 1986; McPherson 

1997). Encroachment can be divided into two categories: clump coalescence 

and gradual progression. Clump coalescence occurs when individual trees or 

shrubs establish in patches within openings, leading to further encroachment, 

whereas gradual progression occurs when woody vegetation slowly expands 

from the perimeter of openings. These two modes of forest encroachment 

have been described in field studies but have rarely been related to fire 

regimes and anthropogenic factors. For example, a study of forest progression 

in Africa indicates that increased anthropogenic fire frequency produces a 

shift from more rapid climate-driven clump coalescence to more gradual progression from the 

edges (Favier et al. 2004). 

The configuration of a habitat patch in relation to adjoining habitat patches and the site’s grazing 

history and topography have also been found to affect plant community composition (Foster 

and Tilman 2003; Hersperger and Forman 2003). Thus, when you look at a given savannah 

site to decide how stable it is, it may be important to look at the adjacent forested habitats 

for clues. The successional state of habitat patches and the level of contrast between patches 

and their surrounding landscape will typically result in unique patch dynamics and life forms, 

making generalizations difficult and potentially misleading (Watson 2002). When savannahs 

are fragmented and occur as patches within a matrix of forested and developed land, this 

increased patchiness may also result in an elevated rate of forest encroachment. Patterns of forest 

encroachment can also vary between nearby habitats due to local differences, including unique 

human land use history. 

In general, evidence indicates that virtually all savannah ecosystems have had a long history 

of relatively frequent, low-intensity fires. In the past, many fires were started by lightning, but 

the landscape management activities of First Nations peoples were responsible for much of 

the regularity of the fire regime 6 across North America. European settlement has disrupted the 

fire regime in most locations. The predominant post-settlement pattern has been one of fire 

suppression 7 or complete fire exclusion. These changes in the disturbance regime have resulted in 

dramatic changes to the composition, structure, and function of savannah ecosystems. As 

6 The term fire regime refers to the pattern of fire that occurs over time (e.g., the average interval between fires and/or fire 

severity when fires occur). 

7 Fire suppression refers to active human intervention to prevent fires from occurring or at least restricting them to small 

areas through fire fighting activities. 

3-8 



expected, the precise role of fire, and the changes that have accompanied fire exclusion, vary 

among vegetation types. 

Re-introduction of fire or simple introduction of another disturbance is not always an easy or 

effective solution to restoring savannahs. Savannahs that have historically been maintained by fire 

or other disturbance may experience increased invasion by alien species if disturbance is returned 

to the system, creating additional restoration difficulties. Re-introduction of fire in temperate 

grasslands often benefits many alien species, to the detriment of native ones (Agee 1993; Grace 

et al. 2001). It is important to remember that fire regimes within a given system may also vary 

between patches of similar habitat (Wardle 2002), thereby making it necessary to determine sitespecific 

fire prescriptions. It is important to consider disturbance in light of your restoration goals, 

the current state of your restoration site, and potential effects of disturbance given the changed 

conditions (see Case Study 1 in Chapter 8). 

3.3 Stand Dynamics in Oak Savannahs and Prairies in the Pacific 

Northwest 

Savannah ecosystems are some of the most altered ecosystems worldwide, and much of 

North America’s oak (Quercus spp.) savannah ecosystems have been lost to development. The 

encroachment of woody species into oak savannahs presents additional complications, since a 

current lack of adult oak recruitment has been observed in a number of different oak savannah 

and forest types (Russell and Fowler 2002; Brudvig and Asbjornsen 2005; Gedalof et al. 2006). 

Throughout North America, the observed decline in oak has been attributed 

to various factors, such as selective logging of oaks, catastrophic fires, fire 

suppression, poor seed production, seedling damage, shading and competition 

from other tree species and alien grasses, and chestnut blight in the eastern 

United States (Abrams 1992; Lorimer et al. 1994; McEwan et al. 2006). 

However, dendrochronological analyses of Garry Oak and Douglas-fir stand 

structures in British Columbia indicate that both tree species increased in 

abundance in coastal savannahs and prairies following European settlement 

(Gedalof et al. 2006; Smith 2007). 

Factors involved in encroachment of conifers into savannahs are not well 

understood but links have been identified among fire suppression, increased 

deer browsing, and lack of oak recruitment in many oak forests and savannahs 

in North America. In some oak savannahs, conifers appear to be recruiting 

successfully, possibly as a result of increased oak establishment immediately 

following European settlement and the suppression of fire (Agee and 

Dunwiddie 1984; Peter and Harrington 2002; Gedalof et al. 2006; Smith 2007). 

In order to restore an oak savannah effectively, restoration practitioners need 

to understand both the processes that historically maintained the savannah 

and the processes and conditions that affect the current stand structure and 

regeneration. 

In order to restore 

an oak savannah 

effectively, 

restoration 

practitioners need 

to understand 

both the processes 

that historically 

maintained the 

savannah and the 

processes and 

conditions that 

affect the current 

stand structure and 

regeneration. 

Historically, fire was instrumental in inhibiting shrub and tree encroachment (including oak) into 

open prairies. It also maintained the open vegetation structure of oak savannahs and parklands. 



3-9


Figure 3.1 Stand development model of the impacts of different disturbance regimes, particularly 

fire suppression, on different types of Garry Oak woodland in the South Puget Sound area of 

Washington. Disturbance regimes are representative of those that have dominated the landscape 

since European settlement. Progression from white to light gray to dark grey boxes indicates a 

transition from historical oak to altered oak to non-oak habitats. Redrawn with permission from 

Hanna and Dunn (1996). 

McCoy et al. (2006) studied historical Garry Oak ecosystems by examining charcoal and fossil 

pollen from lake sediments on Pender Island and Vancouver Island. Their work shows low fire 

activity prior to 1780 AD, increased fires between 1780 and 1860, and little fire activity after about 

1940. Hanna and Dunn (1996) proposed a stand-development model that illustrates the impacts 

of post-European settlement disturbance regimes, particularly fire suppression, on different types 

of Garry Oak stands in the South Puget Sound area of Washington (Figure 3.1). This model shows 

changes occurring in many Garry Oak stands throughout the species’ range. 

Current stem densities within the stands are as much as an order of magnitude higher than they 

were at the time of European settlement (Hanna and Dunn 1996; Gedalof et al. 2006; Smith 2007). 

Fire stimulates oak sprouting but causes high seedling mortality; therefore, in the absence of fire, 

oak (and possibly conifer/maple) density increases, conifers establish in the understorey, and 

savannahs convert to conifer forests (Sugihara et al. 1987; Smith 2007). 

Smith (2007) and Gedalof et al. (2006) studied tree ring chronologies, stand structure and 

recruitment, and understorey composition at representative Garry Oak ecosystem sites on 

Vancouver Island and the southern Gulf Islands. One common factor observed at B.C. sites was 

an increase in stand recruitment at the time of European settlement. This recruitment was most 

likely related to increased disturbance and/or disruption of land use and fire regimes at that time. 

Increased site disturbance resulted in increased opportunities for tree seedling establishment, 

3-10 



and in the absence of repeated disturbance, these pulses of regeneration 

established dense woodlands and forests. Rates of forest encroachment varied 

considerably between sites depending on environmental conditions, land 

use history, fire history, or other natural disturbances at the site. All sites 

exhibited a high degree of conifer encroachment as a result of disturbance 

and land clearing activity concurrent with European settlement (except for 

those sites where encroachment was environmentally controlled, such as on 

exposed islets or steep slopes). Grazing/browsing pressure, exposure and/or 

salt spray, adjacent forest, slope, and soil type/depth influence encroachment 

patterns and rates in oak savannahs in B.C. For example, on Tumbo Island 

in the southern Gulf Islands, there is a clump coalescence pattern of 

encroachment, as well as heavy browsing by deer. Forest progression is slower 

than at sites with gradual forest progression because browsing pressure 

restricts conifer establishment. Otherwise, gradual forest progression is the 

typical form of encroachment that can be expected to occur in these Garry Oak sites, and the rate 

of encroachment is linked to browsing pressure, site disturbance, adjacent forest cover (and seed 

source), understorey vegetation type and density, and degree of canopy closure. Fire-maintained 

savannahs are much more likely to be more mesic, less steep, and have a deeper, more organic 

soil than environmentally maintained (e.g., shallow soil rocky environment) savannahs which 

are more likely to have harsher site conditions, and readily show impacts from herbivores (e.g., 

presence of alien invasive grasses, disturbed soil, and clipped vegetation). 

3.3.1 Role of Fire and other Environmental Controls and Site Conditions 

What do we Know about the Historical Role of Climate, Fire, and First Nations 

Management? 

Grazing/browsing 

pressure, exposure 

and/or salt spray, 

adjacent forest, 

slope, and soil type/ 

depth influence 

encroachment 

patterns and rates 

in oak savannahs in 

B.C. 

Burning by aboriginal peoples is widely thought to have had an important influence on the 

composition and structure of Garry Oak communities (Tveten and Fonda 1999; Thysell and Carey 

2001). Fire history, dynamics, and effects within Garry Oak and associated prairie and mixed 

forest ecosystems have been studied throughout the Pacific Northwest from California to British 

Columbia. These studies have documented the ubiquitous use of fire by First Nations peoples 

prior to European settlement. 

Charcoal in sediment cores taken on southeastern Vancouver Island indicates that fire activity 

gradually increased between 11,500 and 10,000 ybp 8 , presumably as a result of warming, highintensity 

storms and lightning strikes. The sediment cores further indicate that between 10,000 

and 7000 ybp, fires were more frequent and not stand-replacing, and were most likely the result 

of drier conditions at that time. Charcoal levels dropped between 7000 and 4000 ybp at lowland 

sites as the climate again grew moister. However, at about 2000 ybp, fire activity increased at 

several sites, even though the climate continued to moisten and cool. This increase in fire activity 

is attributed to burning by First Nations peoples (Brown and Hebda 2002). 

The functions of First Nations management activities varied from place to place, but for the most 

8 ypb = years before present. 



3-11


part were associated with directly enhancing important food resources such as camas, berries, 

and Bracken Fern (Pteridium aquilinium), improving the ease of capture or collection of game or 

other resources (such as deer), or making travel across land easier (Agee 1993; Anderson 2007). 

It has also been reported that burning was done to reduce the prevalence 

of insect pests and disease (Anderson 2007). The precise characteristics of 

Tree ring analyses 

at several Garry 

Oak savannah sites 

in B.C. indicate 

that, historically, 

the landscape had 

less tree cover 

and regular lowintensity 

fires. 

the fires are largely unknown, but historical accounts and tree ring analyses 

indicate that they were ignited in late summer and fall, burned frequently, 

perhaps annually in some places, and covered large expanses of the landscape. 

This regular fire regime prevented the build up of fuels; consequently, fires 

were generally flashy and of low intensity, and were carried quickly through 

the landscape by the dry herbaceous understorey. Tree ring analyses at 

several Garry Oak savannah sites in B.C. indicate that, historically, the 

landscape had less tree cover and regular low-intensity fires (Smith 2007). 

Historical descriptions of B.C.’s Garry Oak ecosystems during and after 

European settlement support these findings and suggest that the landscape 

was a mosaic of vegetation types, determined mainly 

by topography, soil depth, and fire (see Chapter 2). This 

mosaic would have consisted of varying patch sizes from small rocky outcrops 

to large, deep-soil savannahs (MacDougall et al. 2004). Pollen analysis of soil 

profiles confirms the mosaic nature of the vegetation (McDadi and Hebda 

2008). 

First Nations peoples also introduced other disturbances to savannahs and 

prairies. In particular, the cultivation of camas and other bulbs is believed to 

have played an important role in maintaining an abundance of forbs in Garry 

Oak and associated ecosystems. First Nations peoples actively dug and sowed 

bulbs and corms, thereby practicing a form of tillage that aerated the soil and 

encouraged forb growth (Turner 1999; Anderson 2007). 

Fire exclusion has 

been described as 

the most serious 

ecological problem 

facing remnant 

Garry Oak stands 

that are protected 

from development. 

The effects of fire exclusion, which began after European settlement around 1850, are important 

to consider. Fire exclusion has been described as the most serious ecological problem facing 

remnant Garry Oak stands that are protected from development (Sugihara and Reed 1987; Agee 

1993; Hanna and Dunn 1996). Disturbance by fire allows Garry Oak woodlands to persist in deeper 

Pellow Islet is an example of 

a small islet where shallow 

soils, wind, and salt spray 

restrict vegetative growth. 

Photo: Emily Gonzales 

3-12 



soil sites that would otherwise succeed to conifer forest. Large-scale conversions of prairie and 

oak savannah to forest have been documented in California, Oregon, Washington, and British 

Columbia. Estimates indicate that up to 50% of all Garry Oak woodlands that 

are suitable for conifer establishment might be lost within 30 years (Agee 

1993). 

Aboriginal burning, however, may not have been a factor in maintaining 

all oak savannahs. Agee and Dunwiddie (1984) identified a fire rotation 

of approximately 80 years on Yellow Island in the San Juan Islands. Shrub 

and tree invasion on this island is thought to be linked to above-average 

summer precipitation rather than to a change in the fire regime. Conifer 

encroachment was also not an issue at some sites in Canada’s Gulf Islands, 

where forest development was restricted by environmental controls such as 

extremely well-drained or thin soils, steep slopes, and exposure to wind or 

salt spray (Figure 3.2 and 3.3) (Smith 2007). Soils in Garry Oak ecosystems in 

B.C. are often shallow or have excessive drainage (Roemer 1972, 1993), and are 

often nitrogen poor, which reduces competition from other native species. 

It is important to note that some Garry Oak communities are maintained 

through a combination of abiotic conditions, such as precipitation and soil 

characteristics, rather than through disturbance such as fire. 

Effects of Prescribed Fire and Fire Surrogates on Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Prescribed fire is in use as a restoration tool in Garry Oak and associated prairie ecosystems at 

a number of locations in California, Oregon, and Washington. The use of prescribed burning is 

only at an early, experimental stage in Garry Oak ecosystems in B.C. Most often, prescribed fire 

requires the prior manual removal of ladder fuels, such as shrubs, and may require the removal 

of woody debris and thatch, depending on site conditions. Additionally, individual trees may 

need to be manually removed to achieve the desired stand density. A Practical Guide to Oak 

Some Garry Oak 

communities are 

maintained through 

a combination 

of abiotic 

conditions, such as 

precipitation and 

soil characteristics, 

rather than through 

disturbance such 

as fire. 

Figure 3.2 

Krummholtz oaks 

on an islet in the 

southern Gulf 

Islands, subject to 

salt spray and wind. 

Photo: Brian Reader 



3-13


Figure 3.3 Extremely 

steep slopes can be 

environmentally maintained 

as open savannah or prairie. 

Photos: Shyanne Smith 

Release (Harrington and Devine 2006; www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr666.pdf) provides an 

introduction to the release of oak stands. 

Fire surrogates are also used when the use of fire is not practical or desirable. Surrogates 

include mowing and raking or other manual removal of vegetation or woody material. A study 

in a savannah dominated by alien perennial grasses (Kentucky Bluegrass, (Poa pratensis) and 

Orchard-grass, (Dactylis glomerata)) in B.C. indicates that annual prescribed fire and fire 

surrogates were similarly effective in controlling the alien invasive grass species and encouraging 

perennial forb species over a five year period (MacDougall and Turkington 2007) (See Case Study 

2 in Chapter 8). However, assessment of manual disturbance (thinning) of oak woodlands in 

Oregon after four to seven years found that the single treatment resulted in increased annual 

3-14 



species cover, including a doubling of alien annual grass cover, and a decrease in native perennial 

species (Perchemlides et al 2008). These findings illustrate the need for ongoing management and 

site-specific research and monitoring. 

Once a savannah converts to forest, it becomes increasingly difficult to successfully implement 

prescribed fire, or otherwise restore the ecosystem to a savannah state. The benefits of using fire 

as a restoration tool also vary due to complications such as the responses of invasive species to fire 

and altered species composition (see Section 3.3.2 below, and Chapter 9: Alien Invasive Species). 

In addition, prescribed fire alone, even over multiple years, can result in increased woody 

understorey cover due to widespread sprouting from tree bases and stumps (Chiang et al. 2005). 

Prescribed fire should be considered as a potential restoration tool, to be used in conjunction 

with other restoration techniques, including invasive species removal, reintroduction 

or enhancement of native species, litter removal, and stand and/ 

or soil modification. 

Once a savannah 

converts to 

forest, it becomes 

increasingly difficult 

to successfully 

implement 

prescribed fire, or 

otherwise restore 

the ecosystem to a 

savannah state. 

Experimental prescribed fire at 

Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve 

(see Case Study 2 in Chapter 8). 

Photo: Tim Ennis 



3-15


Timing 

The frequency and timing of burns or surrogate management activities are important 

considerations for restoration and management. High-frequency burning (three or more times 

per decade) can prevent development of an oak sapling layer and canopy infilling, while lowfrequency 

burning (less than two fires per decade) can produce stands with 

dense thickets of saplings (Peterson and Reich 2001); however, the optimal 

Timing prescribed 

burns or similar 

treatments (cutting 

and raking or 

weeding) for midsummer, 

when 

alien invasive 

grasses are at 

their reproductive 

peak, was found 

to be dramatically 

more effective in 

controlling alien 

invasive grass 

abundance. 

timing and frequency of prescribed burning of Garry Oak stands in B.C. 

are largely unknown. Given the summer drought period that Garry Oak 

ecosystems in B.C. experience, fires would likely have historically occurred 

between July and October, and would have been set after camas harvesting 

was completed and most vegetation had senesced. Fires likely occurred 

patchily across the landscape, creating a mosaic of different communities and 

stand structures. 

Effects on Plant Species 

The effects of fire on herbaceous vegetation are not limited to the inhibition 

of woody shrubs and trees. Different species of plants respond differently to 

the changes in temperature, litter, soil moisture, soil chemistry, microclimate, 

and soil biota that are caused by fire, and they exhibit varying levels of 

vulnerability to direct damage (Daubenmire 1968). Fire-adapted forbs and 

grasses that evolved and persisted in these ecosystems possess various 

structural adaptations (e.g., they are capable of dying back to living tissues 

near or below the ground surface) and life history strategies (e.g., late summer 

die-back of above-ground parts) that enable them to tolerate frequent, 

low-intensity fires. Bulb and rhizome-forming species, and species with 

fire-adapted seed strategies, tend to be favoured by fire (Sugihara and Reed 

1987). Timing prescribed burns or similar treatments (cutting and raking or weeding) for midsummer, 

when alien invasive grasses are at their reproductive peak, was found to be dramatically 

more effective in controlling alien invasive grass abundance, compared to late season burns at the 

Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve (MacDougall and Turkington (2007). 

A study in Oregon found that four to seven years after fuel-reduction thinning treatment (cutting 

and chipping or cutting and pile-burning), native annual species had expanded more than other 

functional groups, particularly when a seed source was available (Perchemlides et al. 2008). These 

native annuals included species of Clarkia, Epilobium, Lotus, and Plagiobothrys. Several species 

in these genera are rare in our B.C. Garry Oak ecosystems. The results of this study demonstrate 

the need for careful restoration plan design. If your goal is to restore, for instance, a population 

of a rare annual, you may decide to implement manual fuel-reduction treatments that open the 

canopy and create soil disturbance. If your goal is to restore native perennials, you would instead 

likely choose methods which would create less soil disturbance, while still removing canopy or 

thatch, such as cutting and raking and/or low-intensity prescribed burning during the dormant 

season of the target perennial. 

Effects on Plant Communities 

Plant community responses to fire and fire surrogates are complex due to competitive interactions 

among resident species, and many other factors, including microhabitat, weather, seasonality 

3-16 



Soil Disturbance and Rare Annuals 

Photos: Shyanne Smith 

GOERT members discuss the role of disturbance in creating a carpet of a Threatened 

annual, Macoun’s Meadowfoam (Limnanthes macounii), that appeared after plowing of a 

firebreak (Left photo). A surprising find, it is thought that individuals of this species had 

persisted at low, undetected numbers in a small vernal seep area. When the firebreak was 

cleared, the disturbance created conditions needed for the population to expand. Soil 

disturbance has also been observed to be important for several other rare annual forbs. Soil 

disturbance by feral goats at the site of the largest population of another rare annual, Slender 

Popcornflower (Plagiobothrys tenellus), is also thought to have played a key role in the 

persistence of the species (Right photo). 

and frequency of burning or disturbance, and fire or other disturbance intensity. A compilation 

of responses of numerous species to fire is available in the Fire Effects Information System (www. 

fs.fed.us/database/feis). There are also several resources available from the USDA Forest Service 

that summarize the effects of wildland fire on flora, fauna, soils, water, air, and alien invasive 

plant species. The effects of re-introducing fire or other disturbance in the presence of alien 

invasive plants, particularly grasses, is a concern because many of these species are well-adapted 

to disturbance and are able to establish in disturbed areas more rapidly than native species. See 

Section 3.3.2 for more information on alien invasive plants. Care must be taken to ensure that 

fire, or similar disturbance is applied during the reproductive peak of these grasses and after 

native vegetation has senesced. Fire, or other disturbance, as a restoration tool was found to most 

effective where native flora was already present (MacDougall and Turkington 2007; Perchemlides 

et al. 2008). Native seed addition following burning may be beneficial, or even necessary, in more 

degraded sites. 



3-17


Effects on Animals 

Faunal responses to fire and other disturbance have received considerably less attention than has 

plant responses. The Fire Effects Information System (2011) provides some information about 

responses of a number of vertebrate species to fire, including some species found in Garry Oak 

and associated ecosystems in B.C. The responses of vertebrates to a given 

frequency of burning depend largely on how fire impacts vegetation structure. 

For example, animals that are associated with grasslands and other open 

A compilation 

ecosystems tend to benefit from a frequent fire regime. Many species, in 

of responses of 

fact, rely on fire or other disturbances for the maintenance of their habitats. 

numerous species 

However, some grassland species are favoured by conditions that immediately 

to fire is available 

follow a burn, while others do better under conditions that occur a few years 

in the Fire Effects later (Clark and Kaufman 1990; Johnson 1997). Fire also creates standing 

Information System dead and downed wood, which favours species that depend on these habitat 

(www.fs.fed.us/ elements (e.g., Western Bluebird [Sialia mexicana] and Lewis’s Woodpecker 

database/feis). [Melanerpes lewis]). These and other birds that rely on coastal prairie and 

oak savannahs have declined or become extirpated from the region (Huff et 

al. 2005; GOERT 2002). Temporal factors, such as the seasonality of burning, 

are also important in determining the effects of fire on animals. For example, direct mortality or 

disruption of breeding may occur if burning happens during critical periods in an animal’s life 

cycle (Cavitt 2000). 

Like vertebrates, invertebrate species vary in their response to fire. Some invertebrates are 

favoured by conditions that immediately follow a burn, whereas others do better a few years 

later. In contrast to highly mobile vertebrates, invertebrates are more vulnerable to direct firecaused 

mortality (Nicolai 1991; Swengel 1996; Siemann et al. 1997). Because fire suppression has 

caused increased fuel loads in most places, fires tend to burn hotter than they did historically, 

thus increasing mortality risk. Maintaining populations of invertebrates that are vulnerable to 

fire-caused mortality but depend on fire-maintained ecosystems requires a staggered burning 

strategy, such as rotating burns among portions of the site (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1984; 

Schultz and Crone 1998). Thus, management must incorporate not only the disturbance process 

itself, but variation in time and space to support a complex of species over time. Habitat patches 

in fragmented landscapes must be large enough to accommodate such complex disturbance 

patterns. 

Research and Monitoring 

Experimental work is currently being undertaken to learn more about fire, including the use 

of prescribed fire, in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems in B.C. The Nature Conservancy 

of Canada and Andrew MacDougall of the University of Guelph have led this research at the 

Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve near Duncan B.C. (see Prescribed Fire case study (2) in Chapter 8). 

The Fire and Stand Dynamics Steering Committee (www.goert.ca/about_fire_stand_dynamics. 

php), operating under the Restoration and Management Recovery Implementation Group 

of GOERT, is also working to design and implement the use of techniques to manage stand 

3-18 



structure, promote awareness about woody encroachment and management 

by land managers, and further fire and stand dynamics research. 

In general, the use of prescribed fire has been found to reduce the cover of 

alien invasive herbs in California (Sugihara and Reed 1987; Hastings and Barry 

1997) and to suppress C3 grasses 9 (including native species) and increase 

growth and reproduction of some native forbs here in B.C. There have 

been mixed results, however, at Fort Lewis (Tveten 1997; Tveten and Fonda 

1999), Mima Mounds (Schuller 1997), and Yellow Island (Dunwiddie 1997) 

in Washington. These results underscore the need for caution in applying 

prescribed fire. Potential sites must be carefully assessed, and burning or other 

disturbance should be used within an adaptive management framework, in 

which management actions are applied experimentally, results are monitored, 

and management is refined according to the results obtained. See Chapter 7 

(Inventory and Monitoring) for further information on adaptive management 

methods. 

3.3.2 Disturbance and Alien Invasive Species 

Controlling Invasive Species with Fire or Other Disturbance 

Fire can be effective in controlling some invasive alien species, such as Scotch 

Broom, if repeated over a number of years (Dunn 1998). However, other 

invasive species in Garry Oak ecosystems in British Columbia can be favoured 

by fire. MacDougall has been studying the effects of fire and invasive grasses 

on plant diversity in a deep-soil Garry Oak savannah for a number of years. His research indicates 

that most annuals and other species that have rapid seed production and high seedling growth 

rates, and that quickly colonize disturbed areas, are favoured by disturbance, but some invasive 

alien grasses (such as some bluegrass species) actually fare best in the absence of disturbance in 

this system (MacDougall and Turkington 2004). Exotic bluegrass species are able to dominate in 

undisturbed systems due to their ability to tolerate reduced resource availability under intense 

competition. MacDougall’s research has also demonstrated that native species are recruitmentlimited 

in invaded Garry Oak ecosystems, meaning that their scarcity, compared to non-native 

species, may be a result of fewer available native plant seeds (MacDougall and Turkington 2006). 

In addition, available light appears to be the primary limiting factor for native forb growth. 

Removing biomass (including thatch and leaf litter) before alien grasses set seed has been shown 

to effectively increase growth of several native perennial forbs (MacDougall and Turkington 2007). 

Invasive Plants 

Little is known about the relationships among different understorey plant species and 

communities and the forms and rates of forest encroachment in savannahs. However, alien 

invasive plants can be considered a disturbance or something that changes the “ecosystem, 

community or population structure and changes resource, substrate availability, or the physical 

Potential sites 

must be carefully 

assessed, and 

burning or other 

disturbance 

should be used 

within an adaptive 

management 

framework, in 

which management 

actions are applied 

experimentally, 

results are 

monitored, and 

management is 

refined according 

to the results 

obtained. 

9 C3 grasses: Grasses are divided into two groups, C3 and C4, based on their photosynthetic pathways for carbon fixation. 

C3 grasses are referred to as “cool season grasses” while C4 plants are considered “warm season grasses”. 



3-19


environment” (White and Pickett 1985). Research has demonstrated that 

An example of an savannahs are not simply “prairies with trees” (Leach and Givnish 1999), and 

often-overlooked 

that replacement of dominant native perennial grasses with alien annuals is 

associated with decreased oak recruitment (D’Antonio and Vitousek 1992; 

alien invasive that 

Gordon and Rice 2000). Other studies have shown that alien invasive grasses 

affects Garry Oak 

can alter nitrogen dynamics in the soil (Sperry et al. 2006). Scotch Broom, a 


nitrogen-fixer, has the potential to change ecosystem-wide resource supply 

ecosystems is the and facilitate the growth of nitrogen-loving plants. It also generates large 

earthworm. 

amounts of woody fuel that can support high-intensity fires, and in this way 

alters the natural disturbance regime. Gorse (Ulex europaeus) has similar 

characteristics and destructive potential as Scotch Broom, but to date is not as 

widespread in B.C. (Clements et al. 2001). 

A strong link between invasion of alien species and rates and forms of tree recruitment or other 

ecosystem change has not been established. MacDougall and Turkington (2005) illustrate the 

importance of considering the presence and removal of alien invasive species in a functional 

ecosystem context. They examined whether alien invasive grasses could be considered the drivers 

or passengers of ecosystem change, and found at their study site that invasion by the dominant 

non-native grasses was likely a side effect of fire suppression rather than a result of superior 

competitive ability. 

Invasive Animals 

Plants are not the only invasive species that can affect stand structure and drive ecosystem change. 

Non-native Eastern Grey Squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis)consume acorns, and thus pose a threat 

as a competitor for this valued resource. Although they may help disperse oaks by caching acorns, 

they do not tend to transport acorns very far, and their habit of biting out the apical meristem 

at the tip of the acorn prior to caching it likely limits their role as dispersers (Fox 1982; Pigott et 

al. 1991; Fuchs 1998). Herbivores can also have a significant impact on stand regeneration and 

ecosystem composition (see Section 3.3.3). 

An example of an often-overlooked alien invasive that affects Garry Oak and associated 

ecosystems is the earthworm. Most earthworms in B.C. are European introductions and are 

considered ecosystem engineers (Jouquet et al. 2006). On southeastern Vancouver Island and 

the Gulf Islands, native earthworms are generally absent (Marshall and Fender 1998); however, 

it is unknown whether they have always been sparse or absent, or if they have been displaced. 

Earthworms play an important role in ecosystem function as decomposers and in structuring and 

aerating soils (Speirs et al. 1986; Koss 1999). Changes in the nature or extent of earthworm activity 

can affect nutrient regimes, ecosystem productivity, and other ecosystem functions (Fuchs 2001). 

3.3.3 Herbivory 

Research conducted on the Gulf Islands and San Juan Islands shows that herbivory by deer 

limited the establishment, growth, survival, and reproduction of both seedlings and transplanted 

native forbs and shrubs, and that competition from alien plant species had relatively less impact 

(Gonzales and Arcese 2008; Gonzales and Clements 2010). It should be noted that this research 

was conducted on shallow soil sites, so the results may not be applicable to deep soil sites. 

Alien annual grasses were rarely browsed and increased with increasing ungulate density (deer 

3-20 



Exclosures around 

oak seedlings or other 

vegetation may be needed 

to control herbivory by deer. 

Photo: Shyanne Smith 

and sheep). The volume of alien perennial grasses declined with herbivory, but their overall 

presence was unaffected by ungulate density (despite being preferentially foraged). An important 

implication from this research is that reducing ungulates, such as deer, which is necessary for the 

recovery of many native forbs, may also benefit alien perennial grasses (see also Chapter 8, Case 

Study 1). 

Present densities of deer exceed historical levels (Gonzales and Arcese 2008). As a result of 

increased herbivory, less palatable species (e.g., alien grasses) have a competitive advantage. 

Reducing deer numbers alone may not result in an increase in native grasses and forbs, since 

alien perennial grasses may replace the alien annuals. Gonzales and Arcese (2008) found that 

deer prefer native forbs over most alien annual and perennial grasses, and they suggest that 



3-21


Figure 3.4 Feral 

goats in steep open 

savannah on Saturna 

Island. Photo: 

Shyanne Smith 

Herbivory can be 

used to reduce 

cover of alien 

perennial grasses 

by fencing 

restoration sites 

from fall to spring, 

when most 

native forbs are 

germinating and 

growing, then 

opening the sites 

to grazing during 

summer. 

restoration practitioners will improve their success by controlling herbivore 

density. Where deer are abundant, herbivore pressure can be reduced through 

fencing, culling, or increasing deer alertness 10 . Fertility control, repellents, and 

habitat modification are alternatives to hunting in suburban communities, 

but the success of these approaches as long-term solutions remains uncertain 

(Gonzales and Arcese 2008). 

In addition to the abundant native Columbian Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus 

hemionus columbianus), introduced mammalian herbivores, such as goats 

(Capra hircus), sheep (Ovis aries), Eastern Cottontail rabbits (Sylvilagus 

floridanus), and domestic European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) also 

occur in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems throughout their range 

in B.C. Like other perturbations, these abundant herbivores can shift 

plant communities to new ecosystem states. Research has shown that in 

general, in the presence of increased herbivory, plant communities become 

homogenized, and change in structure and composition (Gonzales and Arcese 

2008; Gonzales and Clements 2010). In this way, herbivory tends to encourage 

dominance by alien annual grasses, whereas protection from herbivory 

favours alien perennial grasses. Their research also suggests that herbivory can 

be used to reduce cover of alien perennial grasses by fencing restoration sites from fall to spring, 

when most native forbs are germinating and growing, then opening the sites to grazing during 

10 Deer alertness is increased by hunting, noise-makers, predator presence, etc. Increased deer alertness results in more 

sporadic browsing, diluting the impact of deer on the site. 

3-22 



summer, after the native forbs have senesced. Grazing by sheep or goats can not only reduce 

biomass, but can also create bare soil sites for native annual species establishment (Smith, pers. 

observ.) (Figure 3.4). 

It is important to note that cover of invasive alien flora does not necessarily increase with 

increased levels of herbivory, and protection from herbivory once alien invasive species have 

established will not automatically reduce the invasive vegetation. However, herbivory does tend 

to encourage dominance by alien annual grasses, whereas protection from 

herbivory favours alien perennial grasses. With the widespread abundance of 

deer and other herbivores throughout Garry Oak and associated ecosystems, 

isolated, small islets or other locations with low densities of herbivores may 

provide important reference sites for historical Garry Oak and associated plant 

community composition and structure (Gonzales 2008). 

Other forms of herbivory that may occur on a site-specific basis should also be 

considered, such as herbivory by insects or other invertebrates. For example, 

Winter Moth (Operophtera brumata) and particularly Gypsy Moth (Lymantria 

dispar), can seriously defoliate oaks. The introduced European Black Slug 

(Arion ater) can also destroy seedlings, and has been reported to impact a 

number of rare plant populations, particularly those of Yellow Montane Violet 

(Viola praemorsa ssp. praemorsa) and Deltoid Balsamroot (Balsamorhiza 

deltoidea) (Fuchs 2001). 

3.3.4 Plant Disease 

Diseases cause 

disturbance and 

facilitate plant 

succession by 

debilitating or 

killing a plant, 

thereby creating 

space or favourable 

conditions for 

other plant species. 

Plant disease has been defined as any interference with the normal functioning of a plant that 

results in disturbed or abnormal physiological action or the deterioration of any of its parts (after 

Hubert 1931). Disease is the result of the interaction of a disease agent, a host, and environmental 

factors. Diseases cause disturbance and facilitate plant succession by debilitating or killing a 

plant, thereby creating space or favourable conditions for other plant species. When planning an 

ecosystem restoration project, it is advisable to know about occurrence and incidence of diseases 

that are capable of causing major disturbance so that the risk of future damage can be assessed 

and appropriate measures can be taken to minimize risk. 

Fungi, including those that cause disease, are normal components of ecosystems. Information on 

the classification and biology of fungi is provided on the Tree of Life website (www.tolweb.org/ 

fungi). 

The lists of fungi mentioned below (Table 3.1) which occur on native grasses, forbs, shrubs, 

and trees in Garry Oak ecosystems, were compiled from the Herbarium Collections Database 

and host-fungus index at the Pacific Forestry Centre (www.pfc.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/biodiversity/ 

herbarium/index_e.html) and the Pacific Northwest Fungi Database (http://pnwfungi.wsu.edu/ 

programs/aboutDatabase.asp). Many of the native graminoids and shrubs, and most of the native 

forbs referred to in this publication, lack disease records in the databases. For example, no fungi 

are recorded on onion (Allium spp.) in Garry Oak ecosystems. In contrast, in the Pacific Forestry 

Centre herbarium there are 91 collections of 49 fungi on Garry Oak trees. Thus, it is evident that a 

systematic survey of disease has not been conducted in these ecosystems. 



3-23


Table 3.1 Some frequently recorded or damaging diseases on graminoids, forbs, shrubs, and trees in Garry Oak 

ecosystems. 

DISEASES OF GRAMINOIDS 

Host 

Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus) 

Alaska Oniongrass (Melica 

subulata) 

Plant part 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage 

Fungus 

Puccinia striiformis 

Puccinia recondita 

Erysiphe graminis 

Type of damage 

rust 

rust 

mildew 

DISEASES OF FORBS 

Host 

Common Camas (Camassia 

quamash) 

White Fawn Lily (Erythronium 

oregonum) 

Plant part 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage 

Fungus 

Urocystis colchici 

Uromyces heterodermus 

Ustilago heufleuri 


smut 

rust 

smut 

DISEASES OF SHRUBS 

Host 

Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) 

Hairy Honeysuckle (Lonicera 

hispidula) 

Tall Oregon-grape (Mahonia 

aquifolium) 

Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana) 

Common Snowberry 

(Symphoricarpos albus) 

Red Huckleberry (Vaccinium 

parvifolium) 

Plant part 

stem 

stem 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage, fruit 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage 

stem 

Fungus 

Phellinus ferreus 

Hymenochaete tabacina 

Microsphaera penicillata 

Hyponectria lonicerae 

Microsphaera berberidis 

Phragmidium fusiforme 

Phragmidium rosae-californicae 

Puccinia crandellii 

Puccinia symphoricarpi 

Lophodermium cladophylum 

Pucciniastrum goeppertianum 


decay 

decay 

mildew 

leaf blight 

mildew 

rust 

rust 

rust 

rust 

leaf spot 

witches broom 

DISEASES OF TREES 

Host 

Arbutus (Arbutus menziesii) 

Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) 

Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) 

Plant part 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage 

foliage 

branch/stem 

stem 

branch/stem 

branch 

foliage 

roots/butt 

roots/butt 

roots/butt 

stem 

stem 

stem 

Fungus 

Pucciniastrum sparsum 

Coccomyces arbutifolius 

Coccomyces quadratus 

Diplodia maculata 

Fusicoccum arbuti 



Cytospora sp. 

Taphrina caerulescens 

Armillaria gallica 

Ganoderma spp. 

Inonotus dryadeus 


Hericium erinaceus 

Laetiporus gilbertsonii 


rust 

leaf spot 

leaf spot 

leaf spot 

canker 

decay 

decay 

canker on twigs 

leaf blister 

killing of roots, decay 

decay 

decay 

decay 

decay 

decay 

3-24 



Not all host-fungus records in the databases have been listed in Table 3.1. For shrubs and trees, 

host-fungus combinations that were recorded frequently or that are especially damaging are 

listed. For graminoids and forbs, the host-fungus combinations were the only ones recorded in 

the databases; they are included in the table to indicate the types of diseases that occur on these 

plant types. 

Pathogens, Parasites, and Saprophytes 

A pathogen is a biotic agent that causes disease. A parasite lives its whole life (obligate parasite) 

or part of its life cycle (facultative parasite) on living tissue, whereas a saprophyte lives on dead 

organic material. For example, in the Garry Oak ecosystem, rusts are obligate parasites on 

the foliage of several plants, Armillaria gallica is a facultative parasite on the roots of oak, and 

Hymenochaete tabacina is a saprophyte on decaying dead branches. 

Detection, Diagnosis, and Assessment of Fungal Disease 

Detection 

Fungal diseases are recognized by the symptoms they cause in their hosts. Symptoms include 

declining amount of foliage, necrotic spots on leaves, cankers on stems, and decay in woody 

tissue. 

Diagnosis 

Mycologists use symptoms and signs to determine the cause of a disease. The reproductive 

structures of fungi are used to identify the cause of the infestation; these vary from microscopic 

dots on leaves to mushrooms and large conks on the stem of trees. Knowing the cause helps 

determine the type and amount of damage that can be expected and the kind of remedial 

treatment that might be applied. 

Assessment of damage 

The amount of damage caused by foliage pathogens can be estimated by determining the 

proportion of leaf area affected, and the proportion of leaves and plants affected. Damage to 

woody tissue by canker-causing fungi can be similarly estimated. Bole- and root-decaying 

fungi are difficult to detect unless there are external signs or symptoms. Fungal fruiting bodies 

Figure 3.5 Whole tree failure of 

a 280-year-old Garry Oak caused 

by decay of its roots by Armillaria 

gallica and Inonotus dryadeus. 

Photo: Duncan Morrison 



3-25


Figure 3.6 Armillaria gallica 

rhizomorphs on the surface of a 

Garry Oak root. The rhizomorphs 

are attached to the bark and are 

associated with small infections 

in the bark that will eventually 

coalesce into a large lesion. 


Figure 3.7 A lesion at the soil line 

on a Garry Oak stem caused by 

Armillaria gallica. Wood behind 

the lesion was decayed by the 

fungus. The host has produced 

callus tissue at the margin of the 

lesion and a reaction zone (black 

line) in the wood adjacent to the 

A. gallica decay. Photo: Duncan 

Morrison 

(mushrooms and conks) on the bole or at the soil line, and suspect characteristics, such as lesions 

and wounds, are indicators of internal decay in the bole or roots. The diameter and length of a 

decay column in the bole or the proportion of structural roots decayed can be determined with 

an increment borer or resistograph instrument. Removal of soil by hand or with an air spade by 

trained personnel permits examination of the major roots for lesions and signs of fungi, such as 

rhizomorphs or decay. 

Diseases of Graminoids 

The diseases recorded for the two graminoid species in the Pacific Forestry Centre database were 

caused by rusts and a mildew (Table 3.1). These fungi require specific environmental conditions 

for infection to occur. It is unlikely that these conditions will occur every year, so although plants 

may be stressed, it is unlikely that they will be killed. 

Diseases of Forbs 

Two smuts and a rust have been recorded on species of Liliaceae (Table 3.1). As with the grasses, 

the risk of mortality is low. 

Diseases of Shrubs 

Most of the diseases of important shrub species are caused by rusts and mildews (Table 3.1). 

The risk of mortality is low. 

Diseases of Trees 

A number of wood decay fungi have been reported on both Arbutus (Arbutus menziesii) and 

Garry Oak (Table 3.1). Several of these, especially Armillaria gallica, Inonotus dryadeus and 

Ganoderma spp. are responsible for whole tree failure (Figure 3.5) and Laetiporus gilbertsonii for 

3-26 



Figure 3.8 Mushroom of 

Armillaria gallica attached to 

the base of a Garry Oak tree. 


failure of large branches. It is common to find more than one of these fungi in trees that have 

failed. Characteristics of the diseases they cause are described below. Fungi that cause brown rot 

decay preferentially remove cellulose and hemicellulose from wood, leaving a brittle matrix of 

modified lignin. In contrast, fungi that cause white rot decompose lignin and cellulose. Some of 

the diseases that cause significant disturbance to Garry Oak and Arbutus are described below. 

Diseases that cause significant disturbance to Garry Oak trees 

Armillaria root disease 

Four species of Armillaria are known from the range of Garry Oak in southwestern B.C.: A. 

ostoyae, A. sinapina, A. nabsnona, and A. gallica (Morrison et al. 1985). All four species could 

occur in Garry Oak ecosystems, especially in moist ecosystem classification units. Armillaria 

ostoyae is a virulent primary pathogen, mainly of conifers. Armillaria sinapina and A. nabsnona 

are pathogens of low virulence that are usually found on stressed, woody angiosperms. 

Armillaria gallica has a circumpolar distribution, and in southwestern B.C., A. gallica is associated 

primarily with broad-leaved tree species, including Bigleaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), Garry 

Figure 3.9 Sporophore of Inonotus dryadeus at 

the base of a Garry Oak stem. The current year 

sporophore is above that of the previous year. 

Photo: Conan Webb, Parks Canada 

Figure 3.10 Sporophore of Ganoderma sp. at the soil 

line on a Garry Oak stem. Photo: Chris Paul 



3-27


Figure 3.11. Sporophores of Laetiporus 

gilbertsonii on a Garry Oak stem. Photo: Dave 

Gilbert 

Figure 3.12. Stem canker caused by Fusicoccum 

arbuti on arbutus. Photo: Brenda Callan, NRCan 

Oak, Paper Birch (Betula papyrifera), Red Alder (Alnus rubra), and hawthorn (Crataegus spp.). 

This fungus is common in Garry Oak ecosystems, especially in moist ecosystem classification 

units, and is often associated with whole tree failure of oak. The fungus spreads from colonized 

wood through soil by root-like strands called rhizomorphs (Figure 3.6), or at contacts between a 

healthy root and colonized wood. The fungus invades, decays and kills bark tissue and root wood 

(Figure 3.7). Rhizomorphs spread the fungus throughout a root system, and over many years most 

structural roots can become decayed and can be killed. From mid-October to mid-November, 

diseased trees can be recognized by the presence of mushrooms at the base of the stem or on the 

ground around the tree (Figure 3.8). 


Inonotus dryadeus is found throughout much of North America, primarily on oaks and other 

hardwoods. This species causes a mottled white rot of the roots and root crown of both living and 

dead trees. Infections reportedly begin in the roots and spread into the root crown, but decay does 

not extend much above ground level. Fruiting bodies are annual, but old basidiocarps may persist 

for several years. They develop near the base of the trunk or from roots below the soil surface 

(Figure 3.9). Basidiocarps vary in size, but can be large, up to 50 cm wide. Fresh basidiocarps are 

yellowish to brownish above and may be covered with drops of amber liquid; hence, the common 

name “weeping conk”. The lower surface is buff with fine circular to angular pores (4–6 per mm). 

Basidiocarps eventually become brown to black and cracked. Trees with I. dryadeus fruiting 

bodies have substantial amounts of root decay and an elevated risk of wind-throw (Swiecki and 

Bernhardt 2006). This fungus is implicated in whole tree failure of Garry Oak. 


One or more species of Ganoderma cause decay of Garry Oak in southwestern B.C. Sporophores 

occur on the stem at or near the soil surface (Figure 3.10); there is often an old basal wound 

associated with fruit bodies. Extensive decay in the lower bole and roots of mature trees has 

resulted in whole tree failure. Work is needed on the taxonomy of the species on Garry Oak, their 

3-28 



biology, and the hazard associated with the presence of conks on trees. 

Laetiporus gilbertsonii (syn. L. sulphureus) 

Laetiporus gilbertsonii causes brown cubical decay of Quercus spp., including 

Garry Oak, along the Pacific coast of the United States from California to 

Washington, and probably into southern B.C. Recently, molecular techniques 

and mating incompatibility were used to examine collections of L. sulphureus 

sensu lato from North America (Burdsall and Banik 2001). Based on those 

results, two new species were described from western North American 

collections: L. conifericola from conifers and L. gilbertsonii (Figure 3.11) from 

oak and eucalyptus. The fungus causes brown rot in stems and branches, 

having entered the tree through pruning wounds or broken branches. 

The fungi that 

cause diseases are 

native components 

of the ecosystem. 

Diseases that cause significant disturbance to Arbutus 

Fusicoccum arbuti (syn. Natrassia mangifera and Hendersonula toruloidea) has a broad 

geographic and host range and causes stem canker (Figure 3.12), but in B.C. it has only been 

recorded on Arbutus (Hunt et al. 1992). Weakened or stressed trees, especially those near the 

ocean, appear to be susceptible to the disease. Infection of Arbutus bark by spores likely occurs 

through tissue damaged by winter injury, sunscald, or mechanical wounds. The first symptoms 

are areas of discoloured and killed bark, which become sunken, and later slough off. A perennial 

canker is formed with callus tissue surrounding the areas of dead bark. Small branches may be 

killed by girdling. 

Cultural Practices and Remedial Measures 

Should we consider modifying cultural practices or introducing remedial measures to reduce 

the effects of diseases on plants in Garry Oak ecosystems? The fungi that cause diseases are 

native components of the ecosystem, so for most of the diseases listed above, the answer is “no”. 

Foliage diseases caused by rusts, smuts, and mildew have little or no long-term impact on the 

plants because foliage is deciduous, and incidence of disease varies from year to year. Similarly, 

saprophytes such as Hymenochaete tabacina and Fuscoporia ferrea, which decay stems and 

branches that are dead due to suppression (shading), are of little consequence. 

In contrast, fungi that decay the wood of roots, stems, or large branches of Garry Oak rarely kill 

trees but can predispose branches, stems, or whole trees to failure. Usually, these fungi cause 

detectable disease and failure in trees older than 100 years, although younger trees can become 

diseased. Except for A. gallica, which can colonize and kill root tissue, most fungi require a wound 

through which their spores can colonize the wood. Wounds are created by pruning branches and 

mowing machines, and possibly by ground fires. For sites where protection of existing trees is 

desirable, managers should avoid creating wounds (wound dressings do not prevent colonization 

by decay fungi). Diseased trees should be monitored, hazardous ones should be removed, and 

new trees should be planted if required. 

3.3.5 Climate Change and Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Ecological restoration must address the effects of climate change. Broadly speaking, we can expect 

changes in weather patterns, including more extreme climatic events, higher temperatures, 

and changes in precipitation patterns, along with increases in sea level (Harris et al. 2006). 



3-29


Given the current 

fragmented and 

degraded state of 

most Garry Oak 

ecosystems, we 

need to be aware 

of the potential 

for climate change 

to impact these 

ecosystems over 

time. 

Restoration practitioners need to consider how species ranges may shift 

under climate change, what new plant communities may form given the 

unprecedented changes, and how genetic variability should be incorporated 

into restoration design. 

In the context of Garry Oak ecosystems and their restoration, climate 

change could be seen as a mixed blessing. On one hand, an ecosystem that 

is generally favoured by warmer and drier conditions than today would seem 

to be favoured by predicted changed conditions (many of the Garry Oak 

and associated ecosystems described in this publication may be favoured by 

warmer and drier conditions). On the other hand, rapid and dramatic climatic 

change is intensely disruptive to established ecosystems and will most likely 

result in extirpation (or extinction) of some species. In addition, atmospheric 

CO 2 

concentrations may have a role in maintaining savannah systems. This 

may be contributing to in-growth of woody vegetation in savannah openings 

and can be expected to increase with ongoing climate change (Bond and 

Midgley 2000). 

Looking to the Future—Clues from the Past 

Historical conditions should not be regarded as a blueprint for our restoration designs, but rather 

as a reference or guide to be used to help us set restoration goals or targets (see Section 8.2). Our 

understanding of historical conditions also highlights the importance of restoring Garry Oak 

ecosystems in Canada. Two lines of evidence strongly suggest that Garry Oak and associated 

ecosystems, in general, are likely to expand their range in Canada as the 

climate warms. Studies of fossil pollen from a Saanich Inlet core (Pellatt et al. 

Restoration efforts 

must consider 

the effects of 

climate change 

on ecosystem 

dynamics, and we 

must consider how 

our restoration 

sites fit into the 

broader regional 

landscape. 

2001) reveal that dry meadow ecosystems in the area (with Camas spp. as an 

element) were much more widespread than today under warm, dry climates 

about 8000 years ago. Once Garry Oaks arrived in our region 8000-7000 ybp, 

they became widespread and abundant along the southeast side of Vancouver 

Island. For example, extensive stands likely occurred in the Cowichan Valley 

at that time. They seem to have become particularly common about 6000 

years ago as the climate remained warm but moisture increased. Cooling 

and moistening climate reduced the range of the species and associated 

ecosystems after 4000 ybp, despite the use of burning practices by First 

Nations peoples (Brown and Hebda 2002). 

It is notable that some species that are exceedingly uncommon today in our 

region, such as Oregon Ash (Fraxinus latifolia), were much more common 

under the warmer climates of the past. This suggests that even rare species 

may have a more positive future as climatic conditions change, provided 

that they can survive in the region until the climate becomes more favourable to them. Keeping 

species at risk from extinction in the meantime will be a challenge because ecosystem changes 

due to climate change can be rapid and catastrophic, allowing little opportunity for migration 

and dispersal (Hebda 2004). Given the current fragmented and degraded state of most Garry Oak 

ecosystems, we need to be aware of the potential for climate change to impact these ecosystems 

over time. 

3-30 



Figure 3.13 Using air photos to understand change in recent history. This series of images show a study plot 

(60x50 m) superimposed on air photos from 1950, 1975, and 2004 to show change in tree cover over time. 

Image: Shyanne Smith 

Climate models that project the future extent of suitable climate for a 

species provide a strong second line of evidence that Garry Oaks and their 

Collecting sitespecific 

reference 

associated species will have an opportunity to expand their range markedly. 

It has generally been accepted that the range of Garry Oak and associated 

information is an 

ecosystems will begin expanding in B.C. under a warmer climate. However, 

important first 

recent bioclimatic modelling, based on a spatial model of climatic suitability 

step in restoration 

for Garry Oak ecosystems and forecasted distribution of climate regions based 

on global climate models, indicates suitability for the current Garry Oak range 

because it helps to 

will actually decrease in the near future (Bodtker et al. 2009). However, this define restoration 

modelling also indicates that the climate suitability will improve again later goals and allows 

in the century. These results reinforce the need for active restoration and 

restoration efforts 

management of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems, and the need to take to be effectively 

an experimental, adaptive management approach to restoration. Restoration evaluated. 

efforts must consider the effects of climate change on ecosystem dynamics, 

and we must consider how our restoration sites fit into the broader regional 

landscape. By integrating model results with our understanding of past and current ecosystems, 

we can assess possible climate change impacts on, and adaptations of, species within Garry Oak 

and associated ecosystems, and prepare for change. 



3-31


Figure 3.14 Tree ring cores can be used to assess disturbance and changed conditions at a site over 

the life of the tree. Cores can be taken with an increment borer, mounted, sanded, and viewed with 

a microscope. Software that measures each annual tree ring is useful for accurately recording small 

variations in growth and creating site chronologies. Photo: Shyanne Smith 

3.4 Summary of Restoration Considerations 

3.4.1 Understanding Site History 

Collecting site-specific reference information is an important first step in restoration because 

it helps to define restoration goals and allows restoration efforts to be effectively evaluated (see 

Chapter 7: Ecological Inventory and Monitoring). From a practical perspective, an understanding 

of the historical reference state can result in a restoration that is more likely to be self-sustaining 

and therefore easier and less costly to maintain (White and Walker 1997). Reference information 

includes not only baseline current conditions (climate, topography, soil, vegetative composition, 

and successional trends) but also any available historical data, ranging from historical accounts 

and photos (Figure 3.13) to legacies remaining on the landscape, such as woody debris and 

dendrochronological (tree ring) records (White and Walker 1997) and pollen profiles of soils 

(McDadi and Hebda 2008). 

Understanding the ecological history of a site is important to its management and restoration, 

particularly when little is known about the historical stand structure, typical regeneration 

patterns, importance of environmental controls, and historical fire regimes. Given the widespread 

changes to vegetation and disturbance regimes in North American open-land habitats, it is 

unlikely that many present species assemblages closely resemble those that occurred prior to 

European settlement (Motzkin and Foster 2002). Using available methods of understanding 

site history (such as soil cores, tree ring study, weather instrument and historical accounts, 

photographs, long-term ecological monitoring, air photos, and even packrat middens), historical 

conditions can be reconstructed and used to provide context to inform management and 

restoration (Figure 3.13 and 3.14) (Swetnam et al. 1999; Kettle et al. 2000). 

3-32 



Restoration design tips 

• Consider what impacts your restoration activities might have on the four fundamental 

processes governing ecosystems: water cycling, nutrient cycling, energy flow, and succession. 

• What is the goal of your restoration? Are you restoring for a specific purpose such as for 

native annual forbs, or for grassland birds? What does current research suggest? For example, 

soil disturbance has been found to benefit several native annuals but not native perennials. 

Weigh the costs and benefits of restoration activities and identify specific objectives (see 

Chapter 5). 

• Check into research already done (ask GOERT) and look for clues about your site’s history in 

historical photos, writings or maps, old air photos, or tree rings. Look for cohorts (many trees 

of similar age), stumps indicating logging, fire scars on trees, or charcoal in the soil. Determine 

when any cohorts established, and when any logging, fire or other disturbance occurred. 

• Check for environmental controls (filters): are shallow or extremely wet soils or exposure to 

wind or salt maintaining open prairie or savannah conditions? (See also Section 8.3.) 

• Consider the three potential problems with re-introducing disturbances: the need to 

understand historical dynamics, that disturbances will not likely have the same results today as 

historically, and the high costs and risks of introducing disturbance into the modern landscape. 

• Consider the effect of your timing of disturbance activities, as well as the effects on native 

and invasive plants and animals, and on plant communities. 

• Assess deer abundance: is there an evident browse line (trees and shrubs heavily “pruned” 

within reach of deer)? Deer prefer native forbs over alien grasses—controlling herbivores will 

increase success toward achieving most restoration goals. Are there other herbivores to be 

considered? 

• Assess plant diseases that may be present at your site. Is there a need to alter your 

restoration activities because of disease? 

• Consider the effects climate change may be having on your site. How might climate affect 

your site in the next 50 years? 100 years? 

• Assess the importance of your site in a regional context. How does it connect to other 

nearby sites? Are there important services it provides to these other sites? How does your 

restoration affect this? 



3-33


3.4.2 Garry Oak Ecosystems Stand Dynamics and Disturbances 

Communities constantly change: organisms die and are replaced by others; energy, water, 

and nutrients pass through ecosystems; and natural succession is always at work. Many of 

these changes are gradual so it appears that there is little change in community form and 

function. Other changes establish new conditions, and plant communities may thereby change 

in significant ways (e.g., succession, invasive species, and disease outbreaks). For instance, 

shrubs and trees may enter into meadow ecosystems and eventually give rise to thickets or 

forests. These changes may be limited by environmental factors. For example, wind and salt 

spray limit the growth of shrubs and trees on many maritime meadows close to the ocean, while 

shallow soils are so prone to drought that woody species grow poorly. Ecosystem disturbances, 

such as fires and windstorms, may reverse or stall succession. Many areas of Garry Oak woodland 

and associated meadows were maintained over long periods by fires that were deliberately used 

by First Nations to maintain good conditions for growing camas (an important food source) 

and hunting game. As other peoples settled in the area, fires were suppressed and fire-sensitive 

trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants gradually invaded many meadow and woodland areas. The 

introduction of many alien invasive species into the region means that fire alone is likely to favour 

dominance by alien invasive plant communities rather than cause a return to the ecosystems that 

were maintained in the past by First Nations. See Case Study 1 in Chapter 5 for an example of 

restoration considerations for a site with unusual ecosystem processes. 


Abrams, M.C. 1992. Fire and the development of oak forests. Bioscience 42: 346-353. 

Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

Agee, J.K. and P.W. Dunwiddie. 1984. Recent forest development on Yellow Island, San Juan 

County, WA. Canadian Journal of Botany 62:2074-2080. 

Anderson, M.K. and M.G. Barbour. 2003. Simulated indigenous management: a new model for 

ecological restoration in national parks. Ecological Restoration 21(4):269-277. 

Anderson, M.K. 2007. Indigenous uses, management, and restoration of oaks of the far western 

United States, Technical Note #2. USDA United States Department of Agriculture, Davis, USA. 

Archer, S. 1989. Have southern Texas savannahs been converted to woodlands in recent history? 

The American Naturalist 134(4):545-561. 

Arno, S.F. and G.E. Gruell. 1986. Douglas-fir encroachment into mountain grasslands in 

southwestern Montana. Journal of Range Management 39(3):272-276. 

Bodtker, K.M., M.G. Pellatt, and A.J. Cannon. 2009. A bioclimatic model to assess the impact 

of climate change on ecosystems at risk and inform land management decisions. Report for 

the Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Directorate, CCAF Project A718. Parks Canada 

Agency, Western & Northern Service Centre Publication, Vancouver, B.C. 

Bond, W.J. and G.F. Midgley. 2000. A proposed CO 2 

-controlled mechanism of woody plant 

invasion in grasslands and savannas. Global Change Biology 6:865-869. 

Brown, J.K. and R.J. Hebda. 2002. Ancient fires on southern Vancouver Island, British Columbia, 

Canada: a change in causal mechanism at about 2,000 ybp. Environmental Archaeology 7:1-12. 

3-34 



Brudvig, L.A. and I. Asbjornsen. 2005. Oak regeneration before and after initial restoration efforts 

in a tall grass oak savannah. American Midland Naturalist 153:180-186. 

Burdsall Jr., H.H. and M.T. Banik. 2001. The genus Laetiporus in North America. Harvard Papers 

in Botany 6:43-55. 

Cavitt, J.F. 2000. Fire and a tallgrass prairie reptile community: effects on relative abundance and 

seasonal activity. Journal of Herpetology 34:12-20. 

Chiang, J.M, MA. Arthur, and B.A. Blankenship. 2005. The effect of prescribed fire on gap fraction 

in an oak forest understorey on the Cumberland Plateau. Journal of the Torrey Botanical 

Society 132(3): 432-441. 

Choi, Y.D. 2004. Theories for ecological restoration in changing environment: toward ‘futuristic’ 

restoration. Ecological Research 19:75-81. 

Clark, B.K and D.W. Kaufman. 1990. Short-term responses of small mammals to experimental fire 

in tallgrass prairie. Canadian Journal of Zoology 68:2450-2454. 

Clements, D.R., D.J. Peterson, and R. Prasad. 2001. The biology of Canadian weeds. 112. Ulex 

europaeus L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 81:325-337. 

D’Antonio, C.M. and P.M. Vitousek. 1992. Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire 

cycle, and global change. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23:63-87. 

Daubenmire, R. F. 1968. Plant communities: a textbook of plant synecology. Harper and Row, New 

York, NY. 

Dunwiddie, P.W. 1997. Yellow Island vegetation studies: 1997 data and analysis. Unpublished 

report. The Nature Conservancy of Washington, Seattle, WA. 

Dunn, P. 1998. Prairie habitat restoration and maintenance on Fort Lewis and within the 

south Puget Sound prairie landscape. Final report and summary of findings. The Nature 

Conservancy of Washington, Seattle, WA. 

Favier, C., C. de Namur, and M. Dubois. Accessed 2004. Forest progression modes in littoral 

Congo, Central Atlantic Africa. Journal of Biogeography 31:1445-1461. 

Fire Effects Information System, (Online). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 

Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed. 

us/database/feis (2011, February 3). 

Foster, J.R. and S.E. Shaff. 2003. Forest colonization of Puget lowland grasslands at Fort Lewis, 

Washington. Northwest Science 77:283-296. 

Foster, B.L. and D. Tilman. 2003. Seed limitation and the regulation of community structure in 

oak savannah grassland. Journal of Ecology 91:999-1007. 

Fox, J.F. 1982. Adaptation of gray squirrel behavior to autumn germination by White Oak acorns. 

Evolution 36:800-809. 

Frost, W.E., J.W. Bartolome, and J.M Connor. 1997. Understory-canopy relationships in oak 

woodlands and savannas. Proceedings of the Symposium on Oak Woodlands: Ecology, 

Management and Urban Interface Issues. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW- 

GTR 160. 

Fuchs, M.A. 1998. Seedling ecology of Garry Oaks in British Columbia and dispersal of Garry Oak 

acorns by Steller’s Jays. M.Sc. Thesis, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. 



3-35


Fuchs, MA. 2001. Towards a recovery strategy for Garry Oak and associated ecosystems in Canada: 

ecological assessment and literature review. Technical Report EC/GB-00-030. Environment 

Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Pacific and Yukon Region. www.goert.ca/documents/ 

litreview.pdf. 

Gedalof, Z., M. Pellatt, and D.J. Smith. 2006. From prairie to forest: three centuries of 

environmental change at Rocky Point, Vancouver Island, BC. Northwest Science 80(1): 34-46. 

GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team). 2002. Recovery strategy for Garry Oak and 

associated ecosystems and their associated species at risk in Canada: 2001-2006. Draft, 

20 February 2002. 

Gonzales, E.K. 2008. The effects of herbivory, competition, and disturbance on island meadows. 

Ph.D. Thesis. Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC. 

Gonzales, E.K. and P. Arcese. 2008. Herbivory more limiting than competition on early and 

established native plants in an invaded meadow. Ecology 89: 3282-3289. 

Gonzales, E.K. and D.R. Clements. 2010. Plant community biomass shifts in response to mowing 

and fencing in invaded oak meadows with non-native grasses and abundant ungulates. 

Restoration Ecology 18: 753-761. 

Gordon, D.R. and K.J. Rice. 2000. Competitive suppression of Quercus douglasii (Fagaceae) 

seedling emergence and growth. American Journal of Botany 87(7):986-994. 

Grace, J.B., MD. Smith, S.L. Grace, S.L. Collins, and T.J. Stohlgren. 2001. Interactions between 

fire and invasive plants in temperate grasslands of North America. In: Proceedings of the 

Invasive Species Workshop: the Role of Fire in the Control and Spread of Invasive Species. Fire 

Conference 2000: the First National Congress on Fire Ecology, Prevention, and Management. 

Galley, K.E.M and T.P. Wilson (editors). Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL. 

Miscellaneous Publication No. 11, pp. 40-65. 

Hanna, I. and P. Dunn. 1996. Restoration goals for Oregon White Oak habitats in the South Puget 

Sound Region. The Nature Conservancy of Washington, Seattle, WA. 

Harrington, C.A. and W.D. Devine 2006. A practical guide to oak release. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW- 

GTR-666. Portland, OR. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 

Harris, J.A., R.J. Hobbs, E. Higgs, and J. Aronson. 2006. Ecological restoration and global climate 

change. Restoration Ecology 14(2):170-176. 

Harwell, M.A. V. Myers, T. Young, A. Bartuska, N. Gassman, J.H. Gentile, C.C. Harwell, S 

Appelbaum, J. Barko, B. Causey, C. Johnson, A. McLean, R. Smola, P. Templet, and S Tosini. 

1999. A Framework for an Ecosystem Integrity Report Card. BioScience 49: 543-556. 

Hastings, M. and W.J. Barry. 1997. Increasing biodiversity through the restoration of a natural 

process by prescribed burning in California state parks: a Sonoma County experience. Paper 

presented at Fire in California Ecosystems: Integrating Ecology, Prevention, and Management, 

17-20 November 1997, San Diego, CA. 

Hebda, R.J. 2004. Paleoecology, climate change and forecasting the future of species at risk. In 

Lofroth, E.C. and T.D. Hooper (editors). Proceedings of the Species at Risk 2004. Pathways to 

Recovery, Victoria, B.C. 

3-36 



Hersperger, A.M and T.T. Forman. 2003. Adjacency arrangement effects on plant diversity and 

composition in woodland patches. Oikos 101(2):279-290. 

Hobbs, R.J. and L.F. Huenneke. 1992. Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for 

conservation. Conservation Biology 6:324-337. 

Hubert, E.E. 1931. An Outline of Forest Pathology. John Wiley and Sons. New York. 

Huff M.H., N.E. Seavy, J.D. Alexander, and C.J. Ralph. 2005. Fire and birds in maritime Pacific 

Northwest. Studies in Avian Biology 30:46-62. 

Hunt, R.S., B. Callan, and A. Funk. 1992. Common pests of arbutus in British Columbia. Forest 

Pest Leaflet No. 63. Forestry Canada, Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria, B.C. 

Jeltsch, F., G.E. Weber, and V. Grimm 2000. Ecological buffering mechanisms in savannahs: a 

unifying theory of long-term tree-grass coexistence. Plant Ecology 161:161-171. 

Jenkins, C.N., and S.L. Pimm. 2003. How big is the global weed patch? Annals of the Missouri 

Botanical Garden 90:172-178. 

Johnson, D.H. 1997. Effects of fire on bird populations in a mixed-grass prairie. In Ecology and 

Conservation of Great Plains Vertebrates. F.L. Knopf and F.B. Samson (editors). Springer- 

Verlag, New York, NY, pp. 181-206. 

Jouquet, P., J. Dauber, J. Lagerlöf, P. Lavelle, and M. Lepage. 2006. Soil invertebrates as ecosystem 

engineers: intended and accidental effects on soil and feedback loops. Applied Soil Ecology 

32(2):153-164. 

Kettle, W.D., P.M Rich, K. Kindscher, G.L. Pittman, and P. Fu. 2000. Land-use history in ecosystem 

restoration: a 40-year study in the prairie-forest ecotone. Restoration Ecology 8(3):307-317. 

Koss, S. 1999. Terrestrial arthropods of the Mt. Hood National Forest. Selected species profiles 

with a focus on endemic species, old growth related species, and potential indicator species. 

US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Mt. Hood National Forest, Sandy, OR. 

Leach, M.K. and T.J. Givnish. 1999. Gradients in the composition, structure, and diversity of 

remnant oak savannahs in southern Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 69(3):353-374. 

Lorimer, C.G., J.W. Chapman, and W.D. Lambert. 1994. Tall understorey vegetation as a factor in 

the poor development of oak seedlings beneath mature stands. Journal of Ecology 82:227-237. 

MacDougall, A.S., B.R. Beckwith, and C.Y. Maslovat. 2004. Defining conservation strategies with 


Biology 18(2):455-465. 

MacDougall, A.S. and R. Turkington. 2004. Relative importance of suppression-based and 

tolerance-based competition in an invaded oak savanna. Journal of Ecology 92:422-434. 

MacDougall, A.S. and R. Turkington. 2005. Are invasive species the drivers or passengers of 

change in degraded ecosystems? Ecology 86(1):42-55. 

MacDougall, A.S. and R. Turkington. 2006. Dispersal, competition, and shifting patterns of 

diversity in a degraded oak savanna. Ecology 87(7):1831-1843. 

MacDougall, A.S. and R. Turkington. 2007. Does the type of disturbance matter when restoring 

disturbance-dependent grasslands? Restoration Ecology 15(2):263-272. 

Marshall, V.G. and W.M. Fender. 1998. Native earthworms of British Columbia forests. Northwest 

Science 2:101-102. 



3-37


McCoy, M.M, M.G. Pellatt, and R.W. Mathewes. 2006. High-resolution fire and vegetation 

history of Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) ecosystems in coastal British Columbia. In Garry 

Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team Research Colloquium February 24, 2006 Proceedings. 

Victoria, B.C. 

McDadi, O. and R. J. Hebda. 2008. Change in historic fire disturbance in a Garry Oak (Quercus 

garryana) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) mosaic, University of Victoria, British 

Columbia, Canada: a possible link with First Nations and Europeans. Forest Ecology and 

Management 256:1704-1710. 

McEwan, R.W., C.H. Keiffer, and B.C. McCarthy. 2006. Dendroecology of American chestnut in a 

disjunct stand of oak-chestnut forest. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 36:1-11. 

McPherson, G. 1997. Ecology and Management of North American Savannahs. University of 

Tucson Press, Tucson, Arizona. 

Moore, M.M. and D.W. Huffman. 2004. Tree encroachment on meadows of the North Rim, Grand 

Canyon National Park, Arizona, U.S.A. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research 36(4):474-483. 

Morrison, D.J., D. Chu, and A.L.S. Johnson. 1985. Species of Armillaria in British Columbia. Can. J. 

Plant Pathol. 7: 242-246. 

Motzkin, G. and D.R. Foster. 2002. Grasslands, heathlands and shrublands in coastal New 

England: historical interpretations and approaches to conservation. Journal of Biodiversity 

29:1569-1590. 

Nicolai, V. 1991. Reaction of the fauna on the bark of trees to the frequency of fires in a North 

American savanna. Oecologia 88:132-137. 

Parks Canada Agency. 2000. Unimpaired for Future Generations? Protecting Ecological Integrity 

with Canada’s National Parks. Vol. I A Call to Action. Vol. II Setting a New Direction for 

Canada’s National Parks. Report of the Panel on the Ecological Integrity of Canada’s National 

Parks. Ottawa, ON. 

Pavlovic, N.B., R. Grundel, and W. Sluis. 2006. Groundlayer vegetation gradients across oak 

woodland canopy gaps. Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society 133(2):225-239. 

Pellatt, M.G., RJ Hebda, and R.W. Mathewes. 2001. High-resolution Holocene vegetation history 

and climate from Hole 1034B, ODP leg 169S, Saanich Inlet, Canada. Marine Geology 174:211- 

226. 

Peter, D. and C. Harrington. 2002. Site and tree factors in Oregon white oak acorn production in 

western Washington and Oregon. Northwest Science 76(3):189-201. 

Peterson, D.W. and P.B. Reich. 2001. Prescribed fire in oak savanna: fire frequency effects on stand 

structure and dynamics. Ecological Applications 11(3):914-927. 

Pigott, C.D., A.C. Newton, and S. Zammit. 1991. Predation of acorns and oak seedlings by grey 

squirrel. Quarterly Journal of Forestry 85:173-178. 

Roemer, H.L. 1972. Forest Vegetation and Environments on the Saanich Peninsula, Vancouver 

Island. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

Roemer, H. 1993. Vegetation and ecology of Garry Oak woodlands. In Proceedings: Garry Oak 

meadow colloquium. R.J. Hebda and F. Aitken (editors). Garry Oak Meadow Preservation 

Society, Victoria, B.C. 

3-38 



Russell, F.L. and N.L. Fowler. 2002. Failure of adult recruitment in Quercus buckleyi populations 

on the eastern Edwards Plateau, Texas. American Midland Naturalist 148:201-217. 

Samways, M.J. 2000. A conceptual model of ecosystem restoration triage based on experiences 

from three remote oceanic islands. Biodiversity and Conservation 9:1073-1083. 

Sankaran, M, J. Ratnam, and N.P. Hanan. 2004. Tree-grass coexistence in savannahs revisited - 

insights from an examination of assumptions and mechanisms invoked in existing models. 

Ecology Letters 7:480-490. 

Scholes, R.J. and S.R. Archer. 1997. Tree-grass interactions in savannahs. Annual Review of 

Ecology and Systematics 28:517-44. 

Schuller, R. 1997. Vegetation response to fall prescribed burning within Festuca idahoensisdominated 

prairie, Mima Mounds Natural Area Preserve, Washington 1985-1992. In Ecology 

and Conservation of the South Puget Sound Prairie Landscape. P. Dunn and K. Ewing 

(editors). The Nature Conservancy of Washington, Seattle, WA. 

Schultz, C.B. and E.E. Crone. 1998. Fire to restore butterfly habitat? A modeling approach to 

management tradeoffs for the Fender’s Blue. Restoration Ecology 6:244-252 

Siemann, E., J. Haarstad, and D. Tilman. 1997. Short-term and long-term effects of burning on oak 

savanna arthropods. Am. Midl. Nat. 137:349-601. 

Smith, J.E. 1949. Natural vegetation in the Willamette Valley, Oregon. Science 109:41-42. 

Smith, S.J. 2007. Garry Oak savannah stand history and change in coastal southern British 

Columbia. M.Sc. Thesis. Univ. of Guelph, Guelph, ON. 

Smith, S.J. Personal observation. Program Manager, GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery 

Team). 

Speirs, G.A., D. Gagnon, G.E. Nason, E.C. Packee, and J.D. Lousier. 1986. Effects and importance 

of indigenous earthworms on decomposition and nutrient cycling in coastal forest ecosystems. 

Canadian Journal of Forest Research 16:983-989. 

Sperry, L.J., J. Belnap, and R.D. Evans. 2006. Bromus tectorum invasion alters nitrogen dynamics 

in an undisturbed arid grassland ecosystem. Ecology 87(3):603-615. 

Stein, W.I. 1990. Quercus garryana Dougl. ex Hook. In Silvics of North America. Volume 2. 

Agricultural Handbook 654. R.M Burns and B.H. Honkala (tech. coords.). US Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service, Timber Management Research, Washington, DC. 

Sugihara, N.G., L.J. Reed, and J.M Lenihan. 1987. Vegetation of the bald hills oak woodlands, 

Redwood National Park, California. Madrono 3(3):193-208. 

Swengel, A.G. 1996. Effects of fire and hay management on abundance of prairie butterflies. 

Biological Conservation 76: 73-85. 

Swetnam, T.W., C.D. Allen, and J.L. Betancourt. 1999. Applied historical ecology: using the past to 

manage for the future. Ecological Applications 9(4): 1189-1206. 

Swiecki, T.J. and E.A. Bernhardt. 2006. A field guide to insects and diseases of California oaks. 

USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-197. 

Thilenius, J.F. 1968. The Quercus garryana forests of the Willamette valley, Oregon. Ecology 

49:1124-1133. 



3-39


Thysell, D.R. and A.B. Carey. 2001. Quercus garryana communities in the Puget Trough, 

Washington. Northwest Science 75(3):219-235. 

Turner, N.J. 1999. “Time to burn”: traditional use of fire to enhance resource production 

by Aboriginal Peoples in British Columbia. In Indians, Fire and the Land in the Pacific 

Northwest. R. Boyd (editor). Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Tveten, R. 1997. Fire effects on prairie vegetation, Fort Lewis, Washington. In Ecology and 

Conservation of the South Puget Sound Prairie Landscape. P.V. Dunn and K. Ewing (editors). 

The Nature Conservancy of Washington, Seattle, WA, pp. 123-130. 

Tveten, R.K. and R.W. Fonda. 1999. Fire effects on prairies and oak woodlands on Fort Lewis, 

Washington. Northwest Science 73:145-158. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1984. Recovery plan for the San Bruno Elfin and Mission Blue 

butterflies. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. 

Wardle, D.A. 2002. Islands as model systems for understanding how species affect ecosystem 

properties. Journal of Biogeography 29:583-591. 

Watson, D.M 2002. A conceptual framework for studying species composition in fragments, 

islands and other patchy ecosystems. Journal of Biogeography 29:823-834. 

White, P.S. and S.T.A. Pickett. 1985. Natural disturbance and patch dynamics: an introduction. 

In The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. S.T.A. Pickett and P.S. White 

(editors). Academic Press, London. 

White, P.S. and J.L. Walker. 1997. Approximating nature’s variation: selecting and using reference 

information in restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 5(4):338-349. 

Whitlock, C. and M.A. Knox. 2002. Prehistoric burning in the Pacific northwest: human versus 

climatic influences. In Fire, Native Peoples and the Natural Landscape. T.R. Vale (editor), 

Island Press, WA. 

Wilsey, B.J. and H.W. Polley. 2006. Aboveground productivity and root-shoot allocation differ 

between native and introduced grass species. Oecologia 150:300-309. 

3-40 







Chapter 4 

Species and Ecosystems at Risk 

Contents 

4.1 Introduction ...............................................................................3 

4.1.1 Ranking Species and Ecosystems at Risk...........................4 

4.1.2 Why are These Species and Ecosystems at Risk? ..............6 

4.2 Legislation..................................................................................8 

4.2.1 Legislated Protection of Species and Ecosystems at Risk.8 

4.2.2 Permits............................................................................... 11 

4.3 Planning for Restoration..........................................................12 

4.3.1 Who to Contact ................................................................ 13 

4.3.2 Identifying Threats........................................................... 14 

4.3.3 Identifying Habitat............................................................ 14 

Case Study 1. Golden Paintbrush and Parasitic Associations ...... 15 



4-1


4.3.4 Defining Goals ...................................................................17 

4.3.5 Funding Programs............................................................ 18 

4.4 Special Considerations for Restoration Methods.................. 19 

Case Study 2. Habitat Restoration for an Endangered Bird 

Species, the Coastal Vesper Sparrow, at the Nanaimo Airport: a 

Study in Adaptive Management ...................................................20 

4.4.1 Alien Invasive Species....................................................... 23 

4.4.2 Hydrologic Regimes.........................................................24 

4.4.3 Timing of Restoration ......................................................24 

4.4.4 Translocations.................................................................. 25 

Case Study 3. The San Juan Islands Western Bluebird 

Re-introduction Project ................................................................26 

4.4.5 Monitoring........................................................................30 

4.5 Conclusions.............................................................................. 31 

4.6 References............................................................................... 31 

Appendix 4.1 ..................................................................................34 

Listed Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated 

Ecosystems................................................................................34 

Appendix 4.2................................................................................. 46 

Listed Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated 

Ecosystems, per Restoration Ecosystem Unit (REU)............. 46 

Appendix 4.3 .................................................................................54 

Ecological Communities at Risk in Garry Oak and 

Associated Ecosystems.............................................................54 

4-2 



Chapter 4 

Species and Ecosystems at Risk 

by Kersti Vaino, in collaboration with Brenda Costanzo, Shyanne Smith, and Ted Lea 

Garry Oak and associated 

ecosystems are highly biodiverse 

and have a disproportionately high 

number of species at risk. At least 

three species at risk are known 

and managed for at the Cowichan 

Garry Oak Preserve, one of the 

few remaining deep soil Garry Oak 

woodlands. Photo: Chris Junck 


Garry Oak and associated ecosystems have very high biodiversity and a disproportionately 

high number of species at risk compared to other ecosystems in British Columbia and Canada. 

Approximately 10% of the SARA-listed species at risk in Canada occur in Garry Oak ecosystems, 

and these ecosystems cover less than 2000 hectares (S. Smith, pers. comm. 2011). Garry Oak 

and associated ecosystems make up one of the most endangered ecosystems in Canada (T. Lea, 

pers. comm. 2009). It is important to conserve species and ecosystems at risk as they provide 



4-3


biodiversity, and many of these species occur nowhere else in Canada. Restoration practitioners 

need to be aware of all species and ecosystems at risk occurring on their site and carefully look 

for these prior to beginning any work. The purpose of this chapter is to provide guidance and 

direction on how to deal with these sensitive species and ecosystems during restoration. 

The introductory section of this chapter defines species and ecosystems at risk. Section 4.2 lays 

out how these are protected under provincial and federal legislation, and discusses requirements 

for permits for restoration work, if necessary. Resources are provided in Section 4.3 regarding 

whom to contact for identifying and working with species at risk, as well as potential funding 

programs for the restoration of their habitats. The importance of identifying threats and defining 

recovery goals is also discussed. Section 4.4 discusses some common complications when it 

comes to restoring the habitats of species at risk, which should be taken into consideration. These 

include alien invasive species, hydrologic regimes, the timing of restoration, and translocations. 

Finally, monitoring requirements for the restoration of species and ecosystems at risk are 

discussed in Section 4.5. 

4.1.1 Ranking Species and Ecosystems at Risk 

Simply speaking, a species or ecosystem at risk is at risk of dying out or 

disappearing, either from a specific area (e.g., province or country) or from 

the world. In order to prioritize recovery actions, the level of risk needs to be 

determined for each species or ecosystem. In Canada, this ranking is done by 

the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC, 

www.cosewic.gc.ca) and provincially in British Columbia by the 

BC Conservation Data Centre (CDC, www.env.gov.bc.ca/cdc). 

Species at risk are 

assessed and ranked by 

provincial, federal, and 

global authorities. Geyer’s 

Onion (Allium geyeri) is 

a globally (G4G5) ranked 

and provincially Blue-listed 

species at risk that has 

not yet been assessed by 

COSEWIC. Photo: Chris 

Junck 

In Canada, 

risk status for 

species at risk is 

established by 

the Committee 

on the Status 

of Endangered 

Wildlife in Canada 

(COSEWIC), an 

independent 

panel of experts. 

Provincially in 

B.C., the BC 

Conservation 

Data Centre ranks 

species at risk. 

4-4 



COSEWIC is an independent panel of experts that advises the federal government on the status of 

species at risk (COSEWIC 2009a). The designations extinct, extirpated, endangered, threatened, 

special concern, not at risk, and data deficient (COSEWIC 2009b) are used to list species under 

the Species at Risk Act (SARA 2003). SARA establishes Schedule 1 as the official list of wildlife 

species at risk for those species designated extirpated, endangered, threatened, or special concern. 

SARA does not include reference to ecosystems at risk but does permit a multi-species or 

ecosystem-wide approach to the recovery of listed species (GOERT 2007). As of 2010, there have 

been three multi-species recovery strategies prepared by GOERT, under SARA, for: Garry Oak 

woodlands (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/document/default_e.cfm?documentID=874); maritime 

meadows associated with Garry Oak ecosystems (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/document/default_e. 

cfm?documentID=873); and vernal pools and other ephemeral wet areas associated with Garry 

Oak ecosystems (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/document/dspDocument_e.cfm?documentID=875). 

Taylor’s Checkerpot (Euphydryas editha 

taylori) is an Endangered species (SARA 

Schedule 1) for which recovery planning 

is included in the multi-species recovery 

strategy for species at risk in maritime 

meadows associated with Garry Oak 

ecosystems. Photo: Andrew Fyson 

SARA Status Definitions for Species at Risk in Canada 

Extinct – a species that no longer exists anywhere in the world 

Extirpated – a species that no longer occurs in the wild in Canada, but does occur elsewhere 

in the wild 

Endangered – a species facing imminent extirpation or extinction 

Threatened – likely to become endangered if nothing is done to reverse the factors leading 

to its extirpation or extinction 

Special concern – a species that may become threatened or endangered because of a 

combination of biological characteristics and identified threats 

Not at risk – a species that has been assessed and found to be secure 

Data deficient – not enough is known about the species to assess its status 



4-5


The CDC assesses, ranks, and provides information on the status of species and ecological 

communities within the province of British Columbia. The CDC uses the NatureServe 

conservation status methodology to rank species and ecological communities (MOE 2007). Each 

entity is ranked both globally (G) and sub-nationally (S) on a scale of 1 (critically imperiled) to 5 

(secure) (NatureServe 2009, www.natureserve.org). Based on these rankings, each entity is then 

assigned to either a Red, Blue, or Yellow List; the Red List is for those species at greatest risk, the 

Blue List for those at intermediate risk, and the Yellow List for those least at risk (MOE 2007). 

As of 2011, there are 104 provincially-listed species at risk in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems 

and, of these, 55 are also listed federally (see Table 4.1) (GOERT 2011). The number of species 

listed federally will likely grow, as many species have not yet been assessed for listing under SARA. 

A current list (as of 2011) of all listed species at risk in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems is 

provided in Appendix 4.1 along with the Restoration Ecosystem Units (REUs) (see Chapter 2: 

Distribution and Description) for each species to assist restoration practitioners in knowing 

which species might occur on their site. Appendix 4.2 lists the species at risk potentially found in 

each REU. 

There are currently 10 plant communities associated with Garry Oak ecosystems that are included 

on British Columbia’s Red List; six more will likely be added to the Red List after assessment 

(C. Cadrin, pers. comm. 2009) (see Appendix 4.3). The CDC’s ability to rank ecological 

communities is limited by the lack of available data (Fuchs 2001). 

4.1.2 Why are These Species and Ecosystems at Risk? 

Garry Oak and associated ecosystems are vanishing rapidly in British Columbia. Historically, 

their range in the province was limited within the already relatively small extent of the Coastal 

The BC Conservation Data Centre (CDC) provides an in-depth 

description of both the red and blue lists. 

The Red List “includes any ecological community, and indigenous species and subspecies that 

is extirpated, endangered, or threatened in British Columbia. Extirpated elements no longer 

exist in the wild in British Columbia, but do occur elsewhere. Endangered elements are facing 

imminent extirpation or extinction. Threatened elements are likely to become endangered if 

limiting factors are not reversed. Red-listed species and sub-species may be legally designated 

as, or may be considered candidates for legal designation as Extirpated, Endangered or 

Threatened under the Wildlife Act (see www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/faq.htm#2). Not all Red-listed 

taxa will necessarily become formally designated. Placing taxa on these lists flags them as 

being at risk and requiring investigation (MOE 2010).” 

The Blue List “Includes any ecological community, and indigenous species and subspecies 

considered to be of special concern (formerly vulnerable) in British Columbia. Elements 

are of special concern because of characteristics that make them particularly sensitive to 

human activities or natural events. Blue-listed elements are at risk, but are not Extirpated, 

Endangered or Threatened (MOE, 2010).” 

4-6 



Table 4.1 Numbers of B.C.-listed and COSEWIC a -listed Species at Risk per taxonomic category within Garry Oak and 

associated ecosystems in 2011 

Taxonomic Category 

Plants 

Mammals 

Reptiles & Amphibians 

Birds 

Invertebrates 

Totals 

B.C. Listings 

Red Blue 

51 19 

3 

2 

7 7 

7 8 

67 37 

104 

COSEWIC Listings 

Extirpated Endangered Threatened Special Concern 

1 30 4 4 

1 1 

2 2 5 

1 3 1 

3 36 7 9 

55 

a- Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada 

Douglas-fir biogeoclimatic zone (Chapter 2: Distribution and Description). It is estimated that 

less than 5% of the area covered by these ecosystems prior to European contact remains in a nearnatural 

state today (Lea 2006). Habitat loss due to land conversion for agriculture and urban 

development is the primary cause of this alarming decline (GOERT 2002). Remaining Garry Oak 

and associated ecosystems are further threatened by habitat degradation and fragmentation, 

invasion by exotic species, and suppression of fire disturbance. Alien invasive species compete 

with native species and change the species composition of the ecosystem (Chapter 9: Alien 

Invasive Species), while suppression of fire alters ecosystem function (Chapter 

3: Natural Processes and Disturbance). Climate change also impacts these 

ecosystems as changing weather patterns affect seasonal soil moisture 

patterns, the growth of alien species, and susceptibility to burning (GOERT 

2002). 

Many of the rare plant species and ecological communities occurring in Garry 

Oak and associated ecosystems are naturally rare (Fuchs 2001). The majority 

of them are endemic, meaning that they are found only in these ecosystems. 

These species are highly adapted to the unique conditions of these habitats, 

especially those found in such specialized habitats as seepages and vernal 

pools. It is this natural rarity combined with specialized habitat needs that 

makes many of these species particularly vulnerable to extinction. Political 

boundaries further add to the rarity of many of these entities in Canada, with 

their Canadian occurrences being at the very northern periphery of their 

ranges. Although they are uncommon south of the American border as well, 

many of these species are even less common in B.C. (Fuchs 2001). 

Plants 

Land conversion 

is the primary 

threat to Garry Oak 


ecosystems in B.C.; 

invasion by exotic 

species, habitat 

degradation and 

fragmentation, and 

fire suppression 

also play a role in 

their decline. 

In addition to these reasons for their natural rarity, many rare plant species are greatly threatened 

by habitat loss and fragmentation resulting from land conversion and management, including 

herbicide use (GOERT 2003a). Remaining populations are often damaged due to trampling and/or 

soil erosion. Many endemic species have adapted to the presence of soil moisture at key times in 



4-7


Habitat loss is the primary threat to Bog 

Bird’s-foot Trefoil (Lotus pinnatus), a Redlisted, 

Endangered species (SARA Schedule 

1) that grows in seasonally wet meadows. 

The known occurrences of Bog Bird’sfoot 

Trefoil in British Columbia are at the 

northernmost extent of the species’ global 

range. Globally, this species is considered 

secure (G4G5). Photo: Chris Junck 

their lifecycles; activities and invasive species that affect hydrological cycles can be devastating to 

these species. As the climate and resulting weather patterns change, further changes to hydrologic 

cycle become a key factor contributing to decline for some populations. Furthermore, many rare 

plants are grazed or browsed by both native and introduced fauna (GOERT 2003a). 

Vertebrates 

A number of vertebrates that were reliant on Garry Oak and associated ecosystems have become 

extirpated or endangered (Fuchs 2001). These include the Horned Lark strigata subspecies 

(Eremophila alpestris strigata), Vesper Sparrow affinis subspecies (Pooecetes gramineus affinis), 

Western Meadowlark (Georgia Depression population, Sturnella neglecta), Lewis’s Woodpecker 

(Georgia Depression population, Melanerpes lewisii), and Western Bluebird (Georgia Depression 

population, Sialia mexicana) (Fuchs 2001). These species have been affected by rapid habitat loss, 

fragmentation, and degradation due to invasive plant and animal species, as well as insufficient 

food sources and loss of habitat elements such as tree cover, including large live trees and 

standing or downed dead wood (GOERT 2003a). 

Invertebrates 

Very little is known about most invertebrate species at risk associated with Garry Oak ecosystems, 

with the exception of several butterfly species (Fuchs 2001). Most of the invertebrate species 

at risk in these ecosystems are at risk due to loss of food sources and suitable habitat (GOERT 

2003a). Moist meadow areas preferred by butterflies are being destroyed by urban development 

and heavy grazing or are being overgrown by invasive shrubs and grasses. Leaf litter, often 

providing shelter for overwintering pupae, is frequently cleared from the bases of oaks in 

residential areas. Butterfly populations are also affected by pesticide use, predation by pets, and 

the introduction of parasites from other introduced species such as the Cabbage White Butterfly 

(Pieris rapae) (GOERT 2003a). 

4.2 Legislation 

4.2.1 Legislated Protection of Species and Ecosystems at Risk 

This section describes only federal and provincial legislation for the protection of species at risk. 

There are additional potential methods of legal protection for species at risk at the municipal 

level through the BC Community Charter, the Local Government Act, and the Land Title Act 

4-8 



(GOERT 2007). Under this legislation, local governments can create bylaws, manage land use 

zoning, designate environmentally sensitive areas, and manage development permits. In addition, 

restrictive covenants can be placed on a property’s land title, which restrict the activities of both 

present and future holders of the title (GOERT 2007). Local regulations vary from region to region 

so are not discussed here in detail, but should be investigated by restoration practitioners. U.S. 

legislation, which falls under the federal Endangered Species Act, is also not discussed; more 

information can be found on the Endangered Species Program website of the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (www.fws.gov/endangered). 

Federal 

In Canada, federal protection for rare species falls under the Species at Risk 

Act (SARA 2003, www.sararegistry.gc.ca/approach/act/default_e.cfm). There 

is no legislative protection for ecosystems at risk; however, SARA does allow 

for an ecosystem-based approach to species at risk recovery. COSEWIC follows 

a multi-step process for assessing and ranking a species’ level of risk (see 

the COSEWIC website, www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct0/assessment_process_e. 

cfm, for more details on this process) and provides a recommendation to 

the federal Minister of Environment. It is the Minister, in consultation with 

COSEWIC, who then determines the final ranking of the species. A species 

must be added to Schedule 1 to receive protection under SARA (Environment 

Canada 2009). 

Species listed as 

Endangered or 

Threatened must 

have a recovery 

strategy and 

an action plan 

written, and a 

management plan 

must be developed 

for species of 

Special Concern. 

Once listed on Schedule 1, an endangered or threatened species is 

automatically protected on federal lands; no person shall kill, harm, harass or possess an 

individual or cause damage to the residence of one or more individuals. The habitats of species 

at risk are also recognized as critical habitat under the SARA once species have been designated. 

Critical habitat is defined as “the habitat that is necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed 

wildlife species and that is identified as the species’ critical habitat in the recovery strategy or in 

an action plan for the species”. 

SARA requires the development of planning documents to guide recovery for species at risk. For 

endangered and threatened species a recovery strategy and an action plan must be written, and 

for species of Special Concern a management plan must be developed. Once completed, these 

documents can be found on the SARA public registry (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm). 

These documents guide species recovery and outline threats, limiting factors, knowledge gaps, 

targets, and actions for each species. Critical habitat is currently being identified and included in 

several recovery strategies and action plans for species in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems, as 

of April 2011. Signing up for the registry e-news is an easy way to keep up on newly posted recovery 

planning documents (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/involved/newsletter/default_e.cfm). 

These recovery planning documents are often produced by a group of experts brought together 

as a recovery team. For the many species associated with Garry Oak ecosystems, the Garry Oak 

Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT) was formed to lead in recovery planning and to coordinate 

recovery activities (see www.goert.ca). In addition to the ecosystems-wide recovery strategy, 

three approved multi-species recovery strategies covering 20 species, two proposed single-species 

strategies, and three proposed single-species management plans are currently posted on the SARA 

registry (as of June 2011): Garry Oak woodlands; maritime meadows associated with Garry Oak 



4-9


ecosystems; vernal pools and other ephemeral wet areas associated with Garry oak ecosystems 

(www.goert.ca/publications); Rigid Apple Moss (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/ 

rs_rigid_apple_moss_0411_e.pdf); Dense-flowered Lupine (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/ 

files/plans/rs_Dense_flowered_Lupine_0311_e.pdf); Coastal Wood Fern (www.sararegistry. 

gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/mp_coastal_wood_fern_0411_e.pdf); Banded Cord-moss (www. 

sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/mp_banded_cord_moss_0411_e.pdf); and Twisted Oak 

Moss (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/plans/mp_twisted_oak_moss_0411_e.pdf). 

Provincial 

Protection of species at risk on non-federal land is under provincial jurisdiction and is subject to 

the legislation in each province. In British Columbia, there is currently no stand-alone legislation 

to protect species at risk or their habitats (i.e., protection for species at risk falls under several 

different Acts). 

The Wildlife Act (1996, www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/freeside/--%20W%20--/Wildlife%20 

Act%20%20RSBC%201996%20%20c.%20488/00_96488_01.xml) provides protection to all 

vertebrate species by prohibiting the possession, harassment, or injury of wildlife, or damage to 

designated wildlife habitat, other than as allowed by issued permits or licenses (e.g., for hunting) 

(MOE 1996). It also contains provisions to allow listing of vertebrate species as endangered or 

threatened. Only four species are currently listed under this act, none of which are associated with 

Garry Oak ecosystems (MOE 1996). 

The Wildlife Amendment Act 2004 (www.leg.bc.ca/37th5th/3rd_read/gov51-3.htm), which has not 

yet been brought into force by regulation as of 2010, enhances the protection of species at risk. It 

allows invertebrate and plant species (in addition to vertebrate species) to be listed, prohibits the 

The Great Blue Heron fannini subspecies 

(Ardea herodias fannini) is a provincially Bluelisted 

species and a species of Special Concern 

nationally (SARA Schedule 1). On federal lands, 

it is fully protected under SARA and its nests 

and eggs are protected provincially under B.C.’s 

Wildlife Act. Additionally, the Great Blue Heron, 

its nests, and eggs are protected from harm 

under the Migratory Birds Convention of 1994 

and from harm by forest and range practices by 

the Forest and Range Practices Act. Photo: Todd 

Carnahan 

4-10 



damage or destruction of a listed species’ residence, and increases the penalties if these species or 

their residences are harmed (including killed, taken, etc.) (MOE 2004b). A residence is defined as 

an area or natural feature of the habitat of a species at risk that is habitually occupied or used as a 

dwelling place by one or more individuals of the species at risk (e.g., nest or den) (MOE 2004b). 

The Forest and Range Practices Act (2004, FRPA, www.for.gov.bc.ca/code) governs the activities of 

forest and range licensees on provincial Crown land (MOFR 2008). FRPA enables the designation 

of areas of special management for species listed in the Category of Species at Risk or the 

Category of Regionally Significant Wildlife (MOE 2006). Within these areas, called Wildlife 

Habitat Areas, listed species are protected from damage due to forest and range practices. As of 

2010, the Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus), Great Blue Heron fannini subspecies (Ardea herodias 

fannini), and Lewis’s Woodpecker (Melanerpes lewisii) are the only species associated with Garry 

Oak ecosystems listed under the Category of Species at Risk under the FRPA (MOE 2006). 

Federal-Provincial 

The federal, provincial, and territorial governments have jointly signed the Accord for the 

Protection of Species at Risk (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/approach/strategy/default_e.cfm), in 

which the importance of intergovernmental cooperation for the protection of species at risk is 

acknowledged (Environment Canada 2009). The Canadian Endangered Species Conservation 

Council (CESCC), composed of ministers from each level of government, was established to 

oversee the activities of COSEWIC and the various levels of government. The British Columbian 

and federal ministries responsible for the management of species at risk have also signed the 

Canada-British Columbia Agreement on Species at Risk (www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/PubDocs/ 

bcdocs/419585/aa_Canada-British_Columbia_agreement_on_species_at_risk_0805_e.pdf). This 

agreement provides a framework for a coordinated approach to species at risk conservation and 

protection in the province (Environment Canada 2009). 

4.2.2 Permits 

Federal 

Where a species is protected under SARA, a permit or agreement is required for any “activity 

affecting a listed wildlife species, any part of its critical habitat or the residences of its individuals” 

(Environment Canada 2009). For restoration activities in which “the activity benefits the species 

or is required to enhance its chance of survival in the wild,” permits or agreements may be issued 

(Environment Canada 2009). This also includes the introduction or re-introduction of species 

listed on Schedule 1. 

The following conditions must also apply: 

• All reasonable alternatives to the activity that would reduce the impact on the species have 

been considered and the best solution has been adopted; 

• All feasible measures will be taken to minimize the impact of the activity on the species or its 

critical habitat or the residences of its individuals; and 

• The activity will not jeopardize the survival or recovery of the species (Environment Canada 

2009). 

See the SARA public registry for further details on permits and agreements (www.sararegistry. 

gc.ca/sar/permit/permits_e.cfm, Environment Canada 2009). 



4-11


Provincial 

Under the Wildlife Act, the capture, possession, shipping, and import of a vertebrate species is 

forbidden without a permit (MOE 1996). Permits are therefore required for the translocation of any 

vertebrate wildlife species in British Columbia (see Section 4.4.5: Translocations). 

Under the Ecological Reserve Act (1996) or the Protected Areas of British Columbia Act (2000), 

permits are required to conduct research activities in provincial parks and protected areas. 

Permitted activities relevant to restoration include “collection; monitoring; survey and inventory; 

and other research” (BC Parks 2007). See the BC Parks website for more information on permits 

(www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/info/permit_overview.html) in provincial parks and protected areas. 

Local 

Permits are often required to work on municipal or regional district lands. This varies from one 

municipality or regional district to the next. Practitioners having restoration sites on such public 

lands should consult their local government regulations. 

4.3 Planning for Restoration 

Before beginning planning for ecological restoration involving species or ecosystems at risk, the 

practitioner must be able to guarantee a multi-year commitment to the restoration project. Most 

projects require on-going maintenance and monitoring (Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring); if 

this maintenance is not possible then restoration work should not begin. If restoration activities 

Permits are needed for any 

activity that has the potential 

to affect a species at risk or 

its critical habitat on federal 

lands. A permit was required 

to conduct this survey of the 

Endangered (SARA Schedule 1) 

Yellow Montane Violet (Viola 

praemorsa spp. praemorsa) on 

Navigation Canada land at Mt. 

Tuam on Salt Spring Island. 

Photo: Carolyn Masson 

4-12 



are abandoned, previous efforts are rendered futile and can result in harming the species or 

ecosystems. Chapter 5: Restoration Planning goes through the process of planning a restoration 

project in detail; the information in this section will help you to flesh out the steps identified 

there. 

4.3.1 Who to Contact 

Species or Ecosystems at Risk Identification 

Early in the planning phase of any restoration project in a sensitive Garry Oak 

or associated ecosystem, restoration planners should determine whether there 

are any species or plant communities at risk at the site. 

• A detailed species inventory should be completed by a qualified biologist 

as there are a number of factors to consider in examining rare species. 

Among other considerations, these include familiarity with the species, 

time of year, and annual population fluctuations. The Garry Oak 

Ecosystems Recovery Team can provide referrals to qualified professionals 

(phone: 250-383-3427; email: info@goert.ca). 

• Consult the B.C. Ministry of Environment’s Conservation Data Centre 

to find out if they have any such records at the restoration site. This can 

be done by using their online mapping tool (http://webmaps.gov.bc.ca/ 

imfx/imf.jsp?site=imapbc) or by contacting the CDC staff directly (phone: 

250-356-0928; email: cdcdata@gov.bc.ca). 

• Consult the B.C. Species and Ecosystems Explorer (www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/toolintro.html) 

to see if any of the species found on the site are provincially listed as at risk. 

• Check the SARA public registry (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/species/default_e.cfm) to see if any 

of the species found on the site are also federally listed. 

Expert Advice 

Obtain expert advice from a qualified specialist when planning any restoration project. Such a 

specialist can include university researchers, specialized consultants, local stewardship groups, 

or government biologists (GOERT 2003a). Again, GOERT can be contacted for referrals to such 

specialists. 

In addition, for many SARA-listed species, recovery teams consisting of government and 

conservation experts have been formed. When working with any species for which such a recovery 

team exists, the team must be involved in the entire planning and restoration process. A list of the 

recovery team chairs and their contact information can be found on the SARA website 

(www.sararegistry.gc.ca). For species occurring in Garry Oak or associated ecosystems, contact 

GOERT. 

Landowner Contact 

Permission should be obtained from all relevant landowners to conduct restoration work on 

their land. If landowners are municipalities or other government agencies, this might require 

additional permits (see Section 4.2.2). 

Before beginning 

planning for 

ecological 

restoration 

involving species 

or ecosystems 

at risk, the 

practitioner 

must be able to 

guarantee a multiyear 

commitment 

to the restoration 

project. 



4-13


Conducting detailed inventories of a 

site is an important first step in the 

planning of any restoration project. 

Photo: Kersti Vaino 

4.3.2 Identifying Threats 

All threats to rare species or ecosystems, both imminent and long-term, should be identified. 

This will need to be done by a qualified professional or in consultation with a recovery team, 

if applicable, who will likely already have produced a list of threats. For those species having 

a recovery strategy (see Section 4.2.1), the strategy will include a section on identified threats, 

as will any COSEWIC status reports (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/search/advSearchResults_e. 

cfm?stype=doc&docID=18). Potential threats that might occur as a result of restoration activities 

(e.g., trampling and soil compaction or disturbance) should also be identified so that these can be 

minimized. 

4.3.3 Identifying Habitat 

Very little is known about many species at risk and their habitat requirements. It is therefore 

important that the restoration practitioner learn as much as they can about the species’ biology in 

order to understand its habitat requirements to the fullest extent possible. The habitat important 

to the species’ survival at the site should then be identified. GOERT maps and monitors habitat 

for many of the species at risk in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems and can provide this 

information on request to assist with restoration efforts. Habitat elements that are important 

to consider include seepages, plant associations, and shade that provide essential ecosystem 

functions (see Section 3.4.2) for the species. Suitable habitat (i.e., additional habitat that meets 

the species’ requirements but does not contain the species) should also be identified. Restoration 

activities should maintain these habitat elements and ecosystem functions to ensure the survival 

of the species at this site. More information on a number of species at risk, including their habitat 

requirements, is available in the field manual, Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated 

Ecosystems in British Columbia (www.goert.ca/pubs_at_risk.php). 

4-14 



Case Study 1. Golden Paintbrush and Parasitic Associations 

by Matt Fairbarns 

Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta) is a perennial herbaceous plant that occurs in a small 

proportion of native grassland areas on islands near Victoria, B.C., and similar habitats 

in Puget Sound. It is globally rare and listed as Endangered in Canada, where only two 

populations remain (Ryan and Douglas 1995). The Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team has 

supported recovery actions for Golden Paintbrush, including the removal of invasive species from 

its habitat, studies into its seasonal development and population processes, and experiments on 

propagation techniques. A key requirement for successful propagation involves the establishment 

of an essential parasitic relationship with a suitable host plant. 

CASE STUDY 

Parasitism is often viewed in a negative light but this view is incompatible 

with a mature appreciation of biodiversity, considering the rich 

assemblage of native plants and animals which are parasitic on others. 

Upon reflection, parasitism is evidently similar to predation in many 

respects (although many hosts may cope with parasitism, while predation 

tends to have more fatal consequences). 

Some parasitic plants extract both basic nutrients and complex energy 

sources from their hosts. They typically lack chlorophyll, since they 

rely upon the photosynthesis of their host plants. Lacking chlorophyll, 

their stems and leaves are often white rather than green. Such species 

are referred to as holoparasites. Golden Paintbrush, in contrast, is a 

hemiparasite. It invests little effort in building an extensive root system; 

instead it simply latches on to the roots of other plants using special 

suction-cup structures called haustoria. The haustoria extract water and 

mineral nutrients from the host plant and for this reason hemiparasites are 

also called root parasites. Unlike holoparasites, however, they do produce 

green leaves containing chlorophyll, which harvest energy from the sun to 

build carbon-based structures. 

Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja 

levisecta) blooming among 

the Common Camas 

(Camassia quamash) of Trial 

Island. Photo: Chris Junck 

It is likely that Golden Paintbrush, like many of its close relatives, is capable of growing even in the 

absence of a host. Nevertheless, by latching on to the roots of a suitable host it can reduce the 

amount of energy expended in creating an extensive root system and use the “savings” to build 

larger shoots and more seeds. 

The association between hemiparasite and host is a relatively random process and a broad range of 

species may be parasitized. A single Golden Paintbrush plant may form haustorial connections with 

more than one host and populations may collectively form a complex network of interconnected 

root systems with many host plants across a wide range of species. Different host plants may have 

different effects on their hemiparasite’s growth and reproduction, and some hosts may actually 

reduce the parasite’s success. 

Golden Paintbrush is not easily re-introduced to areas where it formerly occurred, nor is it easy to 

add plants to existing populations to increase their population size. Attempts to do so by adding 



4-15


seed tend to meet with little success, even when large numbers of seed are used and a favourable 

seedbed is created at the translocation site. For example, Fairbarns (2009) sowed 9,000 seeds of 

Golden Paintbrush into a maritime meadow site on Trial Island, site of Canada’s largest population 

of Golden Paintbrush. The experimental site lay within 20 metres of an existing subpopulation of 

Golden Paintbrush and shared the same habitat conditions. Despite the large number of seeds, no 

Golden Paintbrush plants were observed in the experimental area over the following four growing 

seasons. While some germination may have occurred (the seedlings are extremely small and very 

difficult to observe), the experiment was unsuccessful in augmenting the existing population. 

Similar results have been obtained in Washington State: Pearson and Dunwiddie (2006) found that 

even with large numbers of seed sown over a number of years, these efforts alone were insufficient 

to establish a new population. They had much greater success planting out Golden Paintbrush 

plants which had been raised in a greenhouse environment together with a suitable host plant. 

CASE STUDY 

Future trials to establish Golden Paintbrush plants would benefit by using greenhouse-reared plants 

growing with a host such as Woolly Sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum), a host plant which occurs 

naturally in the maritime meadow environments favoured by Golden Paintbrush. 1 

Golden Paintbrush is not the only hemiparasitic species at risk in Garry Oak ecosystems. Victoria’s 

Owl-clover (Castilleja victoriae), a globally endangered species entirely restricted to vernal seeps 

associated with Garry Oak ecosystems, is a closely related species. Rosy Owl-clover (Orthocarpus 

bracteosus) and Bearded Owl-clover (Triphysaria versicolor) are also hemiparasitic species at risk 

found in vernal seeps and pools associated with Garry Oak ecosystems. Attempts to restore the 

three owl-clover species are complicated by the fact that they are delicate, short-lived annuals 

which may be difficult to propagate and are likely to die when transplanted. These difficulties, along 

with their hemiparasitic life strategy, complicate translocation efforts. 

References 

Fairbarns, M. 2005. Demographic and phenological patterns in Castilleja levisecta (Golden 

Paintbrush). Summary Report for the Canadian Forest Service. 

Fairbarns, M. 2009. Population Restoration Studies of Plant Species at Risk. Unpublished report to 

Natural Resources Canada-Pacific Forestry Centre. 

Kroeker, N. 2011. Personal Communication. Ecosystem Scientist, Parks Canada Agency, Victoria, B.C. 

Pearson, S. F. and P. Dunwiddie. 2006. Experimental seeding and outplanting of golden paintbrush 

(Castilleja levisecta) at Glacial Heritage, Mima Mounds, and Rocky Prairie, Thurston County, WA 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Olympia, WA. 

Ryan, M. and G.W. Douglas. 1995. Status Report on the Golden Paintbrush Castilleja levisecta in 

Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa, ON. 

Matt Fairbarns is a botanist specializing in the rare plants of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems. 

1 In 2009, Parks Canada translocated 250 greenhouse-reared Golden Paintbrush plants to a small islet in Gulf Islands National 

Park Reserve. The experimental translocation is designed to address key biological and ecological knowledge gaps and to 

test translocation methodologies. If successful, the experimental population will be augmented to establish a viable selfsustaining 

population. (N. Kroeker, pers. comm. 2011). 

4-16 



4.3.4 Defining Goals 

A critical step for any successful restoration project is to set target restoration goals. For species 

at risk, it is further necessary to ensure that these fit into the long-term recovery goals for the 

species, which are determined in consultation with the recovery team and recovery strategy, when 

these exist, and/or a qualified expert. Recovery goals should be applied to the individual project, 

resulting in restoration goals and objectives that address the site-specific threats to the species. 

Typical recovery goals for a species at risk are: 

• To maintain the current population 

• To expand the current population 

• To re-introduce or introduce a new population or sub-population 

To maintain the current population, restoration objectives should mitigate 

identified threats and maintain identified important habitat. In addition 

to this, objectives for expansions of current populations should maintain or 

create suitable habitat adjacent to the existing population. Objectives for 

the introduction or re-introduction of a species at risk (via translocation; 

see Section 4.4.4 for more information on translocations) should maintain 

existing, or create new, suitable habitat at the recipient site. 

When a site has 

species at risk, 

target restoration 

goals must fit into 

the long-term 

recovery goals for 

the species. 

The provincially recognized recovery goals for Endangered Sharp-tailed Snakes (Contia 

tenuis) are to ensure the species persistence across its native range in Canada over the 

long-term, and to maintain known occurrences of Sharp-tailed Snakes in the short-term. 

Creating artificial cover objects, like the ones pictured above, is one way to counteract the 

degradation of Sharp-tailed Snake habitat. Photo: Carolyn Masson 



4-17


4.3.5 Funding Programs 

There are several government sources of funding available for work on the protection and recovery 

of species at risk. Target groups involved in restoration projects can apply for funding from these 

sources. 

Table 4.2 Government funding sources available for the restoration of species at risk 

Name 

Description 

Target Groups 

Agency 

Habitat Stewardship 

Program (HSP) 

www.ec.gc.ca/hsppih/default.asp?lang=En&n 

=59BF488F-1 

“The overall goal of the HSP is to 

"contribute to the recovery of endangered, 

threatened, and other species at 

risk, and to prevent other species from 

becoming a conservation concern, by 

engaging Canadians from all walks of 

life in conservation actions to benefit 

wildlife."” 

Any group 

conducting 

activities on 

private lands, 

provincial 

Crown lands, 

Aboriginal 

lands, or in 

aquatic and 

marine areas 

Environment 

Canada with 

Parks Canada 

and the 

Department of 

Fisheries and 

Oceans 

Inderdepartmental 

Recovery Fund (IRF) 

www.firirf.gc.ca/dspConfirmation_ 

E.cfm?action=not_ 

logged_in 

“The IRF provides access to funding for 

federal departments and departmental 

corporations for implementing recovery 

activities for and conducting surveys on 

species at risk that occur on federal 

lands or waters, or for species under 

federal jurisdiction.” 

Federal 

departments 

and 

departmental 

corporations 

Environment 

Canada 

Endangered Species 

Recovery Fund (ESRF) a 

wwf.panda.org/who_we_a 

re/wwf_offices/canada/pro 

jects/index.cfm?uProjectID 

=CA0063 

“The ESRF sponsors high-priority 

research and education projects to 

assist in the recovery of extirpated, 

endangered and threatened Canadian 

species, and to prevent other species 

from becoming so classified.” 

University 

researchers and 

conservation 

organizations 

Environment 

Canada and 

World Wildlife 

Fund–Canada 

Ecological Gifts Program 

www.cwsscf.ec.gc.ca/egp-pde 

“In order to help Canada's landowners 

and conservation groups preserve 

Canada's natural heritage, the 

Government of Canada has eliminated 

the tax on capital gains for all certified 

ecological gift donations made on or 

after May 2, 2006 by reducing the 

inclusion rate to zero.” 

Private 

landowners 

and 

corporations 

Environment 

Canada 

EcoAction 

www.ec.gc.ca/ecoaction 

“EcoAction encourages project 

submissions that will protect, 

rehabilitate or enhance the natural 

environment, and build the capacity of 

communities to sustain these activities 

into the future.” 

Non-profit 

groups 

Environment 

Canada 

a This funding source is under review as of 2010 

4-18 



4.4 Special Considerations for Restoration Methods 

Restoration methods should be tailored for every site and species. Best management practices are 

not known for many species and are changing as new and more effective methods are discovered. 

Methods should therefore be determined in consultation with an expert and using an adaptive 

management approach, which may require some experimentation. Adaptive management allows 

restoration practitioners to learn about the species throughout the restoration project and to 

adapt their methods and objectives based on the responses of the target species. 

These considerations for restoration methods are meant to complement Chapter 8: Restoration 

Strategies with specific reference to species at risk. Other sources and experts should be consulted. 

GOERT’s Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems in British Columbia 

(www.goert.ca/pubs_at_risk.php) manual has some management information for a growing 

number of species at risk, and GOERT is producing an increasing number of documents to guide 

activities in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems. Restoration practitioners should regularly 

check GOERT’s webpage (www.goert.ca/publications) for new materials. 

General management recommendations that apply for all species and ecosystems at risk 

occurrences include the following (GOERT 2003): 

• Access to the site as well as land use should be limited, particularly at times of the year 

when the occurrence is most sensitive 

• Pesticides and herbicides should be used with extreme caution in the immediate and 

surrounding areas 

• All affected landowners should be notified of the occurrence of an at-risk species or 

ecosystem and appropriate management practices encouraged 



4-19


Case Study 2. Habitat Restoration for an Endangered Bird 

Species, the Coastal Vesper Sparrow, at the Nanaimo Airport: 

a Study in Adaptive Management 

by Trudy Chatwin 

CASE STUDY 

The Coastal Vesper Sparrow, listed federally under the name Vesper Sparrow, affinis 

subspecies, (Pooecetes gramineus affinis) is a small bird that occupies sparsely vegetated 

grasslands with scattered shrubs or trees, and occurs west of the Cascade Mountains 

(COSEWIC 2006). It is rare in Canada and is federally listed as Endangered and is also on the 

provincial Red List. The Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team’s Vertebrates at Risk Recovery 

Implementation Group (Verts RIG) has been working over the past 7 years (2003–2010) to recover 

the remaining population of around 6 pairs of the sparrow. An inventory of Vancouver Island in 

2002 revealed that the only remaining site occupied by Coastal Vesper Sparrows in Canada is at the 

Nanaimo Airport. Funding from the Habitat Stewardship Program, the GOERT Society, and Canadian 

Wildlife Service has supported inventory, stewardship, and restoration work at the Nanaimo Airport 

since that time. 

The federally Endangered, provincially Redlisted 

Vesper Sparrow affinis subspecies 

(Pooecetes gramineus affinis) nests on the 

ground. Extreme caution must be taken 

when surveying the habitat of this species 

and when coordinating restoration efforts. 

Photo: Shyanne Smith 

Issues and Considerations 

The Coastal Vesper Sparrow utilizes habitat at the south 

end of the airport that is comprised of grasses, forbs, 

shrubs, and the occasional cottonwood tree. In some 

areas, vegetative cover is minimal due to the gravelly 

nature of the substrate and the majority of the cover is 

comprised of introduced species of grasses and forbs 

and Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius). The sparrows 

nest on the ground under partial cover of mown 

broom, Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), and 

other forbs. Males use the broom, as well as fences, 

for singing perches, while both sexes also use the 

broom as escape cover. Although the sparrows use the 

broom patches and sparsely vegetated grassland in 

between, the Verts RIG is concerned about allowing the 

aggressive invasion of broom to continue. It is thought 

that ultimately this invasion will result in filling in the 

open areas and also result in excessive nitrogen in the 

soil, thus promoting lush grass growth and reducing 

habitat quality. The Nanaimo Airport Commission is 

also concerned that the broom harbours introduced 

European Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) that cause 

significant safety concerns at the airport. 

4-20 



Restoration History 

In 2002, the Verts RIG began discussions with the Nanaimo Airport Commission on how to maintain 

the habitat of the endangered bird and meet the commission’s safety interests. A Stewardship 

Agreement was signed which recommended that no more than 20% of broom be removed in 

the area occupied by the sparrow and that any mowing and broom removal not be done during 

the breeding period. From 2003 to 2005, some areas were hand-thinned using loppers and weed 

trimmers and a larger adjacent area was cleared using a mechanical mower in 2003. In 2005, native 

shrubs (Common Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia), and Nootka 

Rose (Rosa nutkana)) were planted to replace the broom but within months these had been 

chewed by the introduced rabbits. The sparrows used all the areas following clearing; however, 

the mowed areas were quickly re-populated by broom growing to 90 cm high! In 2006 and 2007, 

hedgerows of the burgeoning broom were cleared. In March 2007, excavators were used to scarify 

the habitat in the south-east corner of the airport, leaving only about 5% herbaceous cover. Large 

piles of cut broom were left on site. Despite this major habitat alteration, the sparrows used the 

hedgerows and the broom piles as singing perches. However, during the nesting seasons, the 

majority of the population shifted further to the south end of the airport. The habitat that had been 

excavated filled in with sparse grasses and herbs by 2008 and looked as though it would serve as 

nesting habitat in the 2009 breeding season. However, the Coastal Vesper Sparrows shifted their 

nesting south again. Only one bird held a territory at the south end of the excavated area and no 

nests were found in the hand-cleared areas. 

CASE STUDY 

Adapting Restoration to Changing Habits of the Coastal Vesper Sparrow 

Given the changing nesting pattern, it was uncertain what direction to take for restoration. In the 

fall of 2008, members of the Verts RIG did a joint field inspection with airport staff to discuss this. It 

was decided that a hydro-mower would be hired to cut all non-native vegetation in an area north 1 of 

the birds’ territories. Prior to the hydro-mowing, all native Nootka Rose, Cottonwood (Populus sp.), 

and Trailing Blackberry (Rubus ursinus) were flagged and broom was hand cleared around them. 

In this way, the hydro-mower could clearly avoid the native shrubs. After mowing, the vegetative 

debris was raked from gravelly areas in order to avoid undesirable mulching of the potentially 

suitable habitat. Native shrubs were again planted with protective barriers in April just before the 

sparrows returned to nest. In the 2009 breeding season, the sparrows continued their southward 

movement and did not use the restored areas. It is believed that this movement was due mostly to 

bird site fidelity and conspecific attraction 2 , rather than habitat preference. 

Due to the ever-burgeoning broom problem, restoration activities in fall 2009 and 2010 involved 

hand-cutting broom in patches adjacent to the habitat used by the sparrows in those years. The 

patches were based on a 5 m radius around patches of likely habitat on gravelly substrate. The 

cleared patches have been mapped to better judge the effectiveness of the program. 

Conclusion 

While there were limitations to the effectiveness of the restoration program, each year joint field 

1 There was concern that cutting broom in the existing territory of the sparrows might alter the habitat too much. 

2 Conspecific attraction is the attraction of being near others of the same species. 



4-21


meetings were held to determine the plan of action based on the response of the sparrows, the 

vegetation, and the interests of the Nanaimo Airport Commission. A variety of techniques were 

used, ranging from hand-cutting to excavating, to restore the degraded ecosystem. The most 

effective method for maintaining Coastal Vesper Sparrow habitat at the Nanaimo Airport appears 

to be a combination of mowing and hand-clearing. 

References 

COSEWIC. 2006. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Vesper Sparrow affinis subspecies 

Pooecetes gramineus affinis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in 

Canada. Ottawa, ON. vi + 22 pp. www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_vesper_ 

sparrow_e.pdf. 

CASE STUDY 

Trudy Chatwin is the Rare and Endangered Species Biologist with the BC Ministry of Forests, Lands, 

and Natural Resource Operations, and Chair of the Vertebrates at Risk Recovery Implementation 

Group, Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team. 

4-22 



4.4.1 Alien Invasive Species 

Second only to habitat loss, the presence of alien invasive species is the greatest threat to Garry 

Oak and associated ecosystems and their species at risk. However, there are instances when alien 

invasive species can serve a critical ecosystem function for a species at risk and might need to 

be preserved. For example, some rare plants may rely on protection from herbivory provided by 

invasive shrubs, and some rare butterflies feed extensively on invasive plant species. See Chapter 9 

for more information on alien invasive species and control methods. 

Before any alien invasive species are removed, the impact of their removal 

should be evaluated and a strategy developed to minimize potential negative 

impacts. The removal of invasive plants by pulling up the roots can disturb the 

soil, which further encourages the germination of alien plant seeds (e.g., see 

Ussery and Krannitz 1998). Plants should therefore be removed in a manner 

that minimizes soil disturbance. This can be achieved by cutting instead of 

hand pulling or, if pulling is required, by doing so in the wetter winter months 

when the soil is softer. The presence of some invasive species also affects the 

chemistry of the site. For example, Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) fixes 

nitrogen from the air and increases soil nutrient levels (GOERT 2003b). Once 

cut, broom can leave behind nitrogen-rich soils favourable to invasive species, 

and cut broom plants should be removed from sensitive areas to reduce the 

effects of the phytotoxin they produce which inhibits growth of other plants. 

Before any alien 

invasive species 

are removed, the 

impact of their 

removal should be 

evaluated and a 

strategy developed 

to minimize 

potential negative 

impacts. 

The impacts of invasive and/or alien species should be evaluated prior to their removal. Many Garry 

Oak ecosystems have been used for sheep grazing, beginning in the mid- to late-1800s, and sheep 

remain feral on Salt Spring Island today. Exclosure experiments can be used to assess the potential 

positive and negative effects that this alien species has on Garry Oak and associated ecosystems. The 

exclosure fencing is protecting a population of Endangered, Red-listed Yellow Montane Violet (Viola 

praemorsa spp. praemorsa) from sheep grazing. Photo: Carolyn Masson 



4-23


4.4.2 Hydrologic Regimes 

Hydrologic regimes can be important to plant and animal species alike. Many rare plants in these 

ecosystems, particularly those adapted to seasonally flooded areas or seeps, rely on the presence 

of soil moisture at critical times of the year for survival. For some animals, the dependence on soil 

moisture is indirect, such as the Common Ringlet butterfly (Coenonympha california insulana) 

relying on green grasses throughout the dry summer months to provide habitat for larvae, and 

the Sharp-tailed Snake (Contia tenuis) relying on the presence of slugs for food, which require 

moist soils (GOERT 2003). It is important that restoration practices do not disrupt the hydrology 

of the site, or if it has already been disrupted, that the hydrology be restored. Soil compaction 

due to trampling or the use of heavy machinery should be avoided around sensitive areas; also, 

if hydrology-altering species are present e.g., Orchard-grass (Dactylis glomerata) or Sweet 

Vernalgrass (Anthoxanthum odoratum), restoration for the site should include removing and 

controlling them. 

4.4.3 Timing of Restoration 

Appropriate timing is critical to the effectiveness of restoration efforts and 

must be incorporated into the work plan. Restoration work conducted in the 

vicinity of a species at risk occurrence could be more damaging than beneficial 

if carried out at the wrong time of year. Areas in the vicinity of a species at risk 

should be avoided during the most sensitive times in the species’ lifecycle, e.g., 

when plants are developing, flowering, and setting seed; when insect larvae are 

developing; and when birds are nesting. It is important instead to undertake 

restoration activities when they will have the least negative effect on the target 

species and its critical habitat. For plants this will usually be after they have 

set seed or when they are dormant, and for animals this time is typically after 

the young have matured. If restoration work must be conducted during the 

sensitive period, extreme care must be taken not to damage the target species. 

Restoration work 

conducted in the 

vicinity of a species 

at risk occurrence 

could be more 

damaging than 

beneficial if carried 

out at the wrong 

time of year. 

Restoration work, including 

planting native grass 

plugs (as shown here), 

is conducted each fall 

at Somenos Garry Oak 

Protected Area in Duncan, 

B.C. By mid-fall all the native 

forbs, including at least three 

species at risk, are dormant 

at the site and restoration 

work can be conducted 

with minimal damage to the 

native species. Photo: Dave 

Polster 

4-24 



Due to the seasonality of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems (i.e., extreme wetness in winter 

and spring followed by summer drought), the sensitive time of year for most species falls between 

early spring and early summer. However, this is not the case for all species, such as the White-top 

Aster (Sericocarpus rigidus) which flowers in late summer, and the Common Ringlet butterfly, 

which produces a second brood during the summer. It is therefore important that enough is 

known about the biology and lifecycle of a species to be able to avoid its sensitive times (see 

Section 4.3.3 Identifying Habitat). More information on a number of species at risk, including 

their life histories, is available in the Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems in 

British Columbia (www.goert.ca/pubs_at_risk.php) manual. 

4.4.4 Translocations 

By translocation, a species can be either re-introduced to where it was once known to occur or 

introduced to a new site where it has not historically occurred. Translocations are only to be used 

when the long-term survival of existing populations cannot be ensured and other management 

options have failed. It is important that translocations never come before the protection and 

management of plants in situ and are not viewed as a solution to their destruction at a site. 

Translocations are the deliberate movement of individuals or propagules from one location to 

another. They can be used to re-establish the historical distribution of a species (see Case Study 

3), to maintain or restore biodiversity, to promote conservation awareness, and to increase our 

understanding of the biology, ecology, and genetic adaptation of a species at risk (Austin 2004; 

Vallee et al. 2004; McKay et al. 2005). Translocation may include adding new individuals to an 

existing population (augmentation), establishing a new population within the historical range 

(introduction), or establishing a population in a location which had previously supported the 

species (re-introduction). Translocation beyond the historical range of the species should only be 

done in well-thought-out circumstances, for example, when no other sites that seem appropriate 

are available within the range, or in anticipation of long-term climate change. 

Translocations must be planned very carefully, as poorly conducted ones may cause damage 

to both donor and recipient sites. Insufficient knowledge of the biology, ecology and genetic 

adaptation of the species at risk can lead to failures (see Fiedler 1991; Falk et al. 1996) through 

the introduction of pathogens, alteration of ecological processes, and/or displacement of other 

species (see Fahselt 1988; Vallee et al. 2004). Many translocation projects are expensive and have 

low success rates due to the fact that they need long-term maintenance and necessary goals and 

targets are not established. Few monitoring data are available to prove the long-term viability of 

translocated populations. 



4-25


Case Study 3. The San Juan Islands Western Bluebird 

Re-introduction Project 

by Lisa Dumoulin 

A bright spring sky falls 

Speck by speck into the valley 

Bluebirds returning 

CASE STUDY 

–ELIZA HABEGGER 

Background 

After an absence of almost 50 years, Western Bluebirds 

(Sialia mexicana) are once again migrating to breed in 

the San Juan Islands, a small archipelago north of Puget 

Sound, Washington. The spring and summer of 2010 saw 

the return of 24 Western Bluebirds, the most to return to 

the islands since their extirpation in the 1960s (K. Foley, 

pers. comm. 2010). The birds’ return is a mark of success 

for the San Juan Islands Western Bluebird Re-introduction 

Project: a five-year project (2007–2011) to re-establish a 

breeding population of the birds on the San Juan Islands. 

The natural range of Western Bluebirds is from Mexico 

to Canada, west of the Rocky Mountains (Peterson 1990). Western Bluebirds began to decline in 

abundance in the northern extent of their range during the 1930s due to the loss of suitable habitat 

(e.g., Garry Oak woodlands and meadows). The extirpation of the Georgia Depression population 

of Western Bluebirds from the San Juan Islands was driven primarily by the declining availability of 

a specific habitat element—nest cavities—through the conversion of oak woodlands to agricultural 

lands and through management practices that removed large dead trees. Prior to their decline, 

Western Bluebirds were a significant part of the landscape (www.sjpt.org). The San Juan Islands 

Western Bluebird Re-introduction Project (a partnership of the San Juan Preservation Trust [SJPT], 

the American Bird Conservancy, the San Juan Islands Audubon Society, and the Ecostudies Institute) 

has embraced the bluebird as a “flagship species” for their ongoing efforts to restore and preserve 

the integrity of the San Juan Islands’ Garry Oak ecosystems (Slater 2009). 

Justification 

A male and female Western Bluebird perch on 

the feeding station near their nestbox on San 

Juan Island. Their nesting is one of the many 

incremental successes that the San Juan 

Islands Western Bluebird Re-introduction 

Project has had since its initiation in 2007. 

Photo: Elyse Portal 

Ecologically, the Western Bluebird is an ideal candidate species for a re-introduction program. 

Bluebirds breed in a wide variety of open habitats, as long as nest cavities, low perches and an 

open understorey are present (Guinan et al. 2008). Moreover, individuals often show site fidelity, 

returning to the same nesting territory year after year. Juveniles, too, have been observed to return 

to their site of fledging (Scriven 1999). Being cavity nesters, they also respond well to nestbox 

programs (Slater 2009). Western Bluebirds have re-colonized areas of their former range in Oregon 

and Washington where nestbox programs have been managed effectively. Furthermore, the recent 

successful re-establishment of Eastern Bluebirds (Sialia sialis) in South Florida through translocation 

offers transferable methodologies suitable for a re-introduction of Western Bluebirds (Slater 2001, 

Lloyd et al. 2009). 

4-26 



Equally, the San Juan Islands are well-suited for supporting bluebirds. The San Juan Islands and 

the Canadian southern Gulf Islands were among the last strongholds for the Georgia Depression 

population of Western Bluebirds in the northern extent of their range. Although much of the land 

on the San Juan Islands has been transformed for agricultural purposes, a pre-project assessment 

indicated that suitable habitat was sufficient (with nestbox management) in north Puget Sound, 

centred on San Juan Island, to support a population (G. Slater, pers. comm. 2010). By providing 

bluebird-specific nestboxes, a key component of their habitat needs—cavities for nesting—is 

restored. 

CASE STUDY 

Translocation 

For the San Juan re-introduction, bluebirds are translocated as pairs from the source population at 

Fort Lewis, WA by road and ferry. The birds are then placed into large outdoor aviaries located in 

suitable habitat at sites on San Juan Island. Pairs are held until there is evidence of nest-building or 

other breeding behaviour. Pairs are released after three weeks if no breeding or nest building activity 

is observed during the holding period. Later in the breeding season, some pairs are translocated 

with nestlings. During transport, nestlings are separated from their parents so that they can be fed 

and to reduce stress to the adults. Juveniles and their parents are reunited in the aviary upon arrival 

to San Juan Island (K. Foley, pers. comm. 2010a). These family groups are released once the young 

have fledged and are capable of sustained flight (G. Slater, pers. comm. 2010). Single females are also 

translocated to balance the increasing male-bias of the re-establishing population. 

Results 

To date (fall 2010), 79 adults have been translocated, and in 2010, after the fourth year of the project, 

the established bluebird population size on San Juan Island has reached 33 adults (San Juan Islands 

Bluebird Project, unpublished data). The program has met preliminary criteria of success: individuals 

have been safely translocated to the release site and released individuals have established breeding 

territories; both translocated individuals and their offspring have reproduced successfully; and the 

re-introduced population has grown in size each year (G. Slater, pers. comm. 2010). In 2007, the first 

year of the project, only one pair was observed to have bred and only three young are known to 

have fledged. In 2010, 84 juveniles fledged. Program managers are optimistic that the population will 

continue to increase in 2011, the last year of re-introductions. However, as with any re-introduction 

or translocation project, the re-colonization process is slow, and the establishing San Juan Islands 

bluebird population is vulnerable, making long-term monitoring an important component of a reintroduction 

project. 

The San Juan Islands Western Bluebird Re-introduction Project has followed IUCN’s Guidelines for 

Re-introductions (International Union for Conservation of Nature, IUCN 1998). Results from the 

project will contribute to the growing documentation of re-introduction projects, particularly for 

land birds. Therefore, the results should help improve the success rate of species re-introductions, a 

primary goal in the field of re-introduction biology (Sutherland et al. 2010; Ewen and Armstrong 2007; 

Seddon et al. 2007). 

Challenges and Successes 

Among the most challenging aspects of the project were developing and implementing translocation 

protocols, adapting aviary logistics, and finding and monitoring released birds. Much of this project’s 

success can be attributed to the Bluebird Project’s adaptive management practices. Several aspects 

of the project have been refined as the project has progressed. For example, the project switched 



4-27


to using larger aviaries and longer holding times after territory establishment was relatively low 

with small aviaries and a short holding period (K. Foley, pers. comm. 2010b). Project managers also 

responded to the increasingly male-biased sex-ratio of the establishing population by developing 

translocation and release protocols for single females. The project has increased juvenile survival and 

adult reproductive success by increasing the amount of supplemental food (mealworms) provided 

to nesting pairs during periods of cold weather and periods when young are feeding in the nest, 

and the first several weeks following fledging. Predator and competitor deterrents have also been 

erected where necessary (K. Foley, pers. comm. 2010a). 

CASE STUDY 

Access to greater funds has also allowed the Bluebird Project to realize increased successes. In 

the first year of re-introductions there were no available funds to support a full-time technician, 

despite the need for consistent monitoring of the released birds’ health and whereabouts. Since 

2008, however, the Bluebird Project has been able to fund a full-time summer technician. The 

technician plays an essential role, monitoring the birds post-release and surveying for returning 

birds, monitoring nestboxes in established breeding territories, providing supplemental food, and 

identifying and mediating threats in each nesting territory. 

Community involvement in the Bluebird Project has also contributed to its successes. The SJPT, 

who has responsibility for the majority of the local education and outreach efforts, initially 

approached the San Juan Island community through educational seminars prior to commencing 

the re-introduction. Interested nestbox hosts and monitors were sought and community concerns 

were addressed. Nestbox hosts often play an important role in the project (the nest that produced 

three clutches in 2010 is provided supplemental mealworms by its nestbox host twice a day), acting 

in addition to the summer technician. Being able to play a significant role in supporting a family of 

bluebirds encourages a sense of ownership of the project for nestbox hosts. The SJPT hopes that 

this involvement in turn may encourage greater community support for prairie oak ecosystem 

preservation (www.sjpt.org). The SJPT has also engaged its community creatively, providing nestbox 

kits for purchase, holding nestbox building workshops, staffing outreach booths at local farmers’ 

markets, conducting educational programs for schoolchildren, conducting media releases, writing 

a website blog, distributing an e-newsletter, and even holding a bluebird haiku contest (K. Foley, 

pers. comm. 2010b)! Generating and sustaining sufficient community support for the re-introduction 

project has been crucial to its success thus far. 

Next Steps 

For the re-introduced San Juan Island Western Bluebird population to persist, additional populations 

or sub-populations will need to be established within the northern extent of the species’ range 

(Slater 2009). New populations may emerge through dispersal, as the San Juan Island population 

grows, but additional translocations may be necessary. A re-introduction project is currently being 

planned by the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT) for 2012–2016 in the Canadian 

southern Gulf Islands, part of the same archipelago as the San Juan Islands. The GOERT project will 

face additional challenges, including permitting for the international transport of living species. The 

project will benefit, however, by the lessons learned and experience gained through the San Juan 

project. 

4-28 



References 

Ewen, J.G. and D.P. Armstrong. 2007. Strategic monitoring of re-introductions in ecological 

restoration programmes. Ecoscience 14(4):401-409. 

Foley, K. June 13, 2010a. Personal communication. Program Director, San Juan Preservation Trust, 

Friday Harbor, Washington. 

CASE STUDY 

Foley, K. October 26, 2010b. Personal communication. Program Director, San Juan Preservation 

Trust, Friday Harbor, Washington. 

Guinan, J. A., P. A. Gowaty, and E. K. Eltzroth. 2008. Western Bluebird (Sialia mexicana). in A. Poole, 

editor. The birds of North America. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY. 

IUCN. 1998. IUCN guidelines for re-introductions. Prepared by the IUCN/SSC Re-Introduction 

Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 

Lloyd, J. D., G. L. Slater, and S. Snow. 2009. Demography of re-introduced Eastern Bluebirds and 

Brown-headed Nuthatches. Journal of Wildlife Management 73:955-964. 

Peterson, R.T. 1990. A Field Guide to Western Birds 3rd Edition. Houghton Mifflin, NY. 

Scriven, D. (Editor). 1999. Bluebird trails: a guide to success 3rd Edition. Bluebird Recovery Program: 

Minneapolis, MN. p.22. 

Seddon, P.J., D.P. Armstrong and R.F. Maloney. 2007. Developing the science of re-introduction 

biology. Conservation Biology 21 (2): 303-312. 

Slater, G. L. 2001. Avian restoration in Everglades National Park (1997–2001): translocation 

methodology, population demography, and evaluating success. Final Report to Everglades 

National Park. Ecostudies Institute, Mount Vernon, WA. 

Slater, G.L. 2004. Final Report: An evaluation of the Brown-headed Nuthatch and Eastern Bluebird 

re-introduction program during the 2-year post-translocation period (2002–2003). Everglades 

National Park, Homestead, FL. 

Slater, G.L. 2009. Western Bluebird (Sialis mexicana) re-introduction work plan for southwestern 

British Columbia, Canada. Prepared for the Garry Oak Recovery Team, Vertebrates at Risk 

Recovery Implementation Group. Ecostudies Institute, Mount Vernon, WA. 

Slater, G.L. November 1, 2010. Personal Communication. Research Director, Ecostudies Institute, 

Mount Vernon, WA. 

Sutherland, W.J., D.P. Armstrong, S.H.M. Butchart, J.M Earnhardt, J. Ewen, I. Jamieson, C.G. Jones, 

R. Lee, P. Newbery, J.D. Nichols, K.A. Parker, F. Sarrazin, P.J. Seddon, N. Shah, V. Tatayah. 2010. 

Standards for documenting and monitoring bird re-introduction projects. Conservation Letters 

3: 229-235. 

Lisa Dumoulin worked as the Outreach and Stewardship Officer for the Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Recovery Team in 2010–2011. 



4-29


Surveys to monitor 

the results of 

restoration should 

be conducted 

annually by 

a qualified 

biologist and at 

the appropriate 

time(s) of year. 

4.4.5 Monitoring 

Prior to commencing restoration work on any site, it is strongly recommended 

that a baseline survey be conducted. A baseline survey provides a starting 

point for all future surveys to be compared against. The focus of the baseline 

survey for species at risk will be to gather data on the size (distribution and 

number of individuals) and condition (population health and reproductive 

success) of species at risk on the site. 

All known populations of species at risk, whether the target of restoration 

efforts or not, should be monitored on a long-term basis for population 

trends (GOERT 2003a). As relatively little is known about many rare species, 

monitoring helps us to learn more about their biology, evaluate their viability, 

and detect developing threats. Surveys to monitor the results of restoration 

should be conducted annually by a qualified biologist (see Section 4.3.1 Who to Contact) and at 

the appropriate time(s) of year. Any new data on a species at risk occurrence should be reported to 

the Conservation Data Centre (GOERT 2003a). See Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring for more 

information on monitoring. 

Experimental plots, like the exclosure and control pictured here, help to refine local knowledge and 

restoration practices but require a multi-year commitment to maintenance and monitoring. The restoration 

taking place at the site above has been on-going for three years. Experimental plots are being maintained 

to assess whether the restoration is benefiting the species of Special Concern at the site. Photo: GOERT 

4-30 



All known populations of 

species at risk, whether the 

target of restoration efforts 

or not, should be monitored 

on a long-term basis for 

population trends. Deltoid 

Balsamroot (Balsamorhiza 

deltoidea) is a Red-listed, 

Endangered (SARA 

Schedule 1) species at risk 

in Garry Oak woodlands. 


4.5 Conclusions 

It is important to consider species and ecosystems at risk during any restoration project and the 

effects that the project might have on them. This chapter provides resources to help restoration 

practitioners determine whether there are species or ecosystems at risk on their site. If present, 

then restoration practitioners should work with the appropriate experts to learn all that they can 

about the occurrence and how to manage for its survival. It is important that restoration activities 

not be detrimental to these sensitive species and that every effort be made to preserve them. The 

restoration project should be planned with care, utilizing the principles and guidelines discussed 

in this chapter. 


Austin, J. 2004. Ex situ conservation and translocations in species recovery: toward a national 

policy and guidelines for Canada. Prepared for the Canadian Wildlife Service. Ottawa, 

Ontario. 

BC Parks. 2007. Park use permits and ecological reserve permits. Province of BC, Ministry 

of Environment. Victoria, B.C. www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/info/permit_overview.html. 

(Accessed Jan. 20, 2010). 

Cadrin, C. 2010. Personal Communication. Program Ecologist, BC Conservation Data Centre. 

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC).2009a. About COSEWIC: 

COSEWIC and the Species at Risk Act. Ottawa, ON. www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct6/sct6_6_e. 

cfm. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2009b. Wildlife species 

assessment: COSEWIC’s assessment process and criteria. Ottawa, ON. www.cosewic.gc.ca/ 

eng/sct0/assessment_process_e.cfm. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 



4-31


Environment Canada. 2009. Species at Risk Public Registry. Ottawa, ON. www.sararegistry.gc.ca/ 

default_e.cfm. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Fahselt, D. 1988. The dangers of transplantation as a conservation technique. Nat. Areas J. 

8(4):238-244. 

Falk, D.A., C.I. Millar and M. Olwell. 1996. Introduction. Pp. xii-xxii. In: D.A. Falk, C.I. Millar and 

M. Olwell. [eds.]. Restoring Diversity: Strategies for Re-introduction of Endangered Plants. 

Center for Plant Conservation, Missouri Botanical Garden and Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

Fiedler, P.L. 1991. Mitigation-related transplantation, relocation and re-introduction projects 

involving endangered and threatened, and rare plant species in California. Final report to 

California Department of Fish and Game, Endangered Plant Program. Sacramento, CA. 82pp. 

Fuchs, M.A. 2001. Towards a Recovery Strategy for Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems in 

Canada: Ecological Assessment and Literature Review. Technical Report GBEI/EC-00-030. 

Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Pacific and Yukon Region. 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2002. Recovery Strategy for Garry Oak and 

Associated Species at Risk in Canada 2001–2006.Victoria, B.C. www.goert.ca/documents/ 

RSDr_Feb02.pdf. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2003a. Species at Risk in Garry Oak and 

Associated Ecosystems in British Columbia. Victoria, B.C. www.goert.ca/pubs_at_risk.php. 

(Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2003b. Invasive Species in Garry Oak and 

Associated Ecosystems in British Columbia. Victoria, B.C. www.goert.ca/pubs_invasive.php. 

(Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2007. Questions and Answers: Legislation and 

Policy for the Protection of Garry Oak Ecosystems. Victoria, B.C. www.goert.ca/documents/ 

QandA_Legislation_and_Policy.pdf. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2011. Species at Risk. Victoria, B.C. www.goert. 

ca/pubs_at_risk.php. (Accessed May 20, 2011). 



Lea, T. 2009. Personal Communication. Vegetation Ecologist (retired), BC Ministry of 

Environment Ecosystems Branch, Victoria, B.C. 

McKay, J.K., C.E. Christian, S. Harrison, and K.J. Rice. 2005. “How local is local?”—a review of 

practical and conceptual issues in the genetics of restoration. Restor. Ecol. 13(3):432-440. 

Ministry of Environment (MOE). 1996. Wildlife Act. Province of BC, MOE. Victoria, BC. www. 

bclaws.ca/Recon/document/freeside/--%20W%20--/Wildlife%20Act%20%20RSBC%20 

1996%20%20c.%20488/00_96488_01.xml. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Ministry of Environment (MOE). 2004a. Identified Wildlife Management Strategy. Province of 

BC, MOE, Environmental Stewardship Division. Victoria, B.C. www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/frpa/ 

iwms/index.html. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Ministry of Environment (MOE). 2004b. Wildlife Amendment Act, 2004. Province of BC, MOE. 

Victoria, B.C. www.leg.bc.ca/37th5th/3rd_read/gov51-3.htm. (Accessed Sept. 1, 2009). 

4-32 



Ministry of Environment (MOE). 2006. Categories of Species. Province of BC, MOE, 

Environmental Stewardship Division. Victoria, B.C. www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/frpa/species.html. 

(Accessed Sept. 1, 2009). 

Ministry of Environment (MOE). 2007. Frequently Asked Questions, Species and Ecosystems at 

Risk. Province of BC, MOE, Environmental Stewardship Division. Victoria, B.C. www.env.gov. 

bc.ca/wld/faq.htm#2. (Accessed Aug. 31, 2009). 

Ministry of the Environment (MOE). 2011. Provincial Red and Blue Lists, Endangered Species and 

Ecosystems. Province of BC, MOE, Environmental Stewardship Division. Victoria, BC. www. 

env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/red-blue.htm (Accessed February 21, 2011). 

Ministry of Forests and Range (MOFR). 2008. Forest and Range Practices Act. Province of BC, 

MOFR. Victoria, B.C. www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/legsregs/frpa/frpa/frpatoc.htm (Accessed Sept. 1, 

2009). 

NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Status. Arlington, VA. www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking. 

htm (Accessed August 31, 2009). 

Smith, S. 2011. Personal Communication. Program Manager, Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery 

Team, Victoria, B.C. 

Ussery, J.G. and P.G. Krannitz. 1998. Control of Scot’s broom (Cytisus scoparius (L.) Link.): The 

relative conservation merits of pulling versus cutting. Northwest Sci. 72:268-273. 

Vallee, L., T. Hogbin, L. Monks, B. Makinson, M. Matthes and M. Rossetto. 2004. Guidelines for 

the translocation of threatened plants in Australia. Second Edition. Australian Network for 

Plant Conservation. Canberra, Australia. 



4-33


Appendix 4.1 

Listed Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems a 

A. Alphabetically by English Name 

English Name Scientific Name Global Rank 

Provincial 

Rank 

COSEWIC 

Status b BC Status REUs c 

VASCULAR PLANTS 

Bear’s-foot Sanicle 

Sanicula arctopoides 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

1; 3 

Bearded Owl-clover 

Triphysaria versicolor 

ssp. versicolor 

G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6 

Bog Bird’s-foot 

Trefoil 

Lotus pinnatus 

G4G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Brook Spike- 

Primrose 

Epilobium torreyi 

G5 

SX 

E 

Red 

5; 6 

California Buttercup 

Ranunculus californicus 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

California Hedgeparsley 

Yabea microcarpa 

G5? 

S1S2 

Red 

3; 4 

California-tea 

Rupertia physodes 

G4 

S3 

Blue 

3 

Carolina Meadowfoxtail 

Alopecurus 

carolinianus 

G5 

S2 

Red 

5 

Coast Microseris 

Microseris bigelovii 

G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

6; 7 

Coastal Scouler’s 

Catchfly 

Silene scouleri ssp. 

grandis 

G5TNR 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

Coastal Wood Fern 

Dryopteris arguta 

G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

7;8 

Common Bluecup 

Githopsis 

specularioides 

G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

4 

Cup Clover 

Trifolium cyathiferum 

G4 

S1 

Red 

6 

Deltoid Balsamroot 

Balsamorhiza deltoidea 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

1; 3;5 

Dense Spikeprimrose 

Epilobium densiflorum 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

2;5;6 

Dense-flowered 

Lupine 

Lupinus densiflorus var. 

densiflorus 

G5T4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

Densetuft 

Hairsedge 

Bulbostylis capillaris 

G5 

S1 

Red 

4 

Dune Bentgrass 

Agrostis pallens 

G4G5 

S3S4 

Yellow 

5 

Dwarf Sandwort 

Minuartia pusilla 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Elegant Rein Orchid 

Piperia elegans 

G4 

S3S4 

Yellow 

5 

4-34 

Erect Pygmyweed Crassula connata var. G5TNR S2 

Red 5 


connata 

Farewell-to-spring 

Clarkia amoena var. 

G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 

5


Lupine 

Densetuft 

Hairsedge 


densiflorus 



G5T4 

G5 

S1 

S1 

E 

Red 

Red 

5 

4 



G4G5 

S3S4 

Yellow 

5 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 



G4 

S3S4 

Yellow 

5 

Erect Pygmyweed 

Crassula connata var. 

connata 

G5TNR 

S2 

Red 

5 



caurina 

G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 

5 



lindleyi 

G5T5 

S3 

Blue 

5 

Fern-leaved 

Desert-parsley 

Lomatium dissectum 

var. dissectum 

G4T4 

S1 

Red 

3; 5 

Foothill Sedge 

Carex tumulicola 

G4 

S2 

E 

Red 

5 

Fragrant Popcornflower 

Plagiobothrys figuratus 

G4T4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6; 7 

Geyer’s Onion 

Allium geyeri var. 

tenerum 

G4G5T3T5 

S2S3 

Blue 

5 

Golden Paintbrush 

Castilleja levisecta 

G1 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

Gray’s Desertparsley 

Lomatium grayi 

G5 

S1 

T 

Red 

3 

Green-sheathed 

Sedge 

Carex feta 

G5 

S2 

Red 

5; 6 

Heterocodon 

Heterocodon 

rariflorum 

G5 

S3 

Blue 

4; 5 

Howell’s Triteleia 

Triteleia howellii 

G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

Howell’s Violet 

Viola howellii 

G4 

S2S3 

Blue 

5 

Kellogg’s Rush 

Juncus kelloggii 

G3? 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6 

Lindley’s False 

Silverpuffs 

Uropappus lindleyi 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

3; 5; 7 

Lobb’s Waterbuttercup 

Ranunculus lobbii 

G4 

SH 

Red 

6 

Macoun’s 

Meadow-foam 

Limnanthes macounii 

G2 

S2 

T 

Red 

6 

Macrae’s Clover 

Trifolium dichotomum 

G4? 

S2S3 

Blue 

7 

Manroot 

Marah oreganus 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

7; 8 

Muhlenberg’s 

Centaury 

Centaurium 

muehlenbergii 

G5? 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6 

Needle-leaved 

Navarretia 

Navarretia intertexta 

GNR 

S2 

Red 

5 & 6 

Nuttall’s Quillwort 

Isoetes nuttallii 

G4? 

S3 

Blue 

6 

Oregon Lupine 

Lupinus oreganus Part II Understanding var. G5T2 Garry SXOak Ecosystems XT 

Red 

kincaidii Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team www.goert.ca/restoration 

5 

4-35 

Poison Oak 

Toxicodendron 

G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

3

Meadow-foam 


Manroot 

English Name 


Centaury VASCULAR PLANTS 

Trifolium dichotomum G4? 

S2S3 

Blue 



Scientific Name 

Centaurium 

muehlenbergii 

G5 

Global Rank 

G5? 

S1 

Provincial 

S1 Rank 

E 

PCOSEWIC 

EStatus 

Red 

BC Status 

Red 

7 

7; 8 

REU 

5; sc6 

Needle-leaved 

Navarretia 


GNR 

S2 

Red 

5 & 6 



G4? 

S3 

Blue 

6 

Oregon Lupine 

Lupinus oreganus var. 

kincaidii 

G5T2 

SX 

XT 

Red 

5 


Toxicodendron 

diversilobum 

G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

3 

Poverty Clover 

Trifolium 

depauperatum var. 

depauperatum 

G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 

5 

Prairie Lupine 

Lupinus lepidus 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 

Purple Sanicle 

Sanicula bipinnatifida 

G5 

S2 

T 

Red 

5 

Pygmyweed 

Crassula aquatica 

G5 

S4 

Yellow 

6 

Rosy Owl-clover 

Orthocarpus 

bracteosus 

G3? 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Scalepod 

Idahoa scapigera 

G5 

S2 

Red 

5 

Seaside Bird’s Foot 

Lotus 

Lotus formosissimus 

G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

Sharp-pod 

Peppergrass 

Lepidium oxycarpum 

G4 

SX 

Red 

2(?); 5 

(?); 6 

Slender Popcornflower 

Plagiobothrys tenellus 

G4G5 

S1 

T 

Red 

5 

Slender Woollyheads 

Psilocarphus tenellus 

var. tenellus 

G4 

S3 

NAR 

Blue 

6 

Slimleaf Onion 

Allium amplectens 

G4 

S3 

Blue 

5 

Small-flowered 

Godetia 

Clarkia purpurea ssp. 

quadrivulnera 

G5T5 

S1 

Red 

5 


Tonella 

Tonella tenella 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 

Small-headed 

Tarweed 

Hemizonella minima 

(Media minima) 

G4 

S1 

Red 

3 

Smooth Goldfields 

Lasthenia glaberrima 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Spanish-clover 

Lotus unifoliolatus var. 

unifoliolatus 

G5T5 

S3 

Blue 

5 

Tall Woolly-heads 

Psilocarphus elatior 

G4Q 

S1 

E 

Red 

3; 6 

Texas Toadflax 

Nutallanthus texanus 

G4G5 

S3 

Blue 

3; 5 

Victoria’s Owl-clover 

Castilleja victoriae 

G1 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

4-36 

Water-plantain 

Buttercup 

Ranunculus alismifolius 

var. alismifolius 

G5T5 


Western rush Juncus occidentalis G5 

S3S4 

Blue 5;6 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

White Meconella 

Meconella oregana 

G2G3 

S1 

E 

Red 

5



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 


Lotus unifoliolatus var. G5T5 S3 

Blue 

Chapter 4 unifoliolatus Species and Ecosystems at Risk 

Tall Woolly-heads Psilocarphus elatior G4Q 

S1 

E 

Red 3; 6 

5 



G4G5 

S3 

Blue 

3; 5 



G1 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 


Buttercup 



G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Western rush 

Juncus occidentalis 

G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

5;6 



G2G3 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

White-lip Rein 

Orchid 

Piperia candida 

G3 

S2 

Red 

1;8 

White-top Aster 

Sericocarpus rigidus 

G3 

S2 

SC 

Red 

2; 3 

Winged water- 

Starwort 

Callitriche marginata 

G4 

S1 

Red 

5; 6 

Yellow Montane 

Violet 

Viola praemorsa ssp. 

praemorsa 

G5T3T5 

S2 

E 

Red 

5 

REPTILES 

Gopher Snake, 

catenifer subspecies 

Pituophis catenifer 

catenifer 

G5T5 

SX 

XT 

Red 

Extirpated 

Sharp-tailed Snake 

Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

1,2,3,5, 

7,8 

MOSSES 

Banded Cord-moss 

Entosthodon 

fascicularis 

G4G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

3 

Rigid Apple Moss 

Bartramia stricta 

GU 

S2 

E 

Red 

3 

Twisted Oak Moss 

Syntrichia laevipila 

GNR 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

1; 2 

MAMMALS 

Ermine, anguinae 

subspecies 

Mustela erminea 

anguinae 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 

8? 

Roosevelt Elk 

Cervus elaphus 

roosevelti 

G5T4 

S3S4 

Blue 

1, 2, 8? 

Townsend’s 

Big-eared Bat 

Corynorhinus 

townsendii 

G4 

S3 

Blue 

1, 3 

INVERTEBRATES 

(excluding butterflies) 

Blue Dasher 

Pachydiplax 

longipennis 

G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

Unknown 

Blue-grey 

Taildropper 

Prophysaon coeruleum 

G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 

Western 

Pondhawk 

Erythemis collocata 

G5 

S3 

Blue 

Unknown 

Autumn 

Meadowhawk 

BUTTERFLIES 

Sympetrum vicinum 

G5 

S3S4 



Blue 

Unknown 

4-37 

Boisduval’s Blue, 

Plebejus icariodes 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 

4?

INVERTEBRATES 


Blue Dasher 

Chapter Pachydiplax 4 Species G5 and S3S4 Ecosystems at BlueRisk 

longipennis 

Unknown 

Blue-grey 

Taildropper 


G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 

Western 

Pondhawk 


G5 

S3 

Blue 

Unknown 

Autumn 

Meadowhawk 


G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

Unknown 

BUTTERFLIES 


blackmorei 

subspecies 


blackmorei 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 

4? 

Common Ringlet, 

insulana subspecies 

Coenonympha 

california insulana 

G5T3T4 

S1 

Red 

5; 7 

Common English Name Woodnymph, 

incana 

subspecies 

Scientific Cercyonis Name pegala incana 

Global G5T4T5Rank 

Provincial S2 

Rank 

PCOSEWIC 

Status 

BC RedStatus 

REU 5; 7 

sc 

Dun Skipper 

Euphyes vestris 

G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 

4?; 6? 

Great Arctic 

Oeneis nevadensis 

G5 

S4 

Yellow 

3 

Island Blue 

Plebejus saepiolus 

insulanus 

G5TH 

SH 

E 

Red 

4?;6? 

Island Marble, 

insulanus 

subspecies 

Euchloe ausonides 

insulanus 

G5T1 

SX 

XT 

Red 

1;2 

Moss’ Elfin, mossii 

subspecies 

Incisalia mossii mossii 

G4T4 

S2S3 

Blue 

3 

Propertius Duskywing 

Erynnis propertius 

G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

1;2;3;5; 

7 

Taylor’s Checkerspot 

Euphydryas editha 

taylori 

G5T1 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 

Western 

Branded Skipper, 

oregonia subspecies 

Hesperia colorado 

oregonia 

G5T3T4 

S2S3 

Blue 

5; 7 

Western Sulphur 

Colias occidentalis 

G4 

S4 

Yellow 

3 

Zerene Fritillary, 

bremnerii 

subspecies 

Speyeria zerene 

bremnerii 

G5T3T4 

S2 

Red 

3 

BIRDS 

Band-tailed Pigeon 

Patagioenas fasciata 

G4 

S3S4B 

SC 

Blue 

8 

Barn Owl 

Tyto alba 

G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 

1,2 

Horned Lark, 

strigata subspecies 

Eremophila alpestris 

strigata 

G5T2 

SXB 

E 

Red 

5 

4-38 

Lewis's Woodpecker 

(Georgia 

Depression 

population) 

Northern Pygmyowl, 

swarthi 

subspecies 

Melanerpes lewis 

pop. 1 

G5TXQ 

SXB, SNA 


Glaucidium gnoma G4G5T3Q S3 

Blue 

swarthi 

T 

Red 

1,2,3,5, 

7,8 

1,2,3,5, 

7,8

BIRDS 


Barn Owl 

Patagioenas fasciata G4 

S3S4B SC 

Blue 


Tyto alba 

G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 

8 

1,2 

Horned Lark, 



strigata 

G5T2 

SXB 

E 

Red 

5 


(Georgia 

Depression 

population) 


pop. 1 

G5TXQ 

SXB, SNA 

T 

Red 

1,2,3,5, 

7,8 

Northern Pygmyowl, 

swarthi 

subspecies 

Glaucidium gnoma 

swarthi 

G4G5T3Q 

S3 

Blue 

1,2,3,5, 

7,8 

Great Blue Heron, 

fannini subspecies 

Ardea herodias fannini 

G5T4 

S2S3B,S4N 

SC 

Blue 

1, 5 

Peregrine Falcon, 

anatum subspecies 

Falco peregrinus 

anatum 

G4T4 

S2?B 

SC 

Red 

7 

Purple Martin 

Progne subis 

G5 

S2S3B 

Blue 

Ukn. 

Short-eared Owl 

Asio flammeus 

G5 

S3B,S2N 

SC 

Blue 

1 

Vesper Sparrow, 

affinis subspecies 

Pooecetes gramineus 

affinis 

G5T3 

S1B 

E 

Red 

3 

Western Bluebird, 

Georgia Depression 

population 

Sialia mexicana pop. 1 

G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 

1, 2, 3, 

5, 7 

Western Meadowlark, 

Georgia 

Depression 

population 

Sturnella neglecta 

pop. 1 

G5TNRQ 

SXB 

Red 

1 

Western Screech 

Owl, kennicottii 

subspecies 

Megascops kennicottii 

kennicottii 

G5T4 

S3 

SC 

Blue 

8 

Yellow-billed 

Cuckoo 

Coccyzus americanus 

G5 

SXB 

Red 

Extirpated 

a Source: Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2011. Species at Risk. GOERT. Victoria, B.C. www.goert.ca/pubs_at_risk.php 

(Accessed June 19, 2011). 

b SC = Special Concern, T = Threatened, E = Endangered, XT = Extirpated. 

c REU: Restoration Ecosystem Units as defined in Chapter 2: Distribution and Description 



4-39


B. Alphabetically by SCIENTIFIC Name 


English Name 

Global Rank 

Provincial 

Rank 

COSEWIC 

Status b 

BC Status 

REUs c 




G4G5 

S3S4 

Yellow 

5 



G4 

S3 

Blue 

5 


tenerum 


G4G5T3T5 

S2S3 

Blue 

5 

Alopecurus 

carolinianus 


G5 

S2 

Red 

5 

Balsamorhiza 

deltoidea 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

1; 3;5 


Densetuft Hairsedge 

G5 

S1 

Red 

4 

Callitriche 

marginata 

Winged water- 

Starwort 

G4 

S1 

Red 

5; 6 

Carex feta 

Green-sheathed Sedge 

G5 

S2 

Red 

5; 6 



G4 

S2 

E 

Red 

5 



G1 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 



G1 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Centaurium 

muehlenbergii 


Centaury 

G5? 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6 


caurina 


G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 

5 


lindleyi 


G5T5 

S3 

Blue 

5 


quadrivulnera 


Godetia 

G5T5 

S1 

Red 

5 


Pygmyweed 

G5 

S4 

Yellow 

6 

Crassula connata 

var. connata 


G5TNR 

S2 

Red 

5 



G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

7;8 

Epilobium 

densiflorum 

Dense Spike-primrose 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

2;5;6 


Brook Spike-Primrose 

G5 

SX 

E 

Red 

5; 6 

Githopsis 



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

4 



Small-headed Tarweed 

G4 

S1 

Red 

3 

4-40 

Heterocodon Restoring Heterocodon 

British Columbia’s Garry G5 Oak Ecosystems: S3 Principles and Blue Practices4; 5 

rariflorum 


Scalepod 

G5 

S2 

Red 

5

var. connata 


Epilobium 

densiflorum 

Coastal Wood Fern G5 

S2S3 SC 

Blue 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

7;8 

2;5;6 



G5 

SX 

E 

Red 

5; 6 

Githopsis 



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

4 




G4 

S1 

Red 

3 

Heterocodon 

rariflorum 

Heterocodon 

G5 

S3 

Blue 

4; 5 


Scalepod 

G5 

S2 

Red 

5 



G4? 

S3 

Blue 

6 



G3? 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6 


Western rush 

G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

5; 6 

Lasthenia 

glaberrima 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Lepidium 

oxycarpum 

Sharp-pod Peppergrass 

G4 

SX 

Red 

2(?); 5 

(?); 6 

Limnanthes 

macounii 

Macoun’s Meadowfoam 

G2 

S2 

T 

Red 

6 

Lomatium 

dissectum var. 

dissectum 

Fern-leaved Desertparsley 

G4T4 

S1 

Red 

3; 5 


Gray’s Desert-parsley 

G5 

S1 

T 

Red 

3 

Lotus 

formosissimus 


Lotus 

G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 


Bog Bird’s-foot Trefoil 

G4G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Lotus unifoliolatus 

var. unifoliolatus 


G5T5 

S3 

Blue 

5 

Lupinus densiflorus 

var. densiflorus 


Lupine 

G5T4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 

Lupinus oreganus 

var. kincaidii 

Oregon Lupine 

G5T2 

SX 

XT 

Red 

5 


Manroot 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

7; 8 



G2G3 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 



G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

6; 7 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Navarretia 

intertexta 

Needle-leaved 

Navarretia 

GNR 

S2 

Red 

5 & 6 

Nutallanthus 

texanus 


G4G5 

S3 

Blue 

3; 5 

Orthocarpus 

bracteosus 

Rosy Owl-clover Part II Understanding G3? Garry S1 Oak Ecosystems E 

Red 


6 

4-41 


White-lip Rein Orchid 

G3 

S2 

Red 

1;8



Manroot 

G5 

Chapter White Meconella 4 Species G2G3 and S1Ecosystems E at Red Risk 

Microseris bigelovii Coast Microseris G4 

S1 

E 

Red 6; 7 

S1 

E 

Red 7; 8 

5 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 

Navarretia 

intertexta 

Needle-leaved 

Navarretia 

GNR 

S2 

Red 

5 & 6 

Nutallanthus 

texanus 


G4G5 

S3 

Blue 

3; 5 

Orthocarpus 

bracteosus 


G3? 

S1 

E 

Red 

6 



G3 

S2 

Red 

1;8 



G4 

S3S4 

Yellow 

5 

Plagiobothrys 

figuratus 


G4T4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6; 7 

Plagiobothrys 

tenellus 


G4G5 

S1 

T 

Red 

5 



G4Q 

S1 

E 

Red 

3; 6 


var. tenellus 


Ranunculus 

alismifolius var. 

alismifolius 


Slender Woolly-heads 

English Name 


Buttercup 

G4 

Global Rank 

G5T5 

S3 

Provincial 

S1 Rank 

NAR 

COSEWIC 

Status E b 

Blue 

BC Status 

Red 

6 

REUs c 

6 

Ranunculus 

californicus 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 


Lobb’s Waterbuttercup 

G4 

SH 

Red 

6 



G4 

S3 

Blue 

3 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

1; 3 

Sanicula 

bipinnatifida 


G5 

S2 

T 

Red 

5 



G3 

S2 

SC 

Red 

2; 3 


grandis 


Catchfly 

G5TNR 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 


Small-flowered Tonella 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 

Toxicodendron 

diversilobum 


G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

3 

Trifolium 

cyathiferum 

Cup Clover 

G4 

S1 

Red 

6 

Trifolium 


depauperatum 


G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 

5 

Trifolium 

dichotomum 


G4? 

S2S3 

Blue 

7 

4-42 

Triphysaria 

Bearded Owl-clover G5T5 S1 

E 

Red 5; 6 

versicolor ssp. 


versicolor 



G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5

diversilobum 

Trifolium 

cyathiferum 

Trifolium 


depauperatum 

Cup Clover 

G4 

S1 

Red 



G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 

6 

5 

Trifolium 

dichotomum 


G4? 

S2S3 

Blue 

7 

Triphysaria 

versicolor ssp. 

versicolor 


G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red 

5; 6 



G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 



Silverpuffs 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

3; 5; 7 



G4 

S2S3 

Blue 

5 


praemorsa 

Yellow Montane Violet 

G5T3T5 

S2 

E 

Red 

5 


California 

Hedge-parsley 

G5? 

S1S2 

Red 

3; 4 

REPTILES 

Contia tenuis 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

1,2,3,5,7,8 

Pituophis catenifer 

catenifer 

Gopher Snake, 


G5T5 

SX 

XT 

Red 

Extirpated 

MOSSES 



GU 

S2 

E 

Red 

3 

Entosthodon 

fascicularis 


G4G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

3 



GNR 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

1; 2 

MAMMALS 


roosevelti 

Roosevelt Elk 

G5T4 

S3S4 

Blue 

1, 2, 8? 

Corynorhinus 

townsendii 

Townsend’s 

Big-eared Bat 

G4 

S3 

Blue 

1, 3 


anguinae 


subspecies 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 

8? 

INVERTEBRATES 



Western Pondhawk 

G5 

S3 

Blue 

Unkn. 

Pachydiplax 

longipennis 

Blue Dasher 

G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

Unkn. 

Prophysaon 

coeruleum 

Blue-grey Taildropper 

G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 


Autumn Meadowhawk 

G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

Unkn. 

BUTTERFLIES 

Cercyonis pegala 

incana 

Common Part Woodnymph, 

Garry incana Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team www.goert.ca/restoration 

II Understanding G5T4T5 Garry S2Oak Ecosystems Red 

subspecies 

5; 7 

4-43

INVERTEBRATES 





G5 

S3 

Blue 

Unkn. 

Pachydiplax 

longipennis 

Blue Dasher 

G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

Unkn. 

Prophysaon 

coeruleum 


G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

3 



G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

Unkn. 

BUTTERFLIES 

Cercyonis pegala 

incana 

Common Woodnymph, 

incana 

subspecies 

G5T4T5 

S2 

Red 

5; 7 

Coenonympha 




G5T3T4 

S1 

Red 

5; 7 



G4 

S4 

Yellow 

3 



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

1;2;3;5;7 


insulanus 


insulanus subspecies 

G5T1 

SX 

XT 

Red 

1;2 

Euphydryas editha 

taylori 


G5T1 

S1 

E 

Red 

5 


Dun Skipper 

G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 

4?; 6? 


oregonia 

Western Branded 

Skipper, oregonia 

subspecies 

G5T3T4 

S2S3 

Blue 

5; 7 

Incisalia mossii 

mossii 


subspecies 

G4T4 

S2S3 

Blue 

3 


Great Arctic 

G5 

S4 

Yellow 

3 


blackmorei 


blackmorei subspecies 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 

4? 


insulanus 

Island Blue 

G5TH 

SH 

E 

Red 

4?;6? 


bremnerii 


bremnerii subspecies 

G5T3T4 

S2 

Red 

3 

Scientific BIRDS Name 

Ardea herodias 

fannini VASCULAR PLANTS 

English Name 



Global Rank 

G5T4 

Provincial 

Rank 

S2S3B,S4N 

COSEWIC 

Status b 

SC 

BC Status 

Blue 

REUs c 

1, 5 

Asio flammeus 


G5 

S3B,S2N 

SC 

Blue 

1 


Yellow-billed Cuckoo 

G5 

SXB 

Red 

Extirp. 


strigata 

Horned Lark, strigata 

subspecies 

G5T2 

SXB 

E 

Red 

5 


anatum 



G4T4 

S2?B 

SC 

Red 

7 

4-44 


swarthi 

Northern Pygmy-owl, 

swarthi subspecies 

G4G5T3Q 


Megascops 

Western Screech Owl, G5T4 S3 

SC 

Blue 8 

kennicottii 

kennicottii subspecies 

kennicottii 

S3 

Blue 

1,2,3,5,7, 

8

mossii 


Asio 

Oeneis 

flammeus 

nevadensis 

Coccyzus Plebejus icariodes americanus 

blackmorei 


strigata Plebejus saepiolus 

insulanus 


anatum Speyeria zerene 

bremnerii 


swarthi 

BIRDS 

Megascops 

kennicottii 

Ardea herodias 

kennicottii 

fannini 


pop. 1 

subspecies 

Great Arctic 

Short-eared Owl G5 

S3B,S2N SC 

Blue 1 


Yellow-billed Boisduval’s Cuckoo Blue, G5G5T3 


Horned Lark, strigata G5T2 

subspecies Island Blue 

G5TH 


anatum Zerene subspecies Fritillary, 




Western Screech Owl, 

kennicottii Great Blue subspecies Heron, 



(Georgia Depression 

population) 

G5 

G4T4 

G5T3T4 

G4G5T3Q 

G5T4 

G5T4 

G5TXQ 

S4 

SXBS3 

SXB 

SH 

S2?B 

S2 

S3 

E 

S3 

SC 

S2S3B,S4N SC 

SXB, SNA 

E 

SC 

T 

Yellow 

Red Blue 

Red 

Red 

Red 

Red 

Blue 

Blue 

Blue 

Red 

3 

Extirp. 4? 

5 

7 

4?;6? 

3 

1,2,3,5,7, 

8 

8 

1, 5 

1,2,3,5,7, 

8 



G4 

S3S4B 

SC 

Blue 

8 

Pooecetes 

gramineus affinis 

Vesper Sparrow, affinis 

subspecies 

G5T3 

S1B 

E 

Red 

3 

Progne subis 

Purple Martin 

G5 

S2S3B 

Blue 

Unkn. 

Sialia mexicana 

pop. 1 



population 

G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 

1, 2, 3, 5, 

7 


pop. 1 



population 

G5TNRQ 

SXB 

Red 

1 

Tyto alba 

Barn Owl 

G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 

1,2 



4-45



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 


Appendix 4.2 

Listed Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems a , per 

Restoration Ecosystem Unit (REU) c 

REU 

English Name 


Global 

Rank 

Provincial 

Rank 

COSEWIC 

Status b 

BC 

Status 

1 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



GNR 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 



G3 

S2 

Red 

Roosevelt Elk 


roosevelti 

G5T4 

S3S4 

Blue 

Townsend’s 

Big-eared Bat 

Corynorhinus 

townsendii 

G4 

S3 

Blue 


Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 




insulanus 

G5T1 

SX 

XT 

Red 



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

Barn Owl 

Tyto alba 

G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 




G5T4 

S2S3B,S4N 

SC 

Blue 



population) 


pop. 1 

G5TXQ 

SXB, SNA 

T 

Red 




swarthi 

G4G5T3Q 

S3 

Blue 


Asio flammeus 

G5 

S3B,S2N 

SC 

Blue 



population 

Sialia mexicana 

pop. 1 

G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 



population 


pop. 1 

G5TNRQ 

SXB 

Red 

2 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



GNR 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 



G3 

S2 

SC 

Red 

Roosevelt Elk 


roosevelti 

G5T4 

S3S4 

Blue 

4-46 

Sharp-tailed Snake Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



Euchloe ausonides G5T1 SX 

XT Red 

insulanus subspecies insulanus

2 



population 


pop. 1 




G5TNRQ 

G5 

SXB 

S1 

E 

Red 

Red 



GNR 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 



G3 

S2 

SC 

Red 

Roosevelt Elk 


roosevelti 

G5T4 

S3S4 

Blue 


Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 




insulanus 

G5T1 

SX 

XT 

Red 



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 

Barn Owl 

Tyto alba 

G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 



population) 

Melanerpes lewis pop. 1 

G5TXQ 

SXB, SNA 

T 

Red 




swarthi 

G4G5T3Q 

S3 

Blue 



population 


G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 

2(?) 



G4 

SX 

Red 

3 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

California Hedgeparsley 


G5? 

S1S2 

Red 



G4 

S3 

Blue 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 




G4T4 

S1 

Red 



G5 

S1 

T 

Red 


Silverpuffs 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 


Toxicodendron 

diversilobum 

G5 

S2S3 

Blue 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 




G4 

S1 

Red 



G4Q 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4G5 

S3 

Blue 



G3 

S2 

SC 

Red 


Entosthodon 

fascicularis 

G4G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

Rigid Apple Moss Bartramia stricta 

GU 

S2 

E 

Ermine, anguinae Part Mustela II Understanding erminea Garry G5T3Oak Ecosystems S3 

subspecies Garry Oak anguinae Ecosystems Recovery Team www.goert.ca/restoration 

Red 

Blue 

4-47 


Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red







G4 

G4Q 

S1 

S1 

E 

Red 

Red 



G4G5 

S3 

Blue 



G3 

S2 

SC 

Red 


Entosthodon 

fascicularis 

G4G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 



GU 

S2 

E 

Red 


subspecies 


anguinae 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 


Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

Great Arctic 


G5 

S4 

Yellow 


subspecies 


G4T4 

S2S3 

Blue 



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 



G4 

S4 

Yellow 




bremnerii 

G5T3T4 

S2 

Red 

REU 



population) 

Northern English Name Pygmy-owl, 



pop. 1 

Glaucidium Scientific Name gnoma 

swarthi 

G5TXQ 

Global 

G4G5T3Q Rank 

SXB, SNA 

Provincial 

S3 Rank 

T 

COSEWIC 

Status b 

Red 

BC 

Blue Status 

4 

Vesper Sparrow, affinis 

subspecies 

Pooecetes gramineus 

affinis 

G5T3 

S1B 

E 

Red 



population 


G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 

4 

California Hedge-parsley 


G5? 

S1S2 

Red 


Githopsis 


G5 

S2S3 

Blue 



G5 

S1 

Red 

Heterocodon 

Heterocodon rariflorum 

G5 

S3 

Blue 

4? 




blackmorei 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 

Dun Skipper 


G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 

Island Blue 


insulanus 

G5TH 

SH 

E 

Red 

5 




G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

SX 

E 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

4-48 


Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and 

Alopecurus carolinianus G5 

S2 

Red 

Practices 


Catchfly 


grandis 

G5TNR 

S1 

E 

Red

lackmorei subspecies 

blackmorei 


G5 

S3 

T 


Dun Skipper 

Island Blue 


insulanus 

G5TH 

SH 

E 

Blue 

Red 

5 




G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

SX 

E 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 


Alopecurus carolinianus 

G5 

S2 

Red 


Catchfly 


grandis 

G5TNR 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

Dense-flowered Lupine 


densiflorus 

G5T4 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4G5 

S3S4 

Yellow 



G4 

S3S4 

Yellow 


Crassula connata var. 

connata 

G5TNR 

S2 

Red 



caurina 

G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 



lindleyi 

G5T5 

S3 

Blue 




G4T4 

S1 

Red 



G4 

S2 

E 

Red 



G4T4 

S1 

E 

Red 



tenerum 

G4G5T3T5 

S2S3 

Blue 



G1 

S1 

E 

Red 


Carex feta 

G5 

S2 

Red 

Heterocodon 


G5 

S3 

Blue 



G3G4 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4 

S2S3 

Blue 



G3? 

S1 

E 

Red 


Silverpuffs 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

Muhlenberg’s Centaury 

Centaurium 

muehlenbergii 

G5? 

S1 

E 

Red 

Needle-leaved 

Navarretia 


GNR 

S2 

Red 

Oregon Lupine 


Lupinus oreganus var. G5T2 SX 

XT 

kincaidii 


Garry Oak Trifolium Ecosystems Recovery Team G5T5? www.goert.ca/restoration 

S3 


depauperatum 

Red 

Blue 

4-49



G4 

S2S3 

Blue 


G3? 

S1 

E 




Silverpuffs 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

Red 


Centaurium 

muehlenbergii 

G5? 

S1 

E 

Red 

Needle-leaved 

Navarretia 


GNR 

S2 

Red 

Oregon Lupine 

Lupinus oreganus var. 

kincaidii 

G5T2 

SX 

XT 

Red 


Trifolium 


depauperatum 

G5T5? 

S3 

Blue 



G5 

S2 

T 

Red 

Scalepod 


G5 

S2 

Red 


Lotus 


G4 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4G5 

S1 

T 

Red 



G4 

S3 

Blue 

Small-flowered Godetia 


quadrivulnera 

G5T5 

S1 

Red 



unifoliolatus 

G5T5 

S3 

Blue 



G4G5 

S3 

Blue 

Western rush 


G5 

S3S4 

Blue 



G2G3 

S1 

E 

Red 

Winged water-Starwort 


G4 

S1 

Red 



praemorsa 

G5T3T5 

S2 

E 

Red 


Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

Red 



Coenonympha 


G5T3T4 

S1 

Red 

Common Wood-nymph, 

incana subspecies 

Cercyonis pegala incana 

G5T4T5 

S2 

Red 

REU 


Taylor’s English Name Checkerspot 


Euphydryas Scientific Name editha 

taylori 

G5 

Global 

G5T1 Rank 

S2S3 

Provincial 

S1 Rank 

COSEWIC 

EStatus b 

Blue 

BC 

Red Status 



subspecies 


oregonia 

G5T3T4 

S2S3 

Blue 




G5T4 

S2S3B,S4N 

SC 

Blue 


subspecies 


strigata 

G5T2 

SXB 

E 

Red 

4-50 

Lewis's Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis pop. 1 G5TXQ SXB, SNA T 

Red 


population) Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and Practices 




swarthi 

G4G5T3Q 

S3 

Blue

REU 

English Name 


Rank 

Rank 

Status b 

Status 

Hesperia colorado G5T3T4 S2S3 




subspecies 

oregonia 

Blue 




G5T4 

S2S3B,S4N 

SC 

Blue 


subspecies 


strigata 

G5T2 

SXB 

E 

Red 



population) 


G5TXQ 

SXB, SNA 

T 

Red 




swarthi 

G4G5T3Q 

S3 

Blue 



population 


G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 

5 (?) 



G4 

SX 

Red 

6 




G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

SX 

E 

Red 



G4 

S1 

E 

Red 

Cup Clover 


G4 

S1 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4T4 

S1 

E 

Red 


Carex feta 

G5 

S2 

Red 



G3? 

S1 

E 

Red 

Lobb’s Water-buttercup 


G4 

SH 

Red 



G2 

S2 

T 

Red 


Centaurium 

muehlenbergii 

G5? 

S1 

E 

Red 

Needle-leaved 

Navarretia 


GNR 

S2 

Red 



G4? 

S3 

Blue 

Pygmyweed 


G5 

S4 

Yellow 


Orthocarpus 

bracteosus 

G3? 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4 

SX 

Red 



var. tenellus 

G4 

S3 

NAR 

Blue 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 

Tall Woolly-heads Psilocarphus elatior G4Q 

S1 

E 


Victoria’s Owl-clover Garry Oak Castilleja Ecosystems victoriae Recovery Team G1 www.goert.ca/restoration 

S1 

E 

Red 

Red 

4-51 



G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red




G5 

S4 


Pygmyweed 


Orthocarpus 

bracteosus 

G4? 

G3? 

S3 

S1 

E 

Blue 

Yellow 

Red 



G4 

SX 

Red 



var. tenellus 

G4 

S3 

NAR 

Blue 



G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4Q 

S1 

E 

Red 



G1 

S1 

E 

Red 


Buttercup 



G5T5 

S1 

E 

Red 

Western rush 


G5 

S3S4 

Blue 

Winged water-Starwort 


G4 

S1 

Red 

6? 

Dun Skipper 


G5 

S3 

T 

Blue 

Island Blue 


insulanus 

G5TH 

SH 

E 

Red 

7 



G4 

S1 

E 

Red 



G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 



G4T4 

S1 

E 

Red 


Silverpuffs 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G4? 

S2S3 

Blue 

Manroot 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 


Contia tenuis 

G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



Coenonympha 


G5T3T4 

S1 

Red 

Common Wood-nymph, 

incana subspecies 


G5T4T5 

S2 

Red 



G5 

S2S3 

Blue 



subspecies 


oregonia 

G5T3T4 

S2S3 

Blue 



population) 


G5TXQ 

SXB, SNA 

T 

Red 




swarthi 

G4G5T3Q 

S3 

Blue 




anatum 

G4T4 

S2?B 

SC 

Red 



population 


G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 

4-52 

8 

Coastal Wood Fern Dryopteris arguta G5 

S2S3 

SC Blue 


Manroot 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G3 

S2 

Red



population) 






swarthi 

G5TXQ 

G4G5T3Q 

SXB, SNA 

S3 

T 

Red 

Blue 




anatum 

G4T4 

S2?B 

SC 

Red 



population 


G5TNRQ 

SHB, SNA 

Red 

8 



G5 

S2S3 

SC 

Blue 

Manroot 


G5 

S1 

E 

Red 



G3 

S2 

Red 

REU 


English Name 


Contia tenuis 



Global G5 

Rank 

G4 

Provincial S1 

Rank 

S3S4B 

COSEWIC E 

Status b 

SC 

BC Red 

Status 

Blue 



population) 


G5TXQ 

SXB, SNA 

Red 




swarthi 

G4G5T3Q 

S3 

T 

Blue 



Megascops kennicottii 

kennicottii 

G5T4 

S3 

SC 

Blue 

8? 


subspecies 


anguinae 

G5T3 

S3 

Blue 

Roosevelt Elk 


roosevelti 

G5T4 

S3S4 

Blue 

a Source: Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2011. Species at Risk. GOERT. Victoria, B.C. www.goert.ca/pubs_at_risk.php 

(Accessed June 19, 2011). 

b SC = Special Concern, T = Threatened, E = Endangered, XT = Extirpated. 

c REU: Restoration Ecosystem Units as defined in Chapter 2: Distribution and Description 

“?” = uncertainty whether the species occurs in this REU 



4-53


Appendix 4.3 

Ecological Communities at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems a 

Restoration Ecosystems 

Unit (REU) Number and 

Name 

Restoration Ecosystem 

Unit #1: 

Deep Soil, Average 

Moisture Garry Oak 

Communities 


Unit #2: 

Deep Soil, Wetter Garry 



Unit #3: 

Shallow Soil Garry Oak 

Communities 


Unit #3 (cont.): 


Communities 


Quercus garryana – 

Festuca roemeri 


Bromus carinatus 


Camassia quamash – 

Elymus glaucus 


Camassia leichtlinii – 



Holodiscus discolor 


Symphoricarpos albus – 


Festuca roemeri – 

Koeleria macrantha 


Racomitrium elongatum – 

Selaginella wallacei 


Dicranum scoparium 


Arbutus menziesii 

Quercus garryana – Acer 

macrophyllum – Prunus 

spp. 

English Name 




California Brome 


Common Camas – 

Blue Wildrye plant 

association 

Garry Oak – Great 

Camas – Blue 

Wildrye plant 

association 


Oceanspray 


Oceanspray – 


plant 

association 

Roemer's Fescue – 

Junegrass 

Garry Oak – Grey 

Rock-moss – 

Wallace’s Selaginella 

plant association 


Broom-moss plant 

association 


Arbutus 

Garry Oak – Bigleaf 

Maple – cherries 

G 

rank 

G1 

G1 

G1 

G1 

G1 

CDC 

list 

Red b 

Red 

Red b 

Red b 

Red 

Red b 

Red 

Red b 

Red b 

Red 

Red 

Biogeoclimatic 

Unit 

CDFmm/00 

CDFmm/00 

CDFmm/00; 

CWHxm1/00 

CDFmm/00 

CWHds1/00 

Reference 

Erickson and 

Meidinger (07) 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Erickson and 

Meidinger 

(2007) 

Erickson and 

Meidinger 

(2007) 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Erickson and 

Meidinger 

(2007) 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Erickson and 

Meidinger 

(2007) 

Erickson and 

Meidinger 

(2007) 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

4-54 




Unit #3: 


Communities 


Unit #3 (cont.): 


Communities 


Unit #4: 

Shallow Soil Seepage 

Communities 


Unit #5: 


Communities 


Unit #6: 

Vernal Pool Communities 


Unit # 7: 

Coastal Bluff 

Communities 


Unit #8: 

Douglas-fir Communities 


Festuca roemeri – 



Racomitrium elongatum – 






Quercus garryana – Acer 

macrophyllum – Prunus 

spp. 

Arbutus menziesii – 

Arctostaphylos 

columbiana 

No communities defined 


Myosurus minimus – 

Montia spp. –Limnanthes 

macounii 


Pseudotsuga menziesii – 

Mahonia nervosa 



Pseudotsuga menziesii 


plant 

association 

Roemer's Fescue – 

Junegrass 

Garry Oak – Grey 

Rock-moss – 


plant association 


Broom-moss plant 

association 


Arbutus 

Garry Oak – Bigleaf 

Maple – cherries 

Arbutus – Hairy 

Manzanita 

Tiny Mousetail – 

Montia –Macoun's 

Meadow-foam 

Douglas-fir–Dull 

Oregon-grape 

Douglas-fir–Arbutus 

Douglas-fir –Alaska 

G1 

G1 

G1 

G2 

G2 

G2 

GNR 

G1 

Red 

Red b 

Red b 

Red 

Red 

Red 

Red 

Red 

Red 

Red 

CDFmm/00; 

CWHxm1/00 

CDFmm/00 

CWHds1/00 

CDFmm/00; 

CWHxm1/00 

CDFmm/00 

CDFmm/01 

CDFmm/02 

CDFmm/03 

(2007) 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Erickson and 

Meidinger 

(2007) 

Erickson and 

Meidinger 

(2007) 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Green and 

Klinka (1994); 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Green and 


Conservation 

Data Centre 

Green and 



4-55



Unit #4: 


Communities 



Unit #5: 


Communities 



Unit #6: 


Myosurus minimus – 

Montia spp. –Limnanthes 

macounii 

Tiny Mousetail – 

Montia –Macoun's 

Meadow-foam 

G2 

Red 


Unit # 7: 

Coastal Bluff 

Communities 



Unit #8: 




Douglas-fir–Dull 

Oregon-grape 

G2 

Red 



Douglas-fir–Arbutus 

GNR 

Red 


–Melica subulata 

Douglas-fir –Alaska 

Oniongrass 

G1 

Red 

a Source: T. Lea, pers. comm. 2009 

b Indicates that these would be red-listed plant communities if assessed by the BC Conservation Data Centre (C. Cadrin, pers. comm. 2009) 

CDFmm/00 

CDFmm/01 

CDFmm/02 

CDFmm/03 

Conservation 

Data Centre 

Green and 


Conservation 

Data Centre 

Green and 


Conservation 

Data Centre 

Green and 


Conservation 

Data Centre 

4-56 



References 

BC Conservation Data Centre (www.env.gov.bc.ca/cdc). 

Cadrin, C. 2009. Personal Communication. Program Ecologist, BC Conservation Data Centre, 


Erickson, W.R., and Meidinger, D.V. 2007. Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) plant communities 

in British Columbia: a guide to identification. BC Ministry of Forests and Range, Research 

Branch. Victoria, B.C. 

Green, R.N., and Klinka, K. 1994. A field guide to site identification and interpretation for the 

Vancouver Forest Region, Land Management Handbook No. 28. BC Ministry of Forests and 

Range, Victoria, B.C. 

Lea, T. 2009. Personal Communication. Vegetation Ecologist, BC Ministry of Environment, 

Ecosystems Branch, Victoria, B.C. (retired). 



4-57


4-58 







Chapter 5 

Restoration Planning 

Contents 

5.1 Introduction................................................................................3 

Case Study 1. Reconsidering the Role of an Invasive Plant: 

Conserving Habitat Requirements for Taylor’s Checkerspot 

(Euphydryas editha taylori), an Endangered Native Butterfly 

Species in Western Oregon.............................................................6 

5.2 The Structure of a Restoration Project: How do I Organize 

and Carry Out Restoration?.............................................................9 

5.2.1 Stage 1 – Establish the Context, Goals, and Objectives 

for the Site.................................................................................. 11 

5.2.2 Stage 2 – Inspection and Inventory.................................. 15 

5.2.3 Stage 3 – Carry Out Analyses............................................20 

5.2.4 Stage 4 – Develop the Restoration Plan..........................20 

Part III Planning for Restoration 


5-1


5.2.5 Stage 5 – Carry Out Experiments and Field Trials............ 22 

5.2.6 Stage 6 – Carry Out Restoration...................................... 22 

5.2.7 Stage 7 – Monitor and Verify Restoration....................... 22 

5.3 Constructing a Plan..................................................................24 

5.4 Conclusions.............................................................................. 27 

5.5 References............................................................................... 27 

5.6 Other Resources...................................................................... 27 

Appendix 5.1 ..................................................................................29 

Restoration Plan for Anniversary Island in Gulf Islands 

National Park Reserve...............................................................29 

5-2 



Chapter 5 

Restoration Planning 

by Conan Webb and Richard Hebda, in collaboration with Don Eastman, Shyanne Smith, 

Brenda Costanzo, Fred Hook, Dave Polster, and Thomas Munson 

Restoration technicians at Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site carrying out a hand-pulling 

treatment on Spurge-laurel (Daphne laureola). This was one of four manual treatments tried in this 

experimental removal of Spurge-laurel seedlings. While almost 100% effective, hand-pulling is labour 

intensive and there was a significant desire to find more efficient control methods. However, handpulling 

remains the standard removal method for Spurge-laurel seedlings at Fort Rodd Hill as other 

methods turned out to be unacceptable: weed-eating (exposure to Spurge-laurel toxin and excess 

litter disturbance), hoeing (soil disturbance, more labour intensive), mulching (disruption of native 

plant regeneration, and costly). Photo: Parks Canada/Conan Webb 


The complexity of restoration projects varies widely. You may want simply to remove invasive 

species in the backyard, or at the other end of the spectrum, you may wish to initiate and carry 

out a restoration of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems within a regional park that includes the 

re-establishment of rare species. In all cases, there needs to be some sort of route mapped out to 

the end point. The end point is the goal. Goals are a broad statement of what you want to achieve; 

a project may have a few goals or only one. This route towards achieving goals is mapped out by 



5-3


Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja 

levisecta), an Endangered 

species in Canada. Restoration 

work can have unforeseen and 

detrimental consequences for 

rare species populations that 

are already stressed. A wellinformed 

restoration plan, based 

on thorough research about 

the restoration site, is critical to 

prevent harm to rare species 

(see Case Study 1, Chapter 4). 

Photo: Nicole Kroeker 

objectives. Objectives are very focused and specific: most projects will tend to have a few too many 

objectives for each goal. Each objective will likely require many tasks to be completed before it is 

achieved. 

A restoration plan lays out the project goal(s), objectives, and tasks. Having a well thoughtout 

plan is especially important where species at risk or multiple agencies are involved, when 

reporting to a grant provider is required, and for the sake of efficient use of human and financial 

resources (Nuzzo and Howell 1990). 

A restoration plan 

lays out project 

goals, objectives, 

and tasks; includes 

a good schedule; 

incorporates 

monitoring; and is 

based upon sound 

knowledge of the 

site and species 

involved. 

While any restoration project has its complexities, working with rare species 

has its own special considerations, some of which are discussed in Chapter 4: 

Species and Ecosystems at Risk. A well-informed restoration plan is important 

because all restoration work, no matter how well-meaning, can have 

unforeseen and potentially deadly consequences for rare species populations 

that are already stressed. In some cases, rare plants and animals could be 

trampled and killed during restoration work—sometimes knowing where not 

to step is just as important as knowing what to do. In other cases, rare species 

may have become dependent on alien invasive species for food or shelter, and 

removing the alien species could lead to the loss of a rare population (e.g., the 

case of Taylor’s Checkerspot (Euphydryas editha taylori) and its host plants 

Case Study 1). For these reasons it is important to learn as much as you can 

about your restoration site before the project begins, so that your restoration 

plan is well-informed. A tenet many restoration practitioners try to follow is 

“do no harm”; after all, you are trying to fix a problem, not create another. 

A good schedule is a central element of successful restoration projects. Obviously, you will 

become frustrated if you have organized a broom removal event, and no one shows up because 

the date happens to coincide with another major environmental initiative or public event. 

5-4 



Additionally, you may discover in your planning process that the restoration project will take 

much longer than you had anticipated due to the need for consultation meetings or permits, for 

example. Further, various restoration tasks are season-sensitive, such as planting and invasive 

species removal. A schedule is particularly important when working around streams where legal 

regulations afford only a narrow annual work window. 

An oft-repeated Garry Oak ecosystem example involves the desire to plant camas bulbs in a 

meadow restoration. A project team or group gets excited about the project, and finally gets 

the approval and budget to buy the bulbs; however, the bulbs need to be purchased before the 

end of the fiscal year, and it is now late fall. The team calls up the supplier, who says that camas 

bulbs, like many other bulbs, are really only available in the late summer and fall. For the rest 

of the year the group either has to obtain potted plants (expensive and not usually available), or 

dig living plants and hope for the best. See Chapter 10: Species Propagation and Supply, Section 

10.7, for further discussion regarding planning timelines. With a little planning, including the 

development of a schedule, such problems can be avoided or mitigated. 

We approach the development of a restoration plan by considering a general series of stages 

that are common to restoration projects. These stages allow you to break the project down into 

smaller chunks to consider in sequence rather than trying to grasp the entire project at once. 

These stages are also useful for organizing tasks into a chronological sequence, or schedule. Once 

specific tasks have been identified and organized, you can assign required resources to each task 

and develop a budget for money and other resources (e.g., staff or volunteer time). Even if you 

are not necessarily spending dollars, you are, at the very least, using up your own time and that of 

others—the value of this time cannot be understated. 

This chapter has two parts: a summary description of a restoration project and some associated 

tasks and planning issues, and a description of a planning tool—the planning table—to help you 

develop your own plans. When carefully considered, the process outlined below will help you 

develop a solid plan, which will increase your chances of success and reduce the risk of doing 

harm. 

In Oregon, the remaining populations 

of Endangered Taylor’s Checkerspot 

(Euphydryas editha taylori) currently 

oviposit exclusively on a non-native 

larval host plant. This novel association 

requires restoration practitioners and 

land managers to re-think traditional 

approaches to managing alien species 

and is further complicated by the need to 

control other invasive plants in order to 

ensure adequate ground cover of the nonnative 

host plant. Photo: Nicole Kroeker 



5-5


Case Study 1. Reconsidering the Role of an Invasive Plant: 

Conserving Habitat Requirements for Taylor’s Checkerspot 

(Euphydryas editha taylori), an Endangered Native Butterfly 

Species in Western Oregon 

by Lisa Dumoulin 

CASE STUDY 

A 

restoration plan needs to carefully consider the suite of species and ecosystem processes 

that are interacting at a given site. Additionally, the goals of a restoration project must be 

clearly defined. Although common anthropogenic disturbances, particularly the presence 

of invasive species, are often targeted for mitigation in ecological restoration, the goals of the 

restoration should be the primary guides for decision making in the planning process. There 

is growing recognition that the mediation of disturbances such as invasive species must be 

reconsidered in light of each new restoration project (SERISPWG 2004). 

Invasive species have become a prolific problem around the globe. Novel associations of invasive 

and native species are well documented (Graves and Shapiro 2003, King et al. 2006) and have 

been used to support the concept of ecological fitting (Agosta 2006). In brief, for plant-insect 

associations, the concept of ecological fitting proposes that the associations we observe presently 

(e.g., butterflies and their host plants) are not necessarily the result of tight co-evolution. 

Rather, an association may have formed through coincidences of time, space, and the innate 

suite of characteristics that the plant and insect carried at the time they came into contact. 

Novel associations, especially when involving species at risk, certainly complicate the process of 

restoration planning. 

Such is the case in the Willamette Valley in western Oregon, where the two remaining populations 

of the Endangered Taylor’s Checkerspot butterfly in the state currently oviposit exclusively on a 

non-native larval host plant, Ribwort Plantain (Plantago lanceolata). To the north, in Washington, 

some of the remaining small populations of Taylor’s Checkerspot also feed on Ribwort Plantain 

but use a small variety of native host plants (paintbrushes, Castilleja spp.; Blue-eyed Mary, Collinsia 

spp.; and Sea Blush, Plectritis congesta) as well. Although many of the same native larval host plants 

consumed in Washington are also found throughout the Willamette Valley, only Sea Blush is found 

at a site where a remaining population of Taylor’s Checkerspot persists, and despite its presence, 

the adult females in the Oregon population do not oviposit on it. Instead, the females favour 

Ribwort Plantain as the larval food source and oviposit only on this alien 

species (Severns and Warren 2008). Since no native species of Plantago 

are known to occur in Oregon, the dependency of Taylor’s Checkerspot 

on Ribwort Plantain in that state is considered a novel association 

between an invasive and an Endangered species, presumably the 

result of a host shift, though the previous native host plants of Taylor’s 

Checkerspot in Oregon remain unknown (Severns and Warren 2008). 


Although it may seem reasonable to think that the Oregon populations 

of Taylor’s Checkerspot might benefit from the re-introduction of other 

potential native host plants (those observed as larval host plants in 

5-6 



Washington) to replace the use of the potentially invasive Ribwort Plantain, further investigation 

reveals that this is not a reasonable restoration or conservation effort. For example, in Oregon, the 

timing of the above-ground growth of Castilleja spp. and the emergence of Taylor’s Checkerspot 

larvae from their winter dormancy do not coincide (Severn and Warren 2008, Severns 2008). 

Moreover, if the timing of these events did coincide, another host shift could lead to a reduction 

in the effective population size, causing a population bottleneck in the already small butterfly 

populations (Severns and Warren 2008). The exclusive use of Ribwort Plantain as a larval host 

plant by Taylor’s Checkerspot in Oregon requires restoration practitioners and land managers 

to rethink traditional approaches to managing alien species and to protect the exotic plant in 

habitats currently occupied by, and of potential importance to, the remaining Taylor’s Checkerspot 

populations (Severns and Warren 2008). 

CASE STUDY 

Restoration management decisions at the sites of the Oregon Taylor’s Checkerspot populations 

also need to consider the presence of two invasive grass species. The increased cover of the 

tall invasive grasses Slender False Brome (Brachypodium sylvaticum) and Tall Fescue (Festuca 

arundinacea) is correlated with a decrease in ground cover of Ribwort Plantain. These grasses also 

out-compete native forbs, including Wild Strawberry (Fragaria virginiana), the primary native food 

plant on which adult Taylor’s Checkerspots feed during their flight period (mid-April to early May). 

Oviposition patterns show that Taylor’s Checkerspot in Oregon require habitat with sufficient larval 

food plants and adult nectar sources for successful reproduction (Severns and Warren 2008). 

Although Ribwort Plantain is an abundant weed, occurring widely throughout the Willamette 

Valley, the extant populations of Taylor’s Checkerspot only inhabit remnant prairie areas where 

the cover of tall invasive grasses is low enough that native forbs persist as well. Therefore, to 

maintain high quality feeding and reproductive habitat in Oregon, restoration activities to remove 

the invasive grasses, or to control their spread, are necessary to protect native forbs as well as the 

exotic Ribwort Plantain. 

This case study highlights contemporary problems that restoration practitioners face due to 

alien invasive species. Often, invasive species threaten native ecosystems and warrant removal. 

In Oregon, however, the exotic Ribwort Plantain is sustaining two extant populations of an 

endangered butterfly, and despite its weedy tendency and potential to become highly invasive, 

it requires protection within the suitable remaining habitat for Taylor’s Checkerspot (Severns 

2008). Traditional ecological restoration in North America may seek to return an ecosystem to 

a pre-colonial state. However, there is growing recognition that invasive species need to be 

considered for all of their potential roles in an ecosystem before management actions are taken 

(Rodriguez 2006, GOERT 2010). As native species are continuously out-competed by exotic ones, 

new species associations (herbivory, predation, and parasitism) will inevitably form (Agosta 2006 ). 

Some of these new associations may turn out to be critical in maintaining a native species, leaving 

restoration practitioners and land managers with complex management dilemmas. Consideration 

of the facilitative effects of invasive species in comparison to their detrimental effects should 

increasingly weigh into the decision-making framework for ecological and ecosystems restoration 

(Rodriguez 2006). 



5-7


References 

Agosta, S.J. 2006. On ecological fitting, plant insect associations, herbivore host shifts, and host 

plant selection. Oikos 114:556-565. 

GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team). 2010. Restoration Plan for the Westridge Strata 

Property, Langford, B.C., March 2010. Prepared by Brittany Dewar. Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Recovery Team, Victoria, B.C. 

CASE STUDY 

Graves, S. and A.M. Shapiro. 2003. Exotics as host plants of the California butterfly fauna. Biological 

Conservation 110: 413-433. 

King, R.B., J.M Ray and K.M. Stanford. 2006. Gorging on gobies: beneficial effects of alien prey on a 

threatened vertebrate. Canadian Journal of Zoology 84:108-115. 

Rodriguez, L. 2006. Can invasive species facilitate native species? Evidence of how, when, and why 

these impacts occur. Biological Invasions 8: 927-939. 

Severns, P and A.D. Warren. 2008. Selectively eliminating and conserving exotic plants to save an 

endangered butterfly from local extinction. Animal Conservation 11:476-483. 

Severns, P. 2008. Interactions between two endangered butterflies and invasive, exotic grasses in 

western Oregon, USA. Endangered Species Update 25 (2):35-40. 

SERISPWG (Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & Policy Working Group). 2004. 

The SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration (Version 2, October, 2004), Society for 

Ecological Restoration International, Washington, D.C. 

Lisa Dumoulin worked as the Outreach and Stewardship Officer for the Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Recovery Team 2010–2011. 

5-8 



5.2 The Structure of a Restoration Project: How do I Organize and 

Carry Out Restoration? 

How to approach carrying out a major initiative may at first seem like an overwhelming question. 

Even a small project may be more complex than you think, especially if it involves a variety of 

groups or property other than your own. However, if you approach the matter systematically, stepby-step, 

rather than trying to grasp it all at once, you can develop a solid plan. 

In general, a restoration project can be broken down into several steps or stages. While the specific 

number of stages varies somewhat according to the person describing them and the emphasis of 

the project, these stages provide an outline for planning. This restoration outline can be followed 

from beginning to end; it will help simplify the planning process and help ensure all the pieces for 

a solid restoration plan are put together. The following description considers seven stages, each 

with many tasks. This breakdown is taught in the University of Victoria’s introductory course to 

Restoration of Natural Systems (Hebda 2007) and has at its core the concept that a restoration 

project is a very broad initiative involving more than just the actual on-the-ground work. 

Identifying the restoration goals and objectives is a key component of the project, as is widespread 

involvement of the public, if appropriate. Thus, the project stages cover much more than what 

people might typically consider when they think of restoration. While we will touch on the topic 

of public involvement in this chapter, readers should refer to Chapter 6: Outreach and Public 

Involvement for further information. 

The outline of the restoration project is presented in a more or less chronological order (see box, 

Restoration Project Stages). In Stage 1 the goals and objectives of the project are established. 

The initial broom 

removal on Mill Hill 

was a major initiative 

requiring extensive 

planning for volunteers 

and equipment. Here 

Scotch Broom (Cytisus 

scoparius) is being 

prepared to be airlifted 

by a helicopter. A 

systematic, step-bystep 

approach to 

restoration planning 

helps identify and 

coordinate all of 

the necessary tasks. 

Photo: Capital Regional 

District 



5-9


Stage 2 involves the collection of data. Stage 3 follows with the analysis of field samples and data 

collected in Stage 2, and potentially requires consultation with experts. Stage 4 builds on data 

collection and analysis, and with as much information in hand as possible, the restoration plan 

is developed and verified with interested parties. In Stage 5, the restoration process may begin at 

the site through pre-restoration experiments and field tests. Finally, the restoration work itself, 

Stage 6, occurs. Stage 7 is the final stage; in this monitoring stage you are checking to see if your 

objectives are being met and what adjustments need to be made, if necessary, to achieve the 

objectives and ultimately the goals of the project. Depending on the project, the monitoring stage 

may be relatively short (months) or very long (decades). 

In the sections that follow, the stage descriptions are in list form with annotations. Selected 

parts have been chosen for extended discussion to provide you with specific practical advice and 

a rationale for steps. In the case of the monitoring stage, because of its great importance and 

frequent omission, we have devoted an entire chapter in this publication to monitoring (Chapter 

7: Inventory and Monitoring). Elements of many other stages are covered to some extent in other 

chapters too. 

Restoration project stages (summarized from Hebda, 2010) 

Stage 1 – Establish the context, goals, and objectives for the site. Setting clear, realistic goals 

for the restoration project is essential for success. 

Stage 2 – Inspect the project site and surrounding area: conduct an inventory of the site and 

an inventory of a comparative site (referred to as a reference ecosystem), and identify biotic 

or abiotic constraints to recovery. 

Stage 3 – Conduct laboratory and other analyses, if needed. 

Stage 4 – Develop and verify the restoration plan (establish and verify what you want to do) in 

consultation with interested parties. This plan will document the goals, objectives, and tasks 

required to complete the restoration project. 

Stage 5 – Conduct controlled experiments and field trials (if needed). Operational trials can be 

used where uncertainty exists. Here, a series of treatments are applied that are expected to 

result in recovery of the site. Careful documentation of the treatments and results provides 

information to refine the treatments as needed. 

Stage 6 – Conduct the restoration on-site. 

Stage 7 – Monitor the restoration site after project completion and make necessary 

adjustments. 

5-10 



The strategies and practical details of terrestrial ecosystem restoration, such as those use for 

Garry Oak ecosystems, have their roots in forestry, agricultural, botanical, and horticultural 

experience. To begin with, reclamation/restoration projects were viewed simply as a soil issue, 

wherein the soil was raw or unproductive and had to be improved. Routine soil analyses were 

carried out to determine which nutrients were in short supply. The soil was treated accordingly, 

and a standard seed mixture was chosen and sown. In other cases, selected plants, such as shrubs 

or forestry stock trees (Garry Oak, Quercus garryana, trees, for example), were planted. This 

relatively straightforward and narrowly focused approach met with some success (Bradshaw and 

Chadwick 1980) and was relatively simple to plan. However, as the scope of restoration broadened 

in recognition of the complexity of ecosystems, practitioners realized that there was a need 

for detailed and comprehensive site investigations that covered all aspects of the ecosystem, 

including interests expressed by various stakeholder groups or individuals. 

With the development of the holistic concept of natural system restoration (as 

reflected in the Society for Ecological Restoration’s definition of restoration (see 

sidebar), the concept of a restoration project expanded in scope to include a 

broader range of activities than in the past, particularly those involving people 

and social issues. Clewell and Aronson (2007), for example, have proposed 

the four quadrant model of ecological restoration to address this diversity 

of interests by explicitly including personal, cultural, ecological, and socioeconomic 

values. The geographic scope of many restoration initiatives has 

also expanded from a specific site to the landscape scale. Garry Oak ecosystem 

restoration is very much this sort of initiative, consisting of many small- to 

medium-scale projects that are integrated on a regional landscape scale. 

“Ecological 

restoration is 

the process of 

assisting the 

recovery of an 

ecosystem that has 

been degraded, 

damaged, or 

destroyed.” 

This wider scope requires a broad approach to many projects. Consequently, the outline for 

developing a restoration plan is now more complex and includes an all-important initial step 

concerning site goals and objectives. As an example of this broader approach, you may want 

to undertake a simple, small restoration project in your neighbourhood. While you could 

proceed alone with your project, if you were aware of other nearby projects and the availability 

of resources, your project might be planned in the context of other projects, and in the long run 

would be likely to be more successful. You might have just the right spot for a rare plant species or 

to establish a key connection between two larger areas, but you become aware of this only when 

considering your project in the broader context (Raphael and Molina 2007). As a background to 

planning, you may want to look at Clewell et al. (2005) at the Society for Ecological Restoration 

website (www.ser.org/content/guidelines_ecological_restoration.asp); these authors consider the 

steps in a restoration project in detail. 

5.2.1 Stage 1 – Establish the Context, Goals, and Objectives for the Site 

Clear and shared goals are vital to a successful restoration project. These goals drive the objectives 

and tasks, which in turn shape the budget of the project. Unclear goals lead to confusion, and 

even to conflict among participants. In the case of a team, lack of a clear set of shared goals may 

result in inconsistent communication with supporting agencies and the public, including those 

who provided the budget. In other words, do not start doing anything until you know why you 

and others are doing it. The process of setting goals is a large subject: we will discuss some of the 

considerations below. 



5-11


Setting goals consists of identifying the big-picture end points of your project. The goals for 

some major projects may be pre-specified by legislation and policy. For example, the restoration 

of roadsides falls into this category. At the other end of the scale, the goal of a small landholder 

may be to restore his/her backyard to a natural state. Though this goal may seem self-evident, we 

do need to consider how the landowner defines the “natural state” of the yard. Does the natural 

state include non-native and native species? Is it a natural state as exists today, or as existed 150 

years ago? Are there municipal bylaws (such as tree removal or weed control requirements) that 

influence what that natural state may look like? 

Additional considerations, such as what the local community thinks or 

Clear and shared whether any adjacent lands or landowners/managers will be affected by the 

goals are vital 

restoration, are also important. By speaking with these people prior to any 

to a successful 

on-the-ground work, they can help collaborate on the development of goals 

restoration project. 

(if appropriate), and the discussion will help identify any potential issues up 

front. Many of these potential issues can be addressed in the restoration plan 

by adjusting goals relatively easily at the outset to avoid the major headaches 

of amending goals after work has already begun (see Chapter 6: Outreach and Public 

Involvement). This is particularly important where re-introduction of fire is being considered 

as a restoration tool. Below are a few steps to take during the development of project goals: 

• Develop a list of parties who are interested in the project, such as: 

• landowners 

• adjacent landowners 

• environmental organizations 

• all levels of government, Provincial, Federal, and First Nations, and particularly local 

and regional 

• local residents 

• land users (recreational, etc.) 

• sources of support (e.g., volunteers, consultants, academic institutions) 

• Meet with landowners, land users, and interested parties to develop restoration goals 

• Facilitate a discussion of possible targets or end points for the restoration 

• Involve those who have raised awareness of the issue through public means such as protests 

(this is particularly important) 

• Establish ongoing communication links with interested parties to ensure feedback 

• Establish which laws and policies apply (e.g., watershed restoration in a park will have very 

different legal requirements than wasteland reclamation). Also be aware of labour laws, union 

agreements, and other regulations that involve workers. 

• Develop a list of resources for the project, as appropriate 

• Gather basic background information and descriptions of restoration models and options 

• Identify any biotic or abiotic constraints to recovery 

These tasks are critical in planning the restoration project. In Section 5.3: Constructing a Plan, we 

will show how to construct a planning table, which is helpful in developing a schedule and budget 

for a restoration project. 

5-12 



Sun through the smoke and branches 

of a Garry Oak during a burn at the 

Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve in the 

Cowichan Valley. Fire re-introduction can 

be an important restoration tool, but 

often requires extensive consultation 

with adjacent landowners, permits, 

expertise, and planning that make it 

difficult to use in many restoration 

projects. Project goals may need to be 

adapted depending on the available 

tools. Photo: Thomas Munson 

Assessing values and setting priorities is a useful and often critical exercise at this stage, since 

priorities provide a guide for making choices. For example, during the development of the 

master plan for Gowlland-Tod Provincial Park (just outside of Victoria, B.C.), preservation of the 

biodiversity of the park’s coastal Douglas-fir ecosystem was identified as the first priority goal 

(BC Parks 1996). Available space for recreation was ranked as a lower priority goal. This important 

decision was made clear before any detailed planning began. As a result, intensive recreational 

activities such as mountain biking were restricted to areas of low biodiversity value. Where 

recreation activities occurred near biodiversity hot spots, such as rare species populations, actions 

were taken to eliminate the activity, minimize the risk, and encourage passive recovery (no active 

interference with the population, such as seeding, control of exotics, etc.). In this example, the 

work of restoration was the elimination of the activity, which allowed the site to restore itself. 

It is important to make it clear that specific project details, such as what combination of plants 

to use, may need to change as new data are collected. However, the goal and priorities should be 

agreed upon at the outset because it will shape what field work and other activities take place in 

the next stage. 

While the goals state broadly what is to be done, and they provide general direction, objectives state 

very specifically what needs to be achieved to reach each goal. Good objectives will be “SMART”: 



5-13


SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timed (see examples in box below). 

Specific – It is better to have many smaller objectives than one large one. It will be easier to 

communicate and monitor several small precise objectives. 

Measurable – Where possible, objectives should be quantifiable. These objectives will determine 

what ecosystem attributes you select to monitor in later stages of planning. It is also easier to 

measure when a quantifiable objective has been achieved. 

Achievable – There is no sense in having an objective that is not achievable under current 

circumstances. 

Realistic – Do you have the resources to achieve the objective? Similar to the previous bullet, 

there is no sense in developing unrealistic objectives. 

Timed – An objective should state a timeline. People need to know when an objective is expected 

to be achieved (weeks, months, years). It may be difficult to come up with a timed objective, but 

even if it is an educated guess, a timed objective will add context, help with consultation, and 

inform your monitoring plan and schedule. Without time-bounded objectives it will be difficult to 

know when to monitor. 

Setting the objectives well in advance provides an opportunity to discuss the possibility of predisturbance 

tasks in the restoration. For example, if one objective is to have certain tree species 

colonize a disturbed site, it may be important to plan to leave selected old trees of the desirable 

species to act as post-disturbance seed sources. 

examples of SMART Objectives 

A SMART objective: Within three years (1) the native grass species Blue Wildrye (Elymus 

glaucus) and Alaska Brome (Bromus sitchensis) will have a combined cover of 75%, and (2) 

the invasive Orchard-grass (Dactylis glomerata) will have less than 5% cover within the 

restoration area 

A not-so-SMART objective: We would like to remove invasive grasses and encourage 

extensive growth of native grasses. 

The SMART objective provides lots of information and direction to the project. It leaves little 

question about what is to be done and by when. The not-so-SMART objective, on the other 

hand, provides little concrete direction and leaves many questions: Which grasses to remove? 

Which grasses to encourage? When is the project to be finished? How will we know when 

the project is finished or whether progress is being made? This last question is particularly 

relevant. When you are asking for money or resources, you need to be able to report on 

progress, and to do that you need to know exactly what you are trying to do. Monitoring the 

SMART objective is relatively straightforward because it has specific, measurable, and timebounded 

targets. Monitoring success will be difficult to impossible for the not-so-SMART 

objective: what is “extensive growth of native grasses”—30%, 60%, 90%? 

5-14 



It is important to identify any constraints at this stage. The removal or mitigation of any 

constraints may form the basis for objective(s) that must be achieved for a project to be 

successful. Biotic or abiotic factors that constrain natural recovery of a site are often called 

filters. Identification of the filters that are preventing recovery is one of the most important 

steps in planning a restoration project. It may be that invasive species such as Eastern Cottontail 

(Sylvilagus floricanis) rabbits are preventing the recovery of a diversity of native plant species. 

Simply planting the appropriate species will not solve the problem—you need to prevent the 

rabbits from eating them. Similarly, a rare species may do well where foot traffic prevents excessive 

growth of non-native grasses. Removal of the foot traffic may, in fact, result in a decline in the 

rare species. In this case, the invasive grasses are the filter and the foot traffic is inadvertently 

mitigating the impacts of the grasses. 

Erickson and Edain’s (1995) description of how to plan a restoration project (www.ser.org/sernw/ 

pdf/FROSTY_HOLLOW_restoration_guide.pdf) takes a different approach to the beginning 

of a restoration project. This approach first identifies the problem, the cause of the problem, 

and the setting of a goal that will solve the problem. By contrast, the approach proposed in this 

publication is broader and begins by asking whether we all think there is a problem, and whether 

we see the same problem. 

5.2.2 Stage 2 – Inspection and Inventory 

Site inspection and inventory are vital to successful restoration because they 

provide the raw data to guide decisions about tasks. Site data also provide the 

basis for further consultation about the restoration plan and recommendations. 

In short, good comprehensive data lead to a good restoration plan. Poor or 

general data with gaps result in a poor restoration plan. Good inventories not 

only identify specific issues that need to be addressed but also may turn up 

unexpected values, such as an unknown population of a rare species. 

Site inspection 

and inventory are 

vital to successful 

restoration; good, 

comprehensive 

data lead to a good 

restoration plan. 

The discussion that follows outlines some general points concerning 

inventories, and it briefly mentions typical activities or tasks that fall into the inventory stage 

(much of this information also applies to monitoring). Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring 

provides a comprehensive description of how to carry out an inventory. 

General Principles of Inventory 

Collect observations in a standard manner using tested methods: You cannot escape the 

need for collecting data in a standard, repeatable, and credible manner. This may seem like an 

overwhelming task because of the diversity of data and technical skills required to collect it. It is 

important to learn (1) what type of information is most useful, and (2) when you should consult 

experts. It is important to acknowledge your limitations and consult others with more experience. 

You might consider taking the standard forms in the Field Manual for Describing Terrestrial 

Ecosystems www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/docs/Lmh/Lmh25-2.htm (BC Ministry of Environment, 

Lands, and Parks and BC Ministry of Forests 2010) and adapting them to your particular part 

of the world. The Ground Inspection Form from the manual (see Figure 5.1 Ground Inspection 

Form) is a comprehensive guide to data collection that is especially related to site location and 

characteristics and the all-important vegetation component. 



5-15


G vs V 

PROJECT ID. 

MAP SHEET 

UTM ZONE 

ASPECT 

SLOPE 

MESO 

SLOPE 

POSTION 

DRAINAGE - 

MINERAL SOILS 

MOISTURE 

SUBCLASSES - 

ORGANIC SOILS 

PHOTO 

GROUND INSPECTION FORM 

LAT. / NORTH 

% SMR 

Crest 

Upper slope 

Very rapidly 

Rapidly 

Aqueous 

Peraquic 

o 

X: 

SU RV. 

PLOT # PO LY . # 

ELEVATION 

Y: 

SNR 

Mid slope 

Lower slope 

To e 

Well 

Mod. well 

Imperfectly 

Aquic 

Subaquic 

DAT E 

LONG. / EAST 

Depression 

Level 

Poorly 

Very poorly 

Perhumid 

Humid 

m 

Figure 5.1 Ground Inspection 

Form (first page) from 

Field Manual for Describing 

Terrestrial Ecosystems (BC 

Ministry of Environment, 

Lands, and Parks and BC 

Ministry of Forests 2010) 

MINERAL SOIL 

TEXTURE 

Sandy (LS,S) 

Loamy (SL,L,SCL,FSL) 

Silty (SiL,Si) 

Clayey (SiCL,CL,SC,SiC,C) 

ORGANIC SOIL TEXTURE 

SURF. ORGANIC HORIZON THICKNESS 

Fibric Mesic Humic 

0–40 cm > 40 cm 

HUMUS FORM 

ROOT RESTRICTING LAYER 

Mor Moder Mull Depth cm Type 

COARSE FRAGMENT CONTENT 

< 20% 

20–35% 

35–70% 

> 70% 

TERRAIN 

COMPONENT: 

TC1 TC2 TC3 

TERRAIN 

SURFICIAL 

SURFACE 

GEOMORPH 

TEXTURE 

MATERIAL 

EXPRESSION 

PROCESS 

1 

2 

1 

2 

1 

2 

1 

2 

ECOSYSTEM 

COMPONENT: 

EC1 EC2 EC3 

BGC UNIT 

SITE SERIES 

STRUCTURAL 

STAGE 

ECOSYSTEM POLYGON 

SUMMARY 

% SS SM ST 

EC1 

EC2 

EC3 

ECOSECTION 

SITE MODIFIERS 

CROWN 

CLOSURE % 

TC1 

TC2 

TC3 

TERRAIN POLYGON 

SUMMARY 

% Classification 

Make multiple visits: Good field observation for restoration purposes requires more than 

a single visit. In Garry Oak and associated ecosystems, field visits in the early spring to early 

summer are especially important for observing various herbaceous species (see box page 5-18, 

Best Practices for Conducting Rare Species Inventory). 

Observe how people use the site and consult them about their interests and concerns: Site 

visits provide an opportunity to survey the wishes and concerns of the local people. It is a good 

opportunity to learn traditional or folk knowledge about the site and engage the local community 

(see Chapter 6: Outreach and Public Involvement). 

Make a reconnaissance visit and get a general sense of the restoration site: Often the goal 

of the first field visit is to look around and get a sense of the scope of the site, both biophysically 

and geographically. Even in this first visit you must be prepared to make notes and sketches and 

collect preliminary samples, such as specimens of dominant plant species. Some analyses take 

many weeks and even months, so the sooner you get started, the better. 

Be prepared for your main field visit: Take forms, maps, field guides, and a good field 

notebook. If you have determined that you need to bring along an expert (in soils, for example), 

5-16 



the expert should visit the site along with you, if at all possible. Then all observations will be 

collected at the same time at the same site. 

Make arrangements with experts for identifications and analyses before you start: These 

experts may provide advice about the site visit, including what you should look for in the way 

of indicators. You need to advise such experts well in advance that you may need their help in 

identification. Today, taxonomic experts are especially rare, and weeks or months may pass before 

they have the time to help, even if you have budgeted payment for their services. 

During the inventory stage, in addition to assessing what is on the site, you should be looking for 

physical attributes, biological features or processes, or human activities that constrain natural 

processes on the site. These constraints will need to be dealt with during restoration and will 

likely be the focus of one or more objectives in the restoration plan. These constraints can be 

thought of as filters. Compaction may be a filter that is preventing recovery where an old road 

runs through a site (abiotic filter). Invasive species such as Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) may 

be a filter that is preventing recovery (biotic filter). The absence of fire is a filter that plagues many 

Garry Oak ecosystems (see Chapter 3: Natural Processes and Disturbance). Whatever the case, 

identification of the filters operating at a site will be critical in developing effective strategies for 

recovery. 

Types of Data 

The following point-form summary lists the types of data you can collect, and it provides 

additional advice on selected points. The list is not comprehensive; however, you can use it to see 

the tasks that have to be carried out, get a sense of when they can be done, decide what equipment 

is necessary, and determine if you need to budget for these tasks. 

Site description: Location, access, map references, air photo numbers, landforms, drainage 

characteristics, etc. 

Photographs or a video of the site: Images help you recall details of the site after the visit, and 

they provide a visual baseline condition before the restoration takes place. 

Soil description: General depth of soil, coarse fragment or rockiness, texture, drainage, root 

restricting layer, description of organic material and thickness, presence of earthworms and other 

biota, moisture regime, nutrient regime, surface Ah horizon depth. 

Vegetation description: Vegetation composition often provides an easy way to describe the 

conditions at the restoration site because it reflects ecological conditions. The plant component 

of a site can be described simply by preparing a species list. Another approach is to describe plant 

vigour (how well are the plants growing?). More useful, however, is a description of the abundance 

and distribution of plant species. A most valuable skill to learn is how to estimate plant species 

cover by vegetation layer (see Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring). If possible, consider 

collecting data on vegetation composition in an undisturbed site and using it for comparison 

purposes. This other site may be the reference site, which you would like your site to resemble 

when restoration has been completed; these comparisons will help you to set your objectives. 

Also, note the occurrence of weedy invasive species, natural regeneration (a clue to species for 

restoration), and rare species and their location. 



5-17


Left: Macoun’s Meadowfoam 

(Limnanthes macounii). 

Photo: Conan Webb 

Right: Sharp-tailed Snake 

(Contia tenuis). 


Best Practices for Conducting Rare Species Inventory 

A qualified person who is familiar with any rare species that are likely to be present in the 

project area should be hired to conduct inventories. Inventories need to be conducted 

at the correct time of year. Many rare plants in Garry Oak ecosystems are detectable (or 

identifiable) only at certain times of the year. 

A summer survey, for instance, will miss many of our rare spring flowering plants, such as 

Threatened Macoun’s Meadowfoam (Limnanthes macounii), which germinates in the fall and 

is virtually undetectable by mid-May on most sites. On the other hand, the identification of 

Endangered Foothill Sedge (Carex tumulicola) can be confirmed only in the summer when 

it is fruiting; at any other time of the year it can be easily confused with more common 

related sedge species. Red-listed Carolina Meadow-foxtail (Alopecurus carolinianus) is a small 

annual grass that is restricted to vernal pools (small depressions that collect water in the fall, 

winter, and spring). This species grows very quickly during the summer after the standing 

water has dried up but before all the soil moisture has evaporated. However, in some years, 

if conditions are poor, the plants will not germinate. 

So, conducting inventories is not as simple as heading out into the field whenever you 

have the opportunity, because proper surveys need to be planned and performed at the 

appropriate time of year. Ideally, surveys should be conducted more than once a year at 

a site to catch the early and the later species, and for more than one year because not all 

species are visible every year. For some particularly cryptic species it can take a very long 

time: there are several cases 

where it took over 50 surveys to 

detect the Endangered Sharptailed 

Snake (Contia tenuis); in 

one of these cases, it took five 

years and 62 surveys. 

Left: Foothill Sedge (Carex 

tumulicola). Photo: Conan Webb 

Right: Carolina Meadow-foxtail 

(Alopecurus carolinianus). 

Photo: Conan Webb 

5-18 



Measuring tree 

diameter at breast 

height (DBH) using a 

DBH tape. Data about 

your restoration site 

must be collected in a 

standard, repeatable, 

and credible manner. 

Photo: Thomas 

Munson 

Weedy species may 

indicate some form 

of disturbance 

that had not 

been noticed. 

This disturbance 

may be as simple 

as a trail running 

through the site or 

the lack of fire. Pay 

particular attention 

to why the weeds 

have established 

because this will 

give you clues 

for designing the 

recovery systems 

you will need. 

Tree mensuration data: A census of trees, including their size, health, and distribution, note 

old-growth trees, observe diameter at breast height (DBH), tree height, age at breast height (need 

an increment borer), signs of disease, scarring, and observed wildlife use. 

Weedy species: They may indicate some form of disturbance that had not been noticed. This 

disturbance may be as simple as a trail running through the site or the lack of fire. 

Coarse woody debris: Stumps or logs, which can be a positive indicator of site health. 

Wildlife: Presence of animals or sign such as droppings or tracks. 

Historical or archaeological features: Shell middens, trees where bark has been stripped, piled 

rocks that may be cairns, or old building foundations. 

Local knowledge: In general, local naturalists and long-time residents may be a particularly rich 

source of knowledge about wildlife. For example, they may be aware of cougar and bear dens. The 

birders of a community often keep detailed lists of bird species in an area and may note where 

nests occur. Nests of raptors are often occupied for many years and become part of the local lore. 



5-19


5.2.3 Stage 3 – Carry Out Analyses 

Once data and any necessary samples are collected, you need to make sense of them to develop 

the restoration plan. Activities in this stage will vary widely depending on the project and what 

data have been collected. Some general activities included in this stage are listed below: 

• Identify and verify plants and wildlife that were not readily identified in initial inventory visits 

• Deposit voucher specimens collected in the field in an appropriate facility (e.g., plants would 

be deposited in a local herbarium) 

• Conduct physical and chemical soil analysis 

• Analyze water quality 

• Consult experts to interpret results and provide recommendations based on your goals 

• Do statistical analyses of survey data/questionnaires 

Points 3 (“Site options analysis”), 4 (“Alternatives analysis”) and 5 (“Decision”) in Erickson and 

Edain (1995), present a detailed set of suggestions for carrying out an analysis. 

5.2.4 Stage 4 – Develop the Restoration Plan 

Using the objectives from Stage 1, combined with field data from Stage 2, and analysis from Stage 

3, prepare a restoration plan that includes the following: 

• Goals and objectives 

• Identification of constraints 

• Communication plan 

• Experimentation and field trials 

• Specific detailed restoration instructions and site plan 

• Special requirements, such as sources of biological materials 

• Consideration of structures to be built or modified 

• Monitoring plan 

• Schedule of tasks 

• Budget, listing costs for each part of process 

• A process to verify the budget and a mechanism for monitoring—this step is often forgotten 

Erickson and Edain (1995) outline many of the considerations and actions needed when making 

a restoration plan and beginning to implement it. Think about these when you develop the plan. 

Also, refer to Appendix 5.1: Restoration Plan for Anniversary Island, which is a full restoration plan 

for a Garry Oak ecosystem restoration project on Anniversary Island in the Gulf Islands National 

Park Reserve. 

Monitoring is discussed below in Stage 7 but deserves special consideration at Stage 4 as well. 

Monitoring helps you determine whether you are achieving your objectives. While the actual work 

of monitoring occurs during or after the work of Stages 5 and 6, it must be planned in advance. 

A monitoring plan must be fully developed in Stage 4 so that appropriate inventory or baseline 

data can be collected before any work alters the site. There will not be sufficient money or time to 

5-20 



measure everything, so you must choose carefully what you will measure and 

how. What you measure should be determined by your objectives—you want 

to determine whether your restoration is achieving your objectives—and if 

your objectives are SMART, your task will be much easier. 

After a draft of the restoration plan has been prepared, it should be shared 

with all participating parties. This is a chance for consultation and for 

verifying that everyone agrees on the goals and the tasks. This is also a good 

time to verify the budget with sponsoring client agencies and interested 

parties. 

Monitoring helps 

you determine 

whether you are 

achieving your 

objectives. It 

is important to 

include monitoring 

in early phases 

of restoration 

planning to 

ensure not only 

that adequate 

resources are 

allocated but also 

that pre-work data 

are appropriate for 

measuring success. 

Anniversary Island Restoration Plan found in Appendix 5.1 is an example of a 

restoration plan written for Garry Oak ecosystems. 



5-21


5.2.5 Stage 5 – Carry Out Experiments and Field Trials 

Garry Oak ecosystem restoration is still a highly experimental undertaking. We are only now 

beginning to see the results of some of our efforts after many years of restoration work. Before a 

large restoration project is implemented, it is wise to check if the proposed treatments will actually 

work at the site in the manner anticipated. If necessary, run trials for treatments you intend to use 

but whose effectiveness you are unsure of, consult with others, and thoroughly check the literature 

to verify the potential for success of your treatment before carrying it out. Many techniques and 

strategies can be tested on a small scale (e.g., proposed fertilization and planting combinations, 

fertility/capability of stored topsoil to support seed mixes, germination rates of native species, 

survival rates of rare species seedlings, resistance of outplantings to herbivores, response of 

desired species to control of invasive or aggressive native plants, resistance to human use). 

Use of a small, well-observed experimental plot might save lots of money and effort in the future 

and avoid unforeseen results. However, such trials need to be planned in advance and worked into 

the schedule because their inclusion in the project could push the restoration timeline ahead by 

several months or even a year into the future. 

5.2.6 Stage 6 – Carry Out Restoration 

The specific tasks involved in a Garry Oak restoration project are covered in several of the chapters 

in this publication—Chapter 6: Outreach and Public Involvement, Chapter 7: Inventory and 

Monitoring, Chapter 8: Restoration Strategies, Chapter 9: Alien Invasive Species, and Chapter 

10: Species Propagation and Supply. Typical tasks include notifying the participants that work is 

commencing, preparing the site, and carrying out plantings or removal of invasive species. Be 

sure to include options in your plan for the schedule or tasks because field conditions change 

(e.g., atypical site conditions, bad weather, or excessive drought). Large projects should include a 

specific task to keep track of expenditures and to remain within budget. Having a well thoughtout 

schedule is especially important to ensure that all the resources, such as tools and people, are 

clearly identified and on-site when required. 

All restoration projects should include a plan to communicate progress from the start to the end of 

the project. Restoration practitioners learn from the mistakes and successes of others, and there is 

something to learn from any project, no matter how small or unsuccessful. Begin with some sort 

of pre-restoration notice, then report on progress at some predetermined stage/date during the 

work. In the end, provide a summary of how the restoration project proceeded and any lessons 

learned, and an outline for future work once the field work is completed. Even unsuccessful results 

are important to share with others so they know what has been tried and what techniques to avoid 

using in their own projects. 

5.2.7 Stage 7 – Monitor and Verify Restoration 

The importance of monitoring is discussed fully in Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring. However, 

it is worth repeating that in order to determine whether a restoration is successful, observations 

of the site must continue after the work has been completed. The post restoration data should be 

compared to the original data and the targets specified by the objectives. To be effective, monitoring 

must measure critical biological and physical features of the site that indicate whether or not the 

5-22 



A common method of 

monitoring vegetation involves 

using 1 m x 1 m quadrat frames. 

Site observations must continue 

after restoration activities in 

order to gauge the success of 

the restoration project. 

Photo: Thomas Munson 

objectives of the restoration are being met (Harwell et al. (1999) discuss some 

of these characteristics). These attributes are often referred to as indicators. 

Monitoring is 


making repeated 

measurements to 

detect change over 

time. 

The concept of monitoring is very important because restoration is a long-term activity. However, 

in practice, there is considerable confusion about what “monitoring” actually means, as well as 

what is involved in carrying it out. 

Two other similar terms—evaluation and assessment—are often used in place of the word 

monitoring, but they have different meanings. Evaluation is the process of determining whether 

the work is being done correctly. For example, you can evaluate whether the right number of 

plants were planted in the prescribed pattern. Assessment is the process of comparing the results 

or condition of an indicator attribute to a desired condition. For example, a coarse woody debris 

(CWD) assessment involves carrying out an inventory of CWD and comparing it to the desirable 

standard or condition (how many pieces or what volume per hectare), which 

should be specified in the objectives. 

Monitoring strictly addresses the question “Is the baseline condition 

changing?” In other words, is the restoration progressing in the direction 

set out in the goals? Are the objectives being achieved? Monitoring may also 

be used to determine whether a desired condition is persisting or whether 

changes are occurring. It involves repeated visits to a site and collecting data in 

a similar or standard manner on each visit. 

A monitoring plan should identify what is to be measured and observed, 

where and how frequently, and by what standards. Such a plan should be 

included in the restoration plan prepared in Stage 4. If needed, make sure 

that any structures and signs for monitoring are installed during this or the 

preceding stage. After you carry out the monitoring observations, make sure 

you deposit them in a secure and accessible place where others can use them. Key data have a 

tendency to disappear if no one is identified as their steward. Part of the process of monitoring 

involves communicating the results. In effect, the monitoring stage provides an opportunity 

to report on long-term progress of a project and demonstrate that the project is progressing. If 

To be effective, 

monitoring must 

measure critical 

biological and 

physical features 

of the site that 

are linked to 

the restoration 

objectives. 



5-23


progress is not being made as planned, then the monitoring stage provides an opportunity for 

taking corrective action. A key task in developing a monitoring plan is to ensure that there is 

sufficient budget to monitor for the interval required. 

5.3 Constructing a Plan 

Written plans are very important documents, especially for large and complex projects. They can 

be constructed in many ways, such as flow charts, point-form to-do lists, and text documents. 

Many restoration plans not only involve tasks but also integrate schedules and 

budgets. A planning table is a straightforward and effective tool for developing 

A planning table is 

a straightforward 

and effective tool 

for developing a 

restoration plan. 

a restoration plan. In a table you can list the tasks, and for each task, list 

the required resources and budget. These tasks can then be organized in 

chronological order to form a schedule. The table serves as a living guide to the 

project, and helps you check at a glance whether your tasks are organized in a 

realistic manner, whether or not the tasks are getting done, and how the project 

schedule and budget are progressing. A planning table can always be adjusted 

as the project moves forward. It also provides a tool for reporting to project 

supporters and interested parties. 

Because the restoration stages cover the full range of tasks involved in restoration and set out the 

flow of a project more or less in chronological order, they can be used to help order restoration 

tasks and ensure that none are missing. For complex projects, such as restoring a native Garry 

Oak ecosystem in a large park, planning under each of the stage headings is necessary. In smaller 

projects, such as restoring your backyard, some of the stages, such as carrying out lab analyses, may 

be omitted. Even if little or no budget is involved and the schedule is mostly up to you, a planning 

table helps you order your tasks. The columns of a planning table can be filled out as follows and as 

modelled in Table 5.1. Restoration stages are listed in the first column of the table. They help group 

project tasks, which are the drivers and measures of a project’s progress. They are the things you 

have to do, and for which you need to find the resources, budget, and time. 

Tasks are listed in the second column of the table, grouped by stage. For example, under the first 

stage, in which you establish the context and objectives for the project, there are typically several 

tasks that need to be done, such as developing a list of interested parties; gathering background 

information; facilitating a discussion with the interested people to outline possible targets or end 

points for the restoration; checking on applicable laws, policies, and strategies; and establishing 

a means of regular communication. It is not so important to place each task precisely under an 

appropriate restoration stage, but it is important to list all the tasks that need to be done. 

After you list the tasks, you then need to sort out who will do them. The “who” column provides 

project managers an opportunity to list potential volunteers, funding agencies, and individuals 

with key expertise. The “who” column also enables you to make sure that for every task there is 

somebody assigned to complete it. For example, you do not want to get a project underway and 

discover that nobody checked on municipal bylaws concerning the removal of exotic plant debris 

or use of noisy machinery. 

Once the people or agencies that will complete the tasks are identified, they need to be provided 

with the tools or resources for the work. For example, in the case of a broom pull by volunteers, 

5-24 



somebody has to ensure that the pullers, cutting tools, and collecting tools 

(tarps), plus perhaps refreshments for the volunteers, are all brought to 

the site. Even in Stage 1, resources are needed. Gathering interested parties 

together requires arranging a meeting place and providing refreshments. The 

task of obtaining background information may require access to a vehicle or 

other travel means. Stage 2 may require all sorts of field sampling equipment, 

according to the nature of the inventory. These resources can be entered in 

the fourth column. 

The “who” 

column provides 

project managers 

an opportunity 

to list potential 

volunteers, 

funding agencies, 

and individuals 

with key expertise. 

Based on the resources required for each task, you can fill out the fifth 

column with the estimated cost. For example, funds will be required to 

purchase or rent resources such as tools, and expert consultants generally 

charge a fee for their time. You can estimate the value of volunteer time and 

that of donated expert services, equipment, and facilities. Many granting 

agencies specifically require an estimate of in-kind materials and volunteer time. These in-kind 

contributions demonstrate commitment of the community or participants to the project. The 

budget column ensures that you have a full cost accounting, and it can help you justify or explain 

the cost of the project and develop a grant application. The budget entries also allow you to keep 

track of expenditures by category as money is being spent. 

The budgeting exercise helps project leaders see whether they have distributed the costs 

realistically (e.g., Stage 7, monitoring and making adjustments, often receives insufficient or no 

funding). If you invest all or most of your funding in Stages 2 and 6 and very little in monitoring, 

you may never know whether or not you achieved the restoration objectives. As well, if things 

go wrong, there will be no money or few resources to make corrections. As a guideline, the 

monitoring stage should be at least 10% of the overall budget, and in some cases even 15–20%, 

particularly if detailed observations are required for several years and/or the treatment is highly 

experimental. 

Having a well thought-out schedule is critical for achieving success with the 

restoration project. Filling out the final column of the planning table allows As a guideline, the 

you to schedule each task. The drafting of a schedule, even if only by season, monitoring stage 

reveals how long a project may realistically take to complete. If permits and should be at least 

various meetings are required, time needs to be allocated for these tasks 

10% of the overall 

before any ground work is initiated. Furthermore, certain types of tasks are budget, and in 

constrained by the season. For example, a full inventory and mapping of rare some cases even 

plants in Garry Oak ecosystems should be conducted from mid-spring to 

15–20%. 

early summer. Also, the removal of invasive plants at a time when rare plants 

are not visible could be disastrous if the locations of rare species have not 

been identified. Conversely, many rare plants are less sensitive to disturbance 

in the summer when they are dormant. Therefore, scheduling must be assessed on a site-bysite 

basis using the expertise of your project team. Planting of seedlings or sowing of seeds can 

be more successful when carried out in the fall and winter; therefore, the schedule needs to be 

built around these constraints. Often this means working back in time from a critical season so 

that Stage 1 begins early enough before the actual work in the field is required. This means that 

community consultation meetings may need to be held many months (or years in the case of 

large, complex projects) before any on-the-ground work begins. 



5-25


The specific information you need to develop a planning table is provided in many chapters of 

this publication. Remember, tasks do not have to occur in a specific stage; they may occur in 

various stages of the project. It is up to the project planner or team to determine where they fit 

best in the table. 

TABLE 5.1 Example Restoration Planning Table 

Restoration 

Stage 

Task 

Who 

Resources 

Budget 

Schedule 

Stage 1 

Talk to stakeholders 

(neighbours, site 

users, owners) 

John 

Pen and paper, 

background 

information 

1 day 

January– 

March 

Stage 1 

Determine goals 

John/Lisa 

January– 

March 

Stage 2 

Inventory site 

John, Botanist, 

Restoration 

practitioner 

Camera, notebook, 

plant press 

2 days 

consultant 

fees 

in-kind 

April 

Stage 4 

Write restoration 

plan 

John/Lisa 

Computer 

lab/office space 

5 days 

May 

Stage 4 

Consult with experts 

and stakeholders 

John/Lisa 

2 days 

May–June 

Stage 6 

Recruit volunteers 

John/Lisa 

Print shop 

$25 (poster 

printing) 

August 

Stage 6 

Source tools to 

borrow 

Lisa 

Borrowed tools 

June–August 

Stage 7 

Collect before 

photo-point photos 

John/Lisa 


scale pole, tripod, 

compass, 

chalkboard, chalk 

1 day 

August 

Stage 6 

Pick up lunch for 

volunteers 

John 

Car 

$50 

August 

Stage 6 

Meet volunteers 

and remove broom 

John/Lisa 

Borrowed tools, 

food 

1 day 

August 25 

Stage 7 

Collect after 

photo-points 

John 


scale pole, tripod, 

compass, 

chalkboard, chalk 

0.5 days 

August 26 

Stage 7 

Write summary 

report 

John/Lisa 

Computer 

lab/office space 

1 day 

September 1 

5-26 



5.4 Conclusions 

Whether a Garry Oak ecosystem restoration project is small or large, planning will always be 

vital. It will help you grasp the full scope of the project and identify what needs to be done and 

by whom. Furthermore, the plan will help you develop a realistic schedule and budget. Without 

some sort of systematic planning, the project may end up being unrealistic, have gaps, run into 

problems in the community or on the ground, and lead to unnecessary effort, costs, and even 

failure. Considering the great task we have before us, it is an absolute must to work in a wellorganized 

and effective manner. 


BC Ministry of Forests and Range and BC Ministry of Environment. 2010. Field manual for 

describing terrestrial ecosystems, 2nd edition. Land Management Handbook Number 25. 

Crown Publications, Victoria, B.C. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/docs/Lmh/Lmh25-2.htm. 

(Accessed 2010). 

BC Parks, South Vancouver Island District. 1996. Gowlland-Tod Provincial Park management 

plan. Queen’s Printer, Victoria, B.C. 

Bradshaw, A. D. and M. J. Chadwick. 1980. The restoration of land. Blackwell Scientific 

Publications, Oxford. 

Clewell, A., J. Rieger, and J. Munro. 2005. Society for Ecological Restoration International: 

guidelines for developing and managing ecological restoration projects, 2nd edition. 

www.ser.org/content/guidelines_ecological_restoration.asp. (Accessed 2010). 

Clewell, A.F. and J. Aronson. 2007. Ecological restoration principles, values, and structure of an 

emerging profession. Island Press. Washington D.C. 

Erickson, S. and M. Edain. 1995. How to plan a restoration project. www.ser.org/sernw/pdf/ 

FROSTY_HOLLOW_restoration_guide.pdf. (Accessed 2010). 

Harwell, M.A., V. Myers, T. Young, A. Bartuska, V. Gassman, J.H. Gentile, C.C. Harwell, A. 

Appelbaum, J. Barko, B. Causey, C. Johnson, A. Mclean, R. Smola, P.Templet, and S. Tosini. 

1999. A framework for an ecosystem integrity report card. Bioscience 49 (7): 543-556. 

Hebda, R.J. 2007. Course Guide ER 311. Principles and concepts of ecological restoration. Division 

of Continuing Studies, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

Nuzzo, V. A., and E. A. Howell. 1990. Natural area restoration planning. Natural Areas Journal 10: 

201-209. 

Raphael, M.G., and R. Molina (editors). 2007. Conservation of rare or little-known species: 

biological, social, and economic considerations. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

5.6 Other Resources 

BC Ministry of Water, Land, and Air Protection. Ecological restoration guidelines for British 

Columbia. Ministry of Water, Land, and Air Protection, Victoria, B.C. www.env.gov.bc.ca/fia/ 

documents/restorationguidelines.pdf. 



5-27


Parks Canada Agency. 2008. Principles and guidelines for ecological restoration in Canada’s 

protected natural areas. Canadian Parks Council, Gatineau, Quebec. www.pc.gc.ca/progs/ 

np-pn/re-er/index.aspx. 

Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & Policy Working Group. 2004. The SER 

international primer on ecological restoration. Society for Ecological Restoration International 

Science & Policy Working Group. www.ser.org/content/ecological_restoration_primer.asp. 

Vesely, D., and G. Tucker. 2004. A landowner’s guide for restoring and managing Oregon White 

Oak. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Salem District, Oregon. www.blm.gov/or/districts/ 

salem/files/white_oak_guide.pdf. 

5-28 



Appendix 5.1 

Restoration Plan for Anniversary Island in Gulf Islands National Park Reserve 

Report prepared by Marian McCoy and Nicole Kroeker, Western and Northern Service 

Centre, Parks Canada, with input from the Garry Oak Ecosystem and Species at Risk 

Recovery Project (GOESARR) Coordinating Committee, Conan Webb, and Phil Lee. 

Plan begins on 

following page. 



5-29

Approval signatures

Cover photo 

Main: Species at Risk field crewmember cutting agronomic grasses in polygon B on the 

northeast side of Anniversary Island. 

Left inset: Native nodding onion (Allium cernuum) is scattered throughout exposed grassy areas 

on Anniversary Island. 

Centre inset: Photo of Himalayan blackberry infestation along the bottom bench in polygon B 

taken in 2005. The blackberry was subsequently removed. 

Right inset: Native broad-leaved stonecrop (Sedum spathulifolium). 

Report content 

Report prepared by Marian McCoy and Nicole Kroeker, Western and Northern Service Centre 

(WNSC), with input from the GOESARR Coordinating Committee, Conan Webb (WNSC 

Ecosystem Scientist), and Phil Lee (WNSC Monitoring Ecologist). 

A concept report by Dave Polster (Polster Environmental Services, 2007) provided the basis for 

the approach to controlling agronomic grasses adopted in this restoration plan.

Table of contents 

1.0 Restoration plan overview ........................................................................................................4 

2.0 Goals.........................................................................................................................................4 

3.0 Site description .........................................................................................................................5 

3.1 Overview ...............................................................................................................................5 

3.2 Ecological conditions.............................................................................................................6 

3.3 Ecological degradation..........................................................................................................7 

3.4 Cultural features....................................................................................................................9 

3.5 Disturbance ...........................................................................................................................9 

4.0 Objectives and targets ..............................................................................................................9 

4.1 Objective 1⎯Replace agronomic grasses in polygons A and B.........................................10 

4.2 Objective 2⎯Remove Himalayan blackberry in all polygons .............................................11 

4.3 Objective 3⎯Remove incidentally occurring exotic plants .................................................12 

5.0 Methods and materials ...........................................................................................................13 

5.1 Protection of cultural features .............................................................................................13 

5.2 Mitigating wildlife interactions..............................................................................................13 

5.3 Exotic vegetation treatment.................................................................................................14 

5.3.1. Agronomic grasses (objective 1) .................................................................................14 

5.3.2. Woody shrubs (objectives 2 and 3) .............................................................................14 

5.3.3. Forbs (objective 3) .......................................................................................................15 

5.3.4. Plant material management.........................................................................................15 

5.4 Re-vegetation......................................................................................................................16 

5.4.1. Polygon A.....................................................................................................................17 

5.4.2. Polygon B.....................................................................................................................17 

5.4.3. Polygon C ....................................................................................................................18 

5.4.4. Polygon D ....................................................................................................................18 

5.4.5. Polygon E.....................................................................................................................18 

5.4.6. Polygon F.....................................................................................................................18 

5.4.7. Forbs and grasses⎯general guidelines for re-vegetation...........................................19 

5.5 Monitoring............................................................................................................................19 

5.5.1. Objective 1 - Replace agronomic grasses in polygons A and B..................................19 

5.5.2. Objective 2 - Remove Himalayan blackberry in all treatment polygons ......................20 

1

5.5.3. Objective 3 - Systematic monitoring for exotic species occurrences ..........................20 

5.5.4. Re-vegetation monitoring.............................................................................................20 

6.0 Communication and outreach.................................................................................................20 

7.0 Planning beyond the GOESARR project ................................................................................21 

7.1 Required work .....................................................................................................................21 

7.1.1. Exotic plant species monitoring and control⎯7.5 person-days per year ....................21 

7.1.2. Vegetation monitoring⎯5 person-days every year .....................................................22 

7.2 Recommendations ..............................................................................................................22 

8.0 Project work plan ....................................................................................................................23 

9.0 References..............................................................................................................................25 

Personal Communications.................................................................................................................27 

Appendix 1⎯Plant community descriptions ......................................................................................28 

Appendix 2⎯Exotic plant species on Anniversary Island .................................................................35 

Appendix 3⎯Shrub propagation and planting methods....................................................................36 

Appendix 4⎯Cultural features on Anniversary Island.......................................................................38 

2

Figures 

Figure 1. Map showing location of Anniversary Island in Gulf Islands National Park Reserve.........5 

Figure 2. Plant community (site) types identified for Anniversary Island by Blackwell (2007) using 

terrestrial ecosystem mapping methodology. Site types are described in Appendix 1................7 

Figure 3. June 2004 photo of Himalayan blackberry removal area on southeast side of Anniversary 

Island. This area is now the primary agronomic grass treatment area (polygon B) in this 

restoration plan. (Photo: Parks Canada)......................................................................................8 

Figure 4. June 2004 photo of Himalayan blackberry removal area on southeast side of Anniversary 

Island. Agronomic grasses are visible in background and lower right. This area is now part of 

the primary agronomic grass treatment area (polygon B) in this restoration plan. (Photo: Parks 

Canada)........................................................................................................................................8 

Figure 5. Orthophoto of Anniversary Island annotated with polygons showing treatment areas....10 

Figure 6. Diagram of live stakes (adapted from Gray and Sotir 1996, and Minnesota Dept of 

Natural Resources). ...................................................................................................................37 

Figure 7. Method for layering snowberry (Evans and Blazich accessed 2008). ..............................37 

Tables 

Table 1. Objective 1 indicators and management prescriptions .....................................................11 



Table 4. Anniversary Island restoration project workplan to Dec 2010...........................................24 

Table 5. Physiognomic vegetation classification table for Anniversary Island (Polster 2007). .......29 

Table 6. Site type 73: Snowberry association (Blackwell 2007)......................................................32 

Table 7. Site type 74: Camas-Herbs association (Blackwell 2007).................................................33 

Table 8. Site type 75: Juniper-Oak association (Blackwell 2007). ..................................................34 

Table 9. Known exotic plant species on Anniversary Island as of 2007. Highlighted species have 

top priority for treatment. Plant occurrences from Roemer 2003, except as noted. ..................35 

3

1.0 Restoration plan overview 

This document describes the restoration plan for Anniversary Island for implementation 

under the Garry Oak Ecosystems and Species at Risk Recovery (GOESARR) project, as 

funded by Priority Investment Fund for Species at Risk Recovery. It is designed to extend 

to 31 March 2009; however, some elements will continue beyond that timeframe. 

This restoration plan elaborates upon the activities described in the Environmental 

Assessment Screening Report form GI07-05 Restoration Plans for Anniversary Island and 

Eagle Island, which was submitted to the First Nations committees for comments and 

subsequently approved by the Gulf Islands National Park Reserve management team. This 

plan covers the same elements presented in the environmental assessment report, but 

provides more detail, a monitoring protocol, communications and outreach plan, and a 

workplan. This plan is also based in part on a report submitted by Polster Environmental 

(2007) that discusses restoration concepts for Anniversary Island and Eagle Island. Readers 

are invited to refer to these documents to see the contents in their original form. 

This restoration plan follows an ecosystem-based adaptive management approach (sensu 

Johnson 1999). Adaptations to the plan will be made as we apply treatments, monitor using 

ecologically sound methods, and learn. Changes to this restoration plan, all data collected, 

results of monitoring, and modifications to methods will be recorded routinely and reported 

annually to Parks Canada staff. Significant revisions to the plan must be vetted by the 

GOESARR Coordinating Committee. 

2.0 Goals 

The overarching goal of this restoration plan is to improve the ecological integrity of 

Anniversary Island. With respect to Canada’s national parks, ecological integrity means, 

“…a condition that is determined to be characteristic of its natural region and likely to 

persist, including abiotic components and the composition and abundance of native 

species and biological communities, rates of change and supporting processes (Canada 

National Parks Act 2000)”. 

At Anniversary Island, where “natural region” includes coastal Douglas-fir, Garry oak and 

associated coastal bluff ecosystems of the Strait of Georgia Lowlands, ecological integrity 

is relatively intact. Native plant communities are estimated through informal survey to 

comprise at least 75% of the total cover (C. Webb pers. comm. 2008); however, 

advancing infestations of agronomic invasive grasses and Himalayan blackberry are 

threatening the native communities and are establishing a new steady state in the 

vegetation (Polster 2007). Achieving the restoration goal therefore involves removing the 

key threats to ecological integrity so that existing native plant communities can persist 

with a minimum of human intervention. As such, this restoration plan does not aim to 

modify all of the island’s ecosystems. Rather, activities are focused on repairing specific 

degraded areas using an integrated pest management approach and methods that are 

sensitive to the presence of native flora and fauna, and cultural features. The objectives, 

targets, and monitoring protocols described in the next sections are directly linked to the 

restoration goal. 

4

3.0 Site description 

3.1 Overview 

Anniversary Island is a 1.8 hectare islet located about one kilometre northwest of Saturna 

Island, within the Belle Chain Islets, in the Strait of Georgia at N48 o 49’00” W123 o 11’00” 

(NAD83) (Figure 1). At its widest point, Anniversary Island is ~ 47 m across. Its long NW- 

SE axis is ~ 449 m excluding the un-vegetated rocky shoreline. This narrow islet is a 

mosaic of rocky outcrops with thin soils and patches of deeper soils that are sufficient to 

support dense shrub thickets and some trees throughout the middle section. Both sides of 

the islet drop steeply to the bedrock shore. 

Gulf Islands National Park Reserve 

Figure 1. Map showing location of Anniversary Island in Gulf Islands National Park 

Reserve. 

5

3.2 Ecological conditions 

Anniversary Island lies within the moist maritime subzone of the coastal Douglas-fir 

(CDFmm) biogeoclimatic zone. It is primarily a coastal bluff ecosystem dominated by dense, 

shrubby Garry oak (Quercus garryana), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Nootka rose 

(Rosa nutkana), and mature seaside juniper (Juniperus maritima) 1 . Several stunted Douglasfir 

(Pseudotsuga menziesii ssp. menziesii) and once-mature snags are also present. Coastal 

bluff ecosystems are naturally rare throughout eastern Vancouver Island and the southern 

Gulf Islands. These ecosystems are of increasing concern due to development pressure, 

increased recreational use, and exotic species infestations. Anniversary Island is designated 

as Zone 1 (Special Preservation), meaning that only authorized access is permitted 2 . 

Among animal species that utilize Anniversary Island, of special interest in this restoration 

plan is the black oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani). 

Seven plant community types have been identified on Anniversary Island. Rather than 

occurring as discrete units on the landscape, these plant communities tend to exhibit 

common elements and often grade into one another, although some may occur in clearly 

defined pockets depending on micro-site variations. Details regarding these plant community 

types and how they were classified are provided in Appendix 1. Figure 2 shows the plant 

community types identified for Anniversary Island by Blackwell et al., (2007) using a 

terrestrial ecosystem mapping methodology. 

Despite infestations of agronomic grasses⎯primarily common velvet-grass (Holcus lanatus), 

sweet vernalgrass (Anthoxantham odoratum), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), orchard 

grass (Dactylis glomerata), and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Anniversary 

Island is generally ecologically intact. Sufficient native species diversity and cover (estimated 

~75%, C. Webb, pers. comm. 2008) remain to warrant restoration of the degraded areas. 

1 Described in Adams, R. P. 2007. Juniperus maritima, the seaside juniper, a new species from 

Puget Sound, North America. Phytologia 89: 263 - 283. 

2 Access is permitted for such activities as research or restoration work, or when authorized by the 

park superintendent in advance. 

6

Figure 2. Plant community (site) types identified for Anniversary Island by Blackwell 

(2007) using terrestrial ecosystem mapping methodology. Site types are described in 

Appendix 1. 

3.3 Ecological degradation 

Infestations of invasive exotic plant species noted above are considered the primary 

cause of ecological degradation on Anniversary Island and are the focus of this 

restoration plan. Between 2003 and 2006, volunteers devoted several days of work to 

clear two areas of Himalayan blackberry by hand-cutting and some root ball removal 

(Figure 3). Due to these efforts, by 2008 native shrubs within and around the perimeter of 

this area have expanded by more than a metre in height and breadth. 

Unfortunately, agronomic grasses that were present around and among the blackberry 

(Figure 4) have also expanded. Common velvet-grass now dominates in the bench and 

up the slope seen in Figure 3, and in other locations where Himalayan blackberry was 

removed. Native shrubs can be expected to continue advancing. In time, they may outcompete 

the agronomic grasses. This restoration plan aims to ensure and expedite that 

process through an integrated pest management approach of repeat cutting and revegetation 

with appropriate native species as recommended by Polster (2007). 

7

Figure 3. June 2004 photo of Himalayan blackberry removal area on southeast side of 

Anniversary Island. This area is now the primary agronomic grass treatment area (polygon 

B) in this restoration plan. (Photo: Parks Canada). 

Figure 4. June 2004 photo of Himalayan blackberry removal area on southeast side of 

Anniversary Island. Agronomic grasses are visible in background and lower right. This 

area is now part of the primary agronomic grass treatment area (polygon B) in this 

restoration plan. (Photo: Parks Canada). 

8

3.4 Cultural features 

In July 2007, an archaeological crew spent a half-day conducting a reconnaissance of 

Anniversary Island. This cursory survey indicated that the island was most certainly used 

by First Nations. While some features were detected on the southern half of the island, 

dense shrub oak, rose, and Himalayan blackberry thickets limited visibility and other 

features could have been missed. There are camas patches on the island, including two 

small meadows that appear to have been cleared of rock. These have been recorded as 

archaeological sites. Areas with clear evidence of intense burning are also present, and 

these may be the remains of camas roasting pits. Significant fire scars are also evident on 

some of the older juniper trees but these scars have not been dated or otherwise analyzed. 

3.5 Disturbance 

Ecosystem structure and function are influenced over time not only by natural 

disturbance processes, such as soil disturbance by mammals, but also by pre-historic 

and historic influences such as managed fires, digging for camas, and the introduction 

of exotic species. 

Today, primary disturbance processes include wind-throw, exotic plant species, slides 

and runs created by northern river otters (Lontra canadensis), and by people using or 

creating pathways. While disturbance has an important influence on Anniversary Island 

plant communities, edaphic factors (primarily soil depth and moisture) appear to control 

the general plant community structure. Once target exotic plant species are controlled, 

edaphic factors are expected to maintain an ecologically acceptable vegetation structure. 

One exception (there may be others) is a cultural feature at the south end of the island. In 

the absence of site-specific management, it is possible this feature will succeed to native 

shrub thickets; however, monitoring and research are needed to determine which 

management actions are appropriate (see recommendations in section 7.2). 

4.0 Objectives and targets 

With the exception of exotic species infestations described previously, native plant 

communities on Anniversary Island are relatively intact. There are no plans to modify 

these communities within the timeframe of this project. The objectives of this restoration 

plan are therefore focused on removing Himalayan blackberry, replacing agronomic 

grasses with native shrub species in specific treatment areas, and removing isolated 

occurrences of other target exotic plants. This will facilitate a return to higher native 

species diversity and ecological integrity on Anniversary Island. The target treatment 

areas (polygons) are shown in Figure 5, below. All treatment and monitoring methods are 

described in Section 5. 

This restoration plan has three objectives: 

1. Replace infestations of agronomic grasses (polygons A and B) with native shrubs; 

2. Permanently remove large Himalayan blackberry thickets (polygons A, B, C, D, E, F); 

3. Permanently remove smaller Himalayan blackberry occurrences and other high 

priority invasive exotic plants that occur incidentally throughout the island. 

9

Figure 5. Orthophoto of Anniversary Island annotated with polygons showing 

treatment areas. 

4.1 Objective 1⎯Replace agronomic grasses in polygons A and B 

As described above, polygons A and B are areas where Himalayan blackberry was 

removed and existing agronomic grasses subsequently expanded. The density of these 

two infestations has reduced the available habitat for native flora, and possibly fauna, on 

the island. In polygon A, the grass infestation has been limited by re-infestation of 

Himalayan blackberry and an expanding patch of stinging nettle (Urtica dioica). In 

polygon B, the grass infestation is most dense along the lower part of the slope and along 

the bottom bench where blackberry was previously removed. 

The target for objective 1 is to establish > 80 percent native species cover in polygon A 

and along the bottom bench in polygon B. Nootka rose, wild clustered rose, snowberry, 

oceanspray, and krummholtz Garry oak are the predominant native shrub species on 

Anniversary Island. Because rose and snowberry tend to form dense layers beneath 

which agronomic grasses do not dominate, and because they are most easily propagated 

from cuttings, these species will be used for re-vegetation. There is no intent to use 

pesticides on the agronomic grasses on Anniversary Island. Longer term plans to restore 

native plant biodiversity in polygon B are discussed in section 7.1. Indicators and 

10

management prescriptions are summarized in Table 1. Management effectiveness will be 

monitored and evaluated by sampling plant species percent cover. 

Table 1. Objective 1 indicators and management prescriptions 

Indicator 

Total native species cover in 

polygons A and along the bottom 

bench in polygon B > 80% within 4 

years after baseline. 

Total native species cover in 

polygons A and B < 80% at 4 years 

after baseline. 

Management 

On-going monitoring; adapt treatment if 

required after 4 years. 

Adapt to problem areas using different methods 

of treatment, e.g., carpet knife to cut out 

strongly tufted species, change planting 

density/species mix. Apply more aggressive 

on-going maintenance as appropriate. 

4.2 Objective 2⎯Remove Himalayan blackberry in all polygons 

In summer 2007, a survey for exotic invasive plant species was carried out and polygons 

delineating infestations were mapped using a GPS. This and other surveys revealed 

Himalayan blackberry thickets of varying size throughout the island and particularly in the 

treatment polygons (A, B, C, D, E, F). Polygons A and B have been partially re-invaded 

with blackberry after previous removal efforts; Polygons C and F comprise blackberry 

thickets among a native shrub community; Polygon D is comprised of roughly 90 percent 

blackberry; and Polygon E is comprised of intermediate sized thickets scattered along an 

open meadow on the west side of the island. 

Thickets and patches will be controlled through cutting and treating stems with a pesticide 

in accordance with a Parks Canada Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) approved in 

March 2008. Where necessary to ensure that one exotic species is not replaced with 

another, bare patches and/or agronomic grasses that might exist under the thickets will be 

re-vegetated with native plants using methods appropriate to the site, but generally 

following those used in polygon B. 

The target for objective 2 is to replace large and medium Himalayan blackberry thickets 

with native species within two years of baseline (Aug 2008). Indicators and management 

prescriptions are summarized in Table 2. Management effectiveness will be monitored and 

evaluated by sampling plant species percent cover. 

11


Indicator 

Total occurrence of Himalayan 

blackberry in all polygons 

decreases by 75% or more 

within 2 years from baseline. 

Total occurrence of Himalayan 

blackberry has decreased by 

less than 75% at 2 years from 

baseline. 

Management 

On-going monitoring. 

If re-sprouting occurs within 6 months, follow up 

with repeat cutting or pesticide treatment. Dig out 

root ball as last resort and immediately replant. 

with fast-growing native species suited to site. 

4.3 Objective 3⎯Remove incidentally occurring exotic plants 

Outlying occurrences of single plants or patches of Himalayan blackberry and other 

invasive exotic plant species on Anniversary Island have the potential to spread and 

displace native species; however, not all exotic species demonstrate invasive tendencies. 

This makes it neither necessary nor effective to treat all exotics equally. Prioritizing when 

and which species to treat facilitates effective treatment and allocation of resources. 

Table 9 in Appendix 2 lists the known exotic plant species on Anniversary Island as of 

2007. Species identified as top priority for treatment (highlighted in grey) were selected 

based on each species’ degree of infestation, relative ease of treatment, and significance 

of impact on the ecosystem, using past experience and the General Decision Process for 

Managing Invasive Plant Species Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems (GOERT 2007) 

as guides. This list should be revised as new data are collected and treatments applied. 

Although common velvet-grass, sweet vernal-grass and orchard grass are identified as 

top priority species, their predominance and difficulty in controlling them precludes them 

from being treated outside the treatment polygons. See recommendations in section 7.1 

regarding longer-term agronomic grass management. 

The target for objective 3 is to reduce the total number of priority exotic plant occurrences 

(excluding agronomic grasses) on Anniversary Island by at least 75 percent relative to the 

baseline (July 2008). Table 3 summarizes the indicators and management prescriptions 

for objective 3. If new methods are found that have proven effective for treating 

agronomic grass species elsewhere, and these are appropriate to Anniversary Island, 

they will be considered for use. 

12


Indicator 

Total occurrence of priority exotic 

species decreases by 75% or more 

within 3 years from baseline. 

Total occurrence of priority exotic 

species has decreased by less than 

75% at 3 years from baseline. 

Management 

On-going monitoring and maintenance as needed. 

Assess and adapt treatments to address either an 

increasing rate of infestation or methods that are 

ineffective for existing occurrences (e.g., same 

plants are re-sprouting). 

5.0 Methods and materials 

5.1 Protection of cultural features 

This restoration plan takes into account the presence of cultural features on Anniversary 

Island. Details regarding the nature and location of known features are provided in 

Appendix 4, which must be referred to prior to commencement of any work. A thorough 

archaeological survey will take place in August 2008, after blackberry thickets have been 

removed thereby making it possible for archaeologists to see the ground. Cultural features 

will then be accurately mapped and future work planned accordingly. 

Throughout the work described below, a key consideration is to avoid damaging or 

altering cultural features. As such, non-mechanical methods will be used whenever 

feasible (e.g., hand sheers, rakes, loppers). The use of gas-powered equipment will be 

kept to a minimum and will not be used to cut close to the ground. 

5.2 Mitigating wildlife interactions 

Islets within GINPR are home to a number of sensitive wildlife species. Of special interest 

is the black oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani). Because they are confined to a 

narrow band of shoreline habitat, populations of this large shorebird are vulnerable to 

natural and human disturbances including predation of eggs and young by native and 

introduced predators, coastal infrastructure development, and human disturbances such 

as induced nest abandonment and trampling. This species is an important indicator of 

rocky inter-tidal community health and is part of the Parks Canada Ecological Integrity 

Monitoring Program (Parks Canada 2008). Black oystercatchers are present on 

Anniversary Island (Butler and Golumbia 2008 [in press]). 

This restoration plan takes into consideration the presence and activities of the black 

oystercatcher. A survey will be undertaken in June 2008 to evaluate this species’ 

presence and nesting activity. Findings will be reported to the park ecologist and activities 

planned to avoid nest areas. Gas-powered equipment such as a brush saw and a weed 

whip will not be used within 20 m of black oystercatcher nests. Workers will avoid 

traversing inter-tidal areas unless necessary for personal safety. 

13

5.3 Exotic vegetation treatment 

The following sections describe treatment methods for specific vegetation. Whenever 

possible, vegetation will be cut/removed using hand tools. A gas-powered brush saw and 

a weed whip will be used to cut grasses in parts of polygons A and B. A brush saw with a 

blade may be used to cut the upper portions of Himalayan blackberry thickets. Use of gaspowered 

equipment will follow safety requirements (i.e., appropriate face and leg 

protection, and steel-toed boots), and with respect to cultural features as discussed 

above. 

5.3.1. Agronomic grasses (objective 1) 

Control of agronomic grasses will focus primarily on parts of polygons A and B. The most 

abundant exotic grass species in those polygons is common velvet-grass, although 

orchard grass, sweet vernal-grass, and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) are present 

in high numbers. 

Common velvet-grass forms dense stands that exclude other plants and reduce species 

diversity, and there is evidence that it may have an allelopathic effect on other plant 

species (Bond et al., 2007). Common velvet-grass can be controlled by intensive mowing 

or grazing. Seed persistence varies depending on seed depth in soil, but can be as long 

as ten years (Ibid), while sweet vernal-grass seeds do not remain viable for more than a 

year. Because of these and other characteristics, agronomic grasses can be difficult to 

control without broadcast spraying with non-selective pesticides such as glyphosate. Due 

to the ecological sensitivity of Anniversary Island and the nature of non-selective 

pesticides, their use is not desirable. Instead, grasses will be repeatedly cut to deplete 

their energy reserves, and native shrubs planted to out-compete them, as recommended 

by Polster (2007). 

Starting in June 2008, exotic grasses in polygons A and B will be cut, mulched, and left to 

decay in situ to suppress re-infestation until native shrub cuttings and live stakes are 

planted in the fall. For safety and to avoid damage to native species and features on the 

ground, hand shears will be used where possible. In some cases, hand-pulling is 

necessary to avoid damaging co-occurring native grasses. In flatter areas where native 

species can be avoided, a gas powered weed whip will be used. 

The first cutting will be at the time of anthesis 3 (typically early June depending on 

seasonal weather), and repeated through the summer when grasses are at maximum regrowth. 

The same protocol will be required in 2009 prior to native shrub planting, and 

possibly again in 2010. Where native species already occur or have been planted, grass 

cutting will be done by hand to avoid damage. 

5.3.2. Woody shrubs (objectives 2 and 3) 

Himalayan blackberry is the main woody shrub of concern on Anniversary Island. In July 

2008, blackberry thickets and patches will be cut and then spot-treated with a selective 

pesticide following the methods described in the approved IPM. The method for cutting 

3 The period during which a flower is fully open and functional. 

14

thickets will follow the protocol that was described in the approved Environmental 

Assessment Screening Report form, i.e.: as required, an experienced operator will use a 

brush saw to carefully remove the exterior canes from one side of the thicket, working 

from the top down. This will allow the operator to see to the ground for objects. The 

operator will continue to cut, but no lower than 50 cm above ground. Immediately before 

pesticide application, hand loppers will be used to open a fresh cut to receive the 

pesticide. Smaller blackberry plants (objective 3) will be cut following the same protocol 

except loppers and rakes will be used instead of a brush saw. The initial cutting does not 

need to take place on the same day, as long as stems are re-cut immediately before 

pesticide treatment. 

Other invasive exotic woody shrubs such as Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) or gorse 

(Ulex europaeus) are not present on Anniversary Island. Two paradise apples (Malus 

pumila), an exotic species with invasive tendencies, have established at the north end of 

the island. In June 2008, both trees were heavily infested with a defoliating insect and were 

in poor condition. They will be monitored and repeatedly cut if necessary. 

5.3.3. Forbs (objective 3) 

Target forb species listed in Appendix 2 (Table 9) will be removed by hand, by either 

cutting or careful hand-pulling. Re-vegetation will be carried out in accordance with the 

guidelines described in section 5.4.6. 

A small patch of burr chervil (Anthriscus caucalis) was identified at the north end of the 

island in 2007 and may be a recent arrival. An exotic winter annual that is a prolific seed 

producer, burr chervil spreads rapidly and can choke native spring forbs if not diligently 

managed. It must be hand-pulled in early spring before seeds mature (10-12 weeks after 

flowering). This will start in 2009 and should be maintained indefinitely to ensure this 

species does not establish on Anniversary Island. 

Bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare) is another target species that is present on Anniversary 

Island. This species reproduces entirely by seed, so control prior to seed production is 

critical. Once plants bolt but before they flower, they will be pulled if possible to get the 

taproot, or cut ~ 3 cm below the soil surface. This will stop the plant from re-sprouting. 

Small rosettes will be carefully dug up and the tap-root removed if possible without 

significantly disturbing the soil. 

5.3.4. Plant material management 

Himalayan blackberry thickets⎯If there is little native vegetation growing among the 

thicket, stems will be cut and removed. If there is a substantial amount of native 

vegetation, such as Lonicera spp., growing up among the stems, the stems will be cut 

into smaller pieces and left in place to decay to reduce the potential for damage to the 

beneficial native plants. 

Other plant material⎯Small amounts of material from plants other than Himalayan 

blackberry will be left to decay in place if there are no seeds or viable roots attached. 

Fruits and flower heads that could produce seed will not be left to decay in situ. Stems 

with viable roots will be hung in surrounding vegetation to desiccate. Note: The Capital 

15

Regional District’s Hartland Landfill does not accept noxious weeds because they cannot 

be composted. 

Storage and removal⎯Cut plant material that is not left to decay in situ will be stored on 

rock above the inter-tidal, well away from sites that are frequently used by black 

oystercatchers. Under the guidance of park staff, the material will be burned when 

conditions are appropriate, most likely in the fall. The Saturna and Mayne Island Fire 

Departments, and the public will be notified in advance when burning is planned (see 

section 6.0⎯Communication and outreach). 

5.4 Re-vegetation 

Re-vegetation will focus on the six treatment polygons and, only if required, in incidental 

patches where exotic plants are removed. At this time, no replanting or other management 

activities are planned for the meadow at the south end of Anniversary Island, although see 

recommendations in section 7.2. All six polygons contain some combination of agronomic 

grasses and/or Himalayan blackberry. Polygons A, B and D will require re-vegetation after 

treatment whereas polygons C, E and F may not require re-vegetation due to the presence 

of native species. In fall 2008, after agronomic grasses are repeatedly cut and the 

blackberry is treated, snowberry and rose will be planted. This approach will successionally 

shift the sites back to the woody shrub stage (Polster 2007). 

In June 2008, several hundred cuttings were collected from Anniversary Island and sent 

to a professional nursery for propagation into plugs. These cuttings were to be the primary 

source of re-vegetation material, but yielded far fewer viable plants than anticipated, 

thereby limiting the area that can be adequately re-vegetated in 2008 4 . For this reason, 

and so that we do not rely on only one method, a combination of native shrub plugs, live 

stakes, and layering will be used to re-vegetate the treatment areas. Appendix 3 provides 

collection, propagation and planting details for each of these methods. 

Plugs from cuttings are 10 cm long and 4 cm wide and although they have a root system 

they will take longer to establish in the ground than live stakes. For this reason, and to 

allow for some mortality, plugs will be planted to a density of five per m 2 . 

Live stakes are similar to cuttings but are longer (80–100 cm) and, after collection, are 

planted directly in the ground without rooting hormone. Snowberry and Nootka rose are 

both known to establish well from live stakes (Darris 2002a, 2002b, WSU 2007). Because 

of their length, diameter, and sturdiness, live stakes reach competitive size sooner than 

cuttings and hence require a lower planting density⎯two per m 2 is recommended. If 

necessary once stakes establish, they may be carefully thinned to a lower density to 

reduce competition with one another. Removed stakes can be moved to another planting 

site on the island. 

4 Actual plug yields in June 2008 were 782 for rose and 896 for snowberry. At a planting density of 

five plugs per m 2 , if there is no mortality in the greenhouse, these will cover ~335 m 2 of treatment 

area. Allowing for 25 percent mortality in the greenhouse, anticipated plug yields are 585 for rose 

and 672 for snowberry, covering only ~250 m 2 of treatment area. 

16

Plugs and live stakes will be planted in species clusters to emulate natural dispersal 

patterns (Robinson and Handel 1993). If possible, species will be planted in proportions 

that emulate the 60/40 snowberry to rose abundance ratio that occurs on Anniversary 

Island. 

5.4.1. Polygon A 

Polygon A is classified as a Juniper-Oak association (site type 75, Blackwell 2007), a 

somewhat closed community with snowberry, Nootka rose, and Garry oak as dominant 

shrub species. Because the soil in polygon A is shallow, cuttings and layering rather than 

live stakes will be used. Planting will be in October 2008, after agronomic grasses have 

been repeatedly cut and Himalayan blackberry has been treated and the biomass 

removed. Polygon A is approximately 100 m 2 ; however, agronomic grasses have invaded 

no more than half of the polygon thus requiring ~250 plugs to achieve a density of five per 

m 2 . Stinging nettle will continue to expand and the removal of Himalayan blackberry will 

alleviate suppression of the existing native shrub community. To reduce the number of 

plugs needed, layering of snowberry that exists on the perimeter of the polygon is 

recommended. Snowberry establishes well by layering (King County 2004) and is a viable 

option in shallow soils. The amount of layering and plugs needed will be determined after 

the exotic plants have been treated. 

5.4.2. Polygon B 

Polygon B is classified as two site types, a Camas-Herb association at the top of the slope 

and a snowberry association on the bottom bench of the polygon (site types 73 and 74 

respectively per Blackwell 2007; see Appendix 1 for characteristics). Although agronomic 

grasses will be cut in all of polygon B, re-vegetation will focus on the bottom bench area 

where Himalayan blackberry was previously removed. This bench receives more moisture 

and has deeper soil than the steeper slope above. Better soil conditions should improve 

cutting survival. Even without re-vegetation, repeat cutting of agronomic grasses on the 

slope above will release existing native vegetation from some competition and facilitate 

natural regeneration. Vegetation data collected in June 2008 indicates higher native 

species diversity exists near the top of the slope compared with the bench area. Restricting 

re-vegetation to the bench at the bottom will maintain the existing Camas-Herb and 

snowberry associations. 

The lower portion of polygon B is about 350 m 2 and requires ~1750 cuttings to meet the 

recommended density of five per m 2 . To mitigate jeopardizing the vigour of existing native 

shrubs, and to reduce logistical challenges, the lower portion of polygon B will be revegetated 

in sections over two years: half in 2008 and half in 2009. Phasing this work 

also allows the treatment approach to be monitored and modified in the subsequent 

phase, if necessary. The re-vegetation area is approximately 5 m wide 5 and excludes a 

1m buffer between the lower perimeter of the polygon and the expanding line of existing 

native shrubs. As cuttings and existing shrubs grow, this buffer will be over-topped. This 

5 The re-vegetation area along the bottom bench in polygon B will vary in width according to edaphic 

factors along the slope thus emulating natural succession. 

17

uffer is also routinely used by otters, and this will help destroy the common velvet-grass, 

which is susceptible to trampling (Bond et al., 2007). 

5.4.3. Polygon C 

Like polygon F, polygon C comprises a large thicket of Himalayan blackberry among an 

existing native shrub community; however, the re-vegetation approach differs between 

these two sites due to edaphic and physical factors. Polygon C is at the bottom of a 

northeast facing slope and is classified as a snowberry association (site type 73, Blackwell 

2007; see Appendix 1 for characteristics) which typically has more moist and deeper soils 

than elsewhere on the island. Because of these characteristics, and because the number 

of cuttings available for fall 2008 is limited, live stakes rather than cuttings will be planted in 

this site. Live stakes also have a better competitive advantage than cuttings against resprouting 

blackberry and agronomic grasses. 

5.4.4. Polygon D 

Facing southwest at the top of a hyper-steep slope, polygon D is classified as a Juniper- 

Oak association inland and bedrock along the edge of the island (site types 75 and RO 

per Blackwell 2007; see Appendix 1 for characteristics). Once the blackberry is cut, 

polygon D will be evaluated and the most effective re-vegetation approach applied. Fastgrowing 

native forbs such as sea blush (Plectritis congesta) for open micro-sites and 

native grass species (e.g., Elymus glaucus) that occur in the adjacent meadows are 

recommended for the Juniper-Oak association. The goal is to minimize opportunities for 

agronomic grasses and other exotic species to dominate in the absence of Himalayan 

blackberry. 

5.4.5. Polygon E 

Facing southwest along a hyper-steep slope, and classified as bedrock (site type RO, 

Blackwell 2007), Polygon E supports stunted seaside juniper and arbutus among shallow 

soil and open meadow dominated by grasses and native forbs. Himalayan blackberry 

thickets in polygon E vary in size from small (< 1 m 2) to medium (> 1 m 2 and < 5 m 2) 

throughout the polygon. Once the blackberry is removed, polygon E will be evaluated and 

the most effective re-vegetation approach applied. Fast-growing native forbs such as sea 

blush (Plectritis congesta) for open micro-sites and native grass species (e.g., Elymus 

glaucus) occurring in the adjacent meadow are recommended. If necessary, plugs will be 

grown from seed collected nearby and planted in fall 2008 or spring 2009 depending on 

species. Bare patches greater than about 20 cm x 20 cm or that lack native plants nearby 

will be re-vegetated using suitable native species. 

5.4.6. Polygon F 

Like polygon C, polygon F comprises a large thicket of Himalayan blackberry among an 

existing native shrub community. Polygon F is classified as a Juniper-Oak association 

(site type 75, Blackwell 2007), a somewhat closed community with snowberry, Nootka 

rose, and Garry oak as dominant shrub species. Once the blackberry is cut, polygon D 

will be evaluated and the most effective re-vegetation approach applied. 

18

5.4.7. Forbs and grasses⎯general guidelines for re-vegetation 

Collection and propagation of forb and grass seed varies significantly depending on 

species. Seed availability, site needs and conditions (e.g., relative densities of existing 

native species, soil depth, moisture) will determine which and how much native grass and 

forb seed will be collected. If there is a lack of propagules or a risk of genetic depression 

due to collection from Anniversary Island, propagules will be collected from a nearby 

GINPR site following established seed collection protocols (primarily GOERT 2007). Seed 

will be grown in a nursery or directly broadcast where needed and as appropriate, based 

on the guidelines described above. Preference will be given to fast growing / early seral 

stage native forbs. 

Outside of the treatment polygons, small bare patches of soil that remain after exotic 

vegetation removal will in most cases be left to re-vegetate naturally, provided suitable 

native vascular plants as noted above occur immediately adjacent. Bare patches greater 

than about 20 cm x 20 cm or that lack native plants nearby will be re-vegetated using 

suitable native species. Where native grasses are appropriate, grass plugs will be planted 

at 25 cm spacing. Forbs are typically planted at lower densities than grasses. Plug planting 

requires simply opening a slit in the soil no more than 10 cm deep and inserting the plug. 

5.5 Monitoring 

Formal monitoring of restoration efforts on Anniversary Island will focus on the treatment 

polygons, although island-wide systematic surveys for target exotic species will also be 

carried out. All observations, data, and results will be recorded when collected. All data 

will be reported annually, or upon request. Monitoring will initially be carried out by 

GOESARR staff, and later by park staff once the GOESARR project comes to an end. 

5.5.1. Objective 1 - Replace agronomic grasses in polygons A and B 

The target for objective 1 is to achieve greater than 80 percent cover of native vascular 

plant species in polygons A and B after four years from baseline in 2008. The target for 

objective 1 will be evaluated using a transect method. 

Eight parallel transects 10 m apart and perpendicular to the slope will be established in 

polygon B. Each transect will be sampled every 50 cm starting from the bench to the top 

of the slope along two strata at 50 cm and 130 cm above ground. Any plant that 

intercepts either height is identified and recorded. The data are later analyzed to yield 

percent cover in the polygon for each species detected. Two transects 2 m apart and 

parallel to the long axis of the treatment area will be established in polygon A. The 

sampling method used in polygon B will be applied in polygon A. Sampling will be 

repeated each year in June, before the first grass cutting and exotic species removal of 

the season, for at least four years, until the desired successional stage is achieved. 

Photos will be captured as a qualitative record of change in each polygon over time. 

Photos will be taken from the centre of each polygon in the four cardinal directions using 

a surveyor’s barber pole for scale. Photos will be captured before the first grass cutting 

and subsequently twice per year in spring and fall. 

19

5.5.2. Objective 2 - Remove Himalayan blackberry in all treatment polygons 

The target for objective 2 is to achieve decreases of Himalayan blackberry in polygons A, 

B, C, D, E and F by 75 percent or more within 2 years from baseline. Sampling will be 

repeated each July, before treatment, for at least two years 

For all polygons objective 2 will be evaluated by measuring the extent and intensity 6 of 

Himalayan blackberry infestations. The extent of each infestation will be determined by 

defining the boundary using a GPS unit whereas a crude estimate of percent cover will be 

recorded to determine intensity. The size of each blackberry infestation will be calculated 

and analysed to determine the total extent across the entire island. 

Photos will be captured as a qualitative record of change in each polygon over time. 

Photos of the Himalayan blackberry infestations will be taken from an elevated point 

along the perimeter of the infestation pre- and post-treatment. 

5.5.3. Objective 3 - Systematic monitoring for exotic species occurrences 

Starting in early May 2008 and thereafter each May and October, a field crew will 

systematically survey Anniversary Island to search for and remove exotic plants. Because 

of the density of vegetation, this may take up to two person-days per survey. An air photo 

should be used to help ensure complete coverage without overlap. A tally sheet will be 

used to record total occurrences for each species. 

Occurrences will be defined as follows: for forb species, any individual more than 2 m 

from its nearest neighbour will be considered a separate occurrence; for shrub species, 

any individual more than 5 m from its nearest neighbour will be considered a separate 

occurrence. Data will be used to modify the treatment approach if necessary. 

5.5.4. Re-vegetation monitoring 

Although establishment of native species in the re-vegetation areas will be sampled by the 

percent cover transects, it is also important to monitor general health and survival of 

cuttings, live stakes, and layered stems. Each re-vegetation area will be checked in spring 

2009, and thereafter during each visit to the island. Plant condition and mortality will be 

evaluated and recorded. A survival rate of >75 percent will be considered a success. Data 

will be used to adapt methods for establishing future plantings. 

6.0 Communication and outreach 

Anniversary Island restoration activities will provide opportunities for public education and 

enhanced visitor experience. Various initiatives will help the public learn about Parks 

Canada’s commitment to improving ecological integrity, and gain knowledge about 

ecological restoration methods that can be applied elsewhere. When the restoration plan 

is approved, it will be made available to interested community and restoration groups. 

6 Intensity meaning a crude percent cover estimate of Himalayan blackberry in each treatment 

polygon. 

20

Public education will be achieved through interpretation activities delivered by park staff, 

with contributions from GOESARR staff, through several means: 

• from the vantage point at nearby Winter Cove, through non-personal media (e.g., 

signs) and as a stop on guided walks where the viewscape looks out to Anniversary 

Island; 

• a website feature that utilizes the on-going monitoring photos of the restoration 

activities; 

• articles in local newspapers/island newsletters; 

• information provided during the park’s participation in local markets and fairs. 

When specific restoration activities, such as plant material disposal and burning, are 

planned, GOESARR staff will ensure park Communications staff are briefed so they can 

inform the public in a timely manner. 

Although Anniversary Island is Zone 1, removing Himalayan blackberry thickets and 

agronomic grasses and restoring some of the former native species diversity may 

enhance visitor experience for boaters and kayakers who pass by. 

7.0 Planning beyond the GOESARR project 

The GOESARR project has a finite timeframe that extends to 2010, and possibly longer. 

During the project timeframe, GOESARR staff and contractors will carry out most of the 

work, with support from GINPR and the Western and Northern Service Centre staff, 

depending on the nature of the work and staff availability. Beyond the GOESARR timeline, 

some of the work requires continuity if the objectives are to be reached and desired 

ecological conditions maintained. 

Below is a description of work that needs to be continued, and recommendations for the 

park to consider incorporating into its Management Plan to further improve ecological 

integrity and visitor experience. 

7.1 Required work 

7.1.1. Exotic plant species monitoring and control⎯7.5 person-days per year 

Monitoring and control of exotic plant species should be continued indefinitely. Work 

completed under the GOESARR project will substantially reduce the percent cover and 

occurrence of target species, thus minimizing the amount of work required by park staff; 

however, gains will be temporary unless on-going maintenance is carried out as part of 

the park’s Integrated Pest Management Plan. Two activities are required: 

21

1. Systematic surveys for exotic plant species occurrences and manual removal should 

be continued twice annually, in spring and at the onset of fall rains. Two surveys are 

needed to capture different species phenologies. The timing facilitates removal when 

soils are moist, to minimize disturbance. Estimated resource requirements: 1 day x 4- 

person crew plus 1 day x 2-person crew plus 0.5 day x 1 person for data entry = 6.5 

person-days per year. Refer to Table 9 for current exotic species list. 

2. The list of target exotic plant species should be re-evaluated each year using the 

GOERT Decision Support Process (2007) or similar invasive species evaluation 

method to determine if new species should be added or others downgraded due to 

successful treatment. Estimated resource requirements: 1 day x 1 person = 1 personday 

per year. 

7.1.2. Vegetation monitoring⎯5 person-days every year 

Sampling of vegetation transects should continue every two years. The monitoring 

protocol established in this plan should be continued. Estimated resource requirements: 2 

days x 2-person crew per survey = 4 person-days every year. 

Photos of all six polygons from an identified photo point should be captured every year at 

the same time of year to provide a visual record of changes. Estimated resource 

requirements: 0.5 day x 2-person crew every year = 1 person-day per year. 

7.2 Recommendations 

Shrub and tree encroachment⎯Succession to dense native shrub understorey and 

closed forest due to fire exclusion is rendering Garry oak meadows and woodlands 

increasingly rare (Gould and Harrington 2008). On Anniversary Island, encroachment by 

krummholz 7 Garry oak, Nootka rose, and snowberry may be occurring in the camas 

meadow site at the south end, and perhaps elsewhere; however, monitoring is needed to 

confirm this. If the park decides to proceed with camas meadow management, objectives 

should be clearly defined before any methods are employed. 

Although prescribed fire may seem an obvious control method, both Garry oak and 

snowberry are fire resistant and sprout vigorously after a low-intensity fire (Gucker 2007). 

Nootka rose and other Rosa species found in BC usually initially decrease in cover after 

wildfire. Thereafter, cover gradually increases, and then declines as the canopy closes. In 

a study of Nootka rose in Washington and Oregon, burning had little effect on 

abundance, although multiple fires can significantly reduce cover of rose species 

(Haesseler et al., 1990). 

The park might consider working with First Nations to maintain the meadow feature using 

traditional methods that do not include fire, such as camas harvesting, or employing 

harvesting along with repeated prescribed fires. Relying on one single fire event will 

almost certainly result in increased shrub and exotic plant species cover. 

7 Low-growing shrub form of tree caused by strong and persistent wind or other factors. 

that influence rate of growth and form. 

22

Agronomic grasses⎯While eradication of agronomic grasses from Anniversary Island is 

unachievable, the park needs to decide to what degree these grasses are acceptable and 

whether focused control is desirable. Again, potential control methods should be carefully 

evaluated before applied. In a five-year field experiment in a degraded oak savanna, 

MacDougall and Turkington (2007) tested the impacts of fire, cutting and raking, and 

weeding on two factors critical for restoration: controlling dominant invasive grasses and 

increasing subordinate native flora. They manipulated the season of treatment application 

and used sites with different soil depths because both factors influence fire behavior. They 

found no significant difference among the treatments: all were similarly effective at 

suppressing exotics and increasing native plant growth. This occurred because light is the 

primary limiting resource for many native species and each treatment increased its 

availability. The effectiveness of disturbance for restoration depended more on the timing 

of application and site factors than on the type of treatment used. Summer disturbances 

occurred near the reproductive peak of the exotic grasses, so their mortality approached 

100 percent. Positive responses by native species were significantly greater on shallow 

soils because these areas had higher native diversity prior to treatment. 

Native species diversity⎯Planting rose and snowberry in the treatment areas is an 

interim measure designed to expedite treatment of agronomic grass infestation. If this 

measure is successful, the park might consider restoring native species diversity by 

planting other species from the corresponding site type (see Appendix 1). Native species 

already occur in these sites and could easily provide propagules. 

Volunteer stewardship⎯The engagement of volunteers to act as stewards of Anniversary 

Island is encouraged. The BC Parks’ Volunteer Warden Program that was established in 

1980 for ecological reserves could provide a model. The role of volunteer stewards could 

be limited to observing, recording, reporting, and recommending on conditions and issues 

pertaining to ecological integrity of the site. The volunteer(s) could work with the Parks 

Canada ecologist and act as a liaison with the Park Interpreter program to help enhance 

visitor experience and the public’s understanding and appreciation of the Species at Risk 

program and Parks Canada’s role in improving ecological integrity. The Saturna and 

Mayne Island communities could be consulted to help find people who would be interested 

and willing to make a long-term commitment to this role. 

8.0 Project work plan 

A project work plan for 2008/09 and 2009/10 is presented in Table 4. The GOESARR 

project will directly contribute approximately $11,000 to the restoration of Anniversary 

Island in 2008/09. This effort will be enhanced with communications and outreach 

activities. The investments made by the GOESARR project will result in completion of the 

more expensive initial stages of improving ecological integrity on this island (e.g., 

monitoring set-up, invasive species removal, re-vegetation). 

23

Table 4. Anniversary Island restoration project workplan to Dec 2010.


Blackwell, B.A. 2007. Parks Canada Southern Gulf Islands Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping (in 

draft) B.A. Blackwell and Associates Ltd. North Vancouver, BC. 

Bond, W., G. Davies, and R. Turner. 2007. The biology and non-chemical control of Yorkshire 

Fog (Holcus lanatus L.) in Organic Weed Management 

http://www.gardenorganic.org.uk/organicweeds/weed_information/weed.php?id=81 

[accessed 26 June 2008]. 

Butler and Golumbia. 2008 (in press). Status of breeding black oystercatchers (Haematopus 

bachmani) in the Strait of Georgia, BC. Northwest Naturalist. 

Darris, C. 2002a. Ability of Pacific Northwest native shrubs to root from hardwood cuttings 

(with summary of propagation methods for 22 species). USDA Technical Notes (Plant 

Materials), No. 30. 20 pp 

Darris, C. 2002b. Native shrubs as a supplement to the use of willows as live stakes and 

fascines in western Oregon and western Washington. USDA Technical Notes (Plant 

Materials), No. 31. 10 pp. 

Evans, E., and F.A. Blazich. Plant propagation by layering: instructions for the home 

gardener. North Carolina State University Cooperative Extension Service. Available: 

http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/hil/hil-8701.html [accessed 9 June 2008]. 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team. 2007. General Decision Process for Managing 

Invasive Plant Species Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems. Report published for 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team, Victoria, BC. 

Gray, D.H., and R.B. Sotir. 1996. Biotechnical and Soil Bioengineering Slope Stabilization, A 

Practical Guide for Erosion Control. John Wiley and Sons. 

Gould, P.J., and C.A. Harrington. 2008. 2008. Evaluation of landscape alternatives for 

managing oak at Tenalquot Prairie, Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-745. 

Portland, OR: USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 45 p. 

Gucker, C. 2007. Quercus garryana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. USDA 

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory 

(producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [accessed 9 June 2008]. 

Haeussler, S.; Coates, D.; Mather, J. 1990. Autecology of common plants in British Columbia: 

A literature review. Economic and Regional Development Agreement FRDA Rep. 158. 

Victoria, BC: Forestry Canada, Pacific Forestry Centre; British Columbia Ministry of 

Forests, Research Branch. 272 p. 

Hockin, A., L. Colquhoun, and N. Hebda. 2007. Gulf Islands National Park Reserve Co-op 

Student Report for Summer 2007. Unpublished draft report written for Garry Oak 

Ecosystems and Species at Risk Recovery Project, Parks Canada, Western and 

Northern Service Centre. 58 pp. 

25

King County Department of Public works, Surface Water Management Division. 1994. 

Northwest Native Plants, Identification and Propagation for revegetation and 

restoration projects. King County, WA. 

King County Natural Resources and Parks. 2004. Live stake cutting and planting tips. King 

County Water and Land Division. Available: http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/pi/cutting.htm 

[accessed 2 April 2008]. 

Lee, P., C. Webb, A. Hockin, N. Hebda, and L. Colquohoun. 2007. Estimation of % Cover for 

Non-Native Species on Anniversary and Eagle Islands with Recommendations for a 

Permanent Monitoring Program. Unpublished report prepared for Western and 

Northern Service Centre, Parks Canada Agency. 

Johnson, B. L. 1999. The role of adaptive management as an operational approach for 

resource management agencies. Conservation Ecology 3(2): 8. [online] URL: 

http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/art8/. 

MacDougall, A.S., and R. Turkington. 2007. Does the Type of Disturbance Matter When 

Restoring Disturbance-Dependent Grasslands? Restoration Ecology. Vol. 15, No.2. 9 pp. 

McWilliams, J. 2000. Symphoricarpos albus. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. 

USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory 

(producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [9 June 2008]. 

Meidinger, D. and J. Pojar (eds.). 1991. Ecosystems of British Columbia. B.C. Min. Forests, 

Special Report Series 6. Victoria, BC. 

Parks Canada. 2008. Gulf Islands National Park Reserve of Canada⎯Natural Wonders and 

Cultural Treasures: Cooperation in Black Oystercatcher Surveys. Available: 

http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/bc/gulf/natcul/natcul8_e.asp [accessed May 2008]. 

Parks Canada Western and Northern Service Centre. 2007. Environmental Assessment 

Screening Report Form: restoration activities at Anniversary and Eagle Islands in Gulf 

Islands National Park Reserve. Prepared for Parks Canada Agency. 18 pp. 

Parliament of Canada, Canada National Parks Act. 2000. c. 18, s. 33. 

Polster, D. 2007. Restoration Concepts: Eagle and Anniversary Islands Gulf Islands National 

Park, Sidney, B.C. Polster Environmental Services Ltd. Unpublished report prepared 

for Parks Canada Agency. 

Robinson, G.R., and S.N. Handel. 1993. Forest Restoration on a closed landfill: rapid addition 

of new species by bird dispersal. Conservation Biology. Vol 7, No. 2. 8 pp. 

Roemer, R. 2003. Anniversary Island plant list. Unpublished report of data collected 27 May 

2003. Gulf Islands National Park Reserve, Parks Canada Agency. 

Rose, R., C.E.C. Chachulski, and D.K. Haase. 1998. Propagation of Pacific Northwest native 

plants. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon. 248 pp. 

Washington State University. 2007. Native plant propagation: hardwood cuttings. Adapted 

from Gardening in Western Washington: Hardwood Cuttings and Live Stakes © WSU 

26

Cooperative Extension. Available http://gardening.wsu.edu/text/nvcuthw.htm [accessed Feb 

2008]. 

Personal Communications 

Robb G. Bennett, BC Ministry of Forests, Saanichton, BC 

Brenda Costanzo, BC Ministry of Environment, Victoria, BC 

Matthew Fairbarns, Botanist, Aruncus Consulting, Victoria, BC 

Daryl Fedje, Parks Canada Agency, Western and Northern Service Centre, Victoria, BC 

Robert Hagel, Pacific Forestry Centre, Canadian Forest Service, Saanich, BC 

Tim Hale, Cairnpark Nursery Services Ltd., Duncan, BC 

Robert W. Holcomb, Glendale Gardens and Woodlands, Saanich, BC 

Siriol Paquet, Sylvan Vale Nursery Ltd, Black Creek, BC 

Dave Polster, Polster Environmental Consulting Services Ltd., Duncan, BC 

Paulis Vrijmoed, Linnaea Nurseries Ltd., Langley, BC 

Conan Webb, Parks Canada Agency, Victoria, BC 

27

Appendix 1⎯Plant community descriptions 

Two methods were used to describe vegetation communities on Anniversary Island: 

1) Plant community classification using relevé data collected in April 2007 (Polster 2007). 

See Table 6. 

2) Terrestrial ecosystem mapping, whereby polygons encompassing similar ecological 

properties are delineated on air photos, and data characterized based on photo 

interpretation and field sampling. Using these data a set of attributes is then assigned to 

each polygon. Site classification is based on the biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification 

(BEC) for British Columbia (Meidinger and Pojar 1991) and enhanced to reflect units 

encountered on Anniversary Island and elsewhere that are not recognized in the BEC 

system (Blackwell 2007). See Table 7. 

Using the first method, Polster identified two plant species-relevé groups on Anniversary 

Island: a Quercus group, which includes oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) and Pacific sanicle 

(Sanicula crassicaulis) as dominant species; and a Triteleia group is characterized by 

hyacinth broadiaea (Triteleia hyacinthine), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis ssp roemeri), 

and ribwort plantain (Plantago lanceolata). Within these species-relevé groups Polster 

identifies four vegetation types (1, 2, 3, and 6) comprising 16 species and 77% of the cover 

on the islet. 

Vegetation type 1 is defined by a strong occurrence of Garry oak (Quercus garryana), along 

with snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) and greater camas (Camassia leichtlinii). The 

relatively low number of species may allow this vegetation type to easily establish, and the 

density of cover when the vegetation is mature may assist in preventing invasion by exotics, 

making this type a potentially strong competitor against blackberry, orchard grass and 

common velvet-grass (Polster 2007). 

Vegetation type 1 is similar to the Juniper-Oak association (site type 75) described by 

Blackwell (2007). Site type 75 occurs on the margins of rocky outcrops on Anniversary 

Island, with a short canopy of Garry oak, sparse stunted Douglas-fir, and seaside juniper. 

The shrub layer comprises 50-70% cover and includes snowberry, oceanspray, Nootka rose 

and tall Oregon-grape. The herb layer provides about 70-100% cover and includes camas, 

native bunchgrasses (e.g., Idaho fescue), cleavers (Galium aparine), miner’s-lettuce 

(Claytonia perfoliata), and Pacific sanicle. Polygon C is classified as site type 75. 

Vegetation type 2 is similar to type 1, but has fewer species (17 total) and slightly less cover, 

suggesting a more open structure. 

Vegetation type 3 is defined by the presence of the Triteleia species-relevé group. This type 

has the highest number of species with camas, Western buttercup (Ranunculus occidentalis), 

Idaho fescue, blue wild-rye (Elymus glaucus), white fawn lily (Erythronium oregonum), and 

smooth cladonia (Cladonia gracilis) as predominant species. Type 3 also has a lower 

average percent cover relative to the other five vegetation types. While this open community 

is a valued ecosystem type, it is difficult to establish and makes a poor competitor against 

invasive exotic species (Polster 2007). 

Vegetation type 6 is a more open community type and is the most commonly occurring 

community that Polster identifies on Anniversary Island. It includes seaside juniper, snowberry, 

tall Oregon-grape, Saskatoon berry (Amelanchier alnifolia), California brome (Bromus 

28

carinatus), and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis, an exotic agronomic grass), with greater 

camas as a predominant species. 

Vegetation types 3 and 6 are similar to the Camas-Herbs association (site type 74) described 

by Blackwell (2007). Site type 74 is predominantly an herb community comprising 70-100% 

cover. The few trees present are typically stunted Garry oak. A sparse shrub layer consists 

primarily of Nootka rose, dull Oregon-grape, Saskatoon berry, oceanspray, and snowberry. 

Camas-Herb communities are present throughout the island and also in pockets on the 

hyper-steep bedrock slope along the island’s southwest edge (e.g., polygon D). 

Blackwell (2007) also describes a snowberry community (site type 73) that is similar to site 

type 75 but which occurs in areas with higher soil moisture and deeper soils. This community 

has a higher shrub cover (80-100%) than site type 75, and a reduced herbaceous cover (30- 

50%). Blackwell identifies the east-facing slope of Anniversary Island (polygon B) that is 

currently infested with agronomic grasses as site type 73. 

Table 5. Physiognomic vegetation classification table for Anniversary Island (Polster 2007). 

Vegetation types 1, 2 and 3 are non-forested, with increasing diversity and shrub cover. Type 6 

plots are non-classified outliers with some shrub cover. Cover values are indicated in percent. R 

indicates much less than 1%; + indicates rare). 

Ann 018 Plot 16 

Ann 007 













Ann 002 

Ann 003 


Ann N End 

Ann 005 Tower Base 

Ann 004 

Vegetation Type 1 2 3 6 

Trees 

Arbutus menziesii 1 

Juniperus scopulorum 25 1 30 1 10 

Pseudotsuga menziesii R 5 

Quercus garryana 5 40 25 60 20 5 5 

SHRUBS - native 

Amelanchier alnifolia + 1 1 20 5 1 

Arctostaphylos uva-ursi R 

Holodiscus discolor 5 1 + 1 1 + 

Mahonia aquifolium 5 + 5 1 1 + 15 1 

Symphoricarpos albus 15 15 40 10 15 40 5 5 10 10 30 + 5 

SHRUBS - exotic 

Malus pumila 5 

Rubus armeniacus 1 5 

29

Table 6 cont’d 


HERBS – native 

Achillea millefolium 5 5 1 5 1 

Allium cernuum 1 5 1 1 

Bromus carinatus 10 1 10 5 1 10 10 1 40 

Camassia leichtlinii 45 40 30 25 15 15 40 30 70 60 40 15 10 40 20 60 R 

Cardamine oligosperma 1 1 1 

Castilleja hispida 1 + 

Cerastium glomeratum 5 1 5 5 1 1 

Cladonia gracilis 15 

Claytonia rubra ssp 

depressa 1 

Collinsia parviflora 1 R + + + 

Delphinium glaucum 

Distichlys spicata 1 

Elymus glaucus 15 10 5 1 20 

Erythronium oregonum 5 5 15 + 10 1 + 

Festuca idahoensis ssp. 

roemeri R 10 5 5 5 1 1 

Fragaria virginiana 

Fritillaria affinis R + 1 

Galium aparine 1 

Grindelia integrifolia 5 5 

Heuchara micrantha + 

Koeleria macrantha + 

Leymus mollis 10 1 1 

Lomatium nudicaule R R + 1 

Lonicera ciliosa R 1 5 R 

Lonicera hispidula 1 5 5 1 

Luzula multiflora + 

Mimulus alsinoides + 

Plectritis congesta 5 1 5 5 + 5 + + 1 1 

Poa pratensis 1 5 1 20 1 1 

Polypodium glycerhiza 1 

Ranunculus occidentals 5 1 1 5 25 5 1 1 

Rosa nutkana 1 15 5 + 60 + 

Rubus ursinus 5 1 1 1 

Sanicula crassicaulis 5 + 20 

Sedum lanceolatum var. 

nesioticum + 1 

Sedum spathulifolium 1 

Selaginella wallacei 1 + 1 

Stellaria media + 

Trisetum spicatum 1 

R 

R 

30

Table 6 cont’d 


HERBS – native cont’d 

Triteleia hyacinthine 1 1 10 1 

Urtica dioica 10 

Vicia americana 5 1 

Zygadenus venenosus 

R 

HERBS – exotic 

Cynosurus echinatus 10 5 

Dactylis glomerata R R 5 15 

Daucus carota 5 

Holcus lanatus 5 15 

Hypochaeris radicata 

R 

Plantago lanceolata R R R 

Rumex acetosella 1 

Senecio vulgaris + R + + 

Vicia sativa + 1 + + 

31

Tables 6, 7 and 8 provide lists of constituent plant species, typical percent cover by strata 

and, in some cases, general edaphic qualities of the three terrestrial plant associations 

defined by Blackwell (2007) that occur on Anniversary Island. 

• CDFmm/Snowberry (site type 73) (Table 6) 

• CDFmm/Camas-Herbs association (site type 74) (Table 7) 

• CDFmm/Juniper-Oak (site type 75) (Table 8) 

Table 6. Site type 73: Snowberry association (Blackwell 2007). 

32

Table 7. Site type 74: Camas-Herbs association (Blackwell 2007). 

33

Table 8. Site type 75: Juniper-Oak association (Blackwell 2007). 

34

Appendix 2⎯Exotic plant species on Anniversary Island 

Table 10 lists known exotic plant species on Anniversary Island as of 2007. Although agronomic 

grasses (e.g., common velvet-grass, orchard grass) are target species in the treatment polygons, 

there are no plans to control them throughout Anniversary Island during this project. 

Table 9. Known exotic plant species on Anniversary Island as of 2007. Highlighted species 

have top priority for treatment. Plant occurrences from Roemer 2003, except as noted. 

Common name Scientific name Common name Scientific name 

yellow hairgrass Aira caryophyllea paradise apple Malus pumila 

silver hairgrass Aira praecox English/ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata 

sweet vernal-grass Anthoxanthum odoratum annual bluegrass Poa annua 

burr chervil a Anthriscus caucalis Himalayan blackberry Rubus armeniacus 

soft brome Bromus hordeaceus sheep sorrel Rumex acetosella 

ripgut brome Bromus rigidus curly dock Rumex obtusifolius 

poverty brome Bromus sterilis common groundsel Senecio vulgaris 

white goosefoot Chenopodium album spiny sowthistle Sonchus asper 

bull thistle Cirsium vulgare common sowthistle Sonchus oleraceus 

hedgehog dogtail Cynosurus echinatus common dandelion Taraxacum officinale 

orchard grass Dactylis glomerata small hop-clover Trifolium dubium 

Queen Anne’s lace b c Daucus carota corn speedwell Veronica arvensis 

redstem stork’s bill Erodium cicutarium tiny vetch Vicia hirsuta 

dove’s-foot geranium Geranium molle common vetch Vicia sativa 

common velvet-grass Holcus lanatus brome fescue Vulpia bromoides 

hairy cat’s-ear Hypochaeris radicata rat-tail fescue Vulpia myuros 

purple dead-nettle Lamium purpureum 

a 

Hockin et al 2007; 

b Polster 2007 

c A Daucus carota observed in April 2007 at the north end of the island will be removed in June 2008. 

35

Appendix 3⎯Shrub propagation and planting methods 

The following methods will be used for propagating and planting native shrubs on Anniversary 

Island. Regardless of method used, all collection will be done using sharp, clean tools. Unless 

stated otherwise, all cuts should be at a 45 o angle. 

Cuttings 

Cuttings are roughly 10 cm long sections cut from whips that are collected from the site and 

propagated into plugs. Whips should be collected in mid to late May, when shrubs are still leafing 

out. Whips should be at least 30 cm long, and cut from current year growth that is firm but not 

rigid. Once collected, whips should be bundled with damp peat moss and stored in a cooler on 

top of a layer of newspaper with ice beneath and shipped immediately to the nursery. Nursery 

staff are responsible for making cuttings and planting the plugs. Roughly three cuttings can be 

made from one whip. Each cutting becomes a plug. To estimate the number of cuttings required, 

allow for 35% “let down” in the greenhouse and up to 25% mortality once planted. 

Live stakes 

The following steps are adapted from http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/pi/cutting.htm [accessed 2 April 

2008]). Planting on Anniversary Island is planned for late October to early November 2008. This 

timeframe allows for poor weather conditions and difficulty accessing the island. The best time to 

plant live stakes is during our region’s dormant season, from October to March 

http://www.soundnativeplants.com/livestake.htm [accessed 28 May 2008]. Even if planted during 

the growing season, live stakes planted into sites that remain moist will establish, but survival 

will be lower. Regardless of when planted, stakes will survive initially by rooting, but eventually 

leaves will sprout from the exposed ends. 

1. Find mature, healthy shrubs that have long, upright branches. These will be cut to make the 

live stakes. No more than 5% of branches should be cut from each plant. Select stems 

that can yield 50 to 60 cm long stakes. This length is necessary to ensure sufficient energy is 

available in the stake, and because stakes will not tolerate much shade while leafing out. 

Rose stakes should be at least 2 cm in diameter; snowberry may be thinner (~ 1cm). 

2. Locate a spot along the lower end of the stem and make an angled cut for the bottom end of 

the stake. The angled cut makes it easier to drive the correct end into the ground; stakes 

planted upside down will die. You should now have a length of older, woody stem that 

includes flexible new growth at the top. Select a place at the upper end of the older wood to 

create a cut for the top of the stake. There should be at least two buds on the upper 15% of 

the stake. Make a straight cut above these buds for the top end. The flexible tip of newer 

growth can also be retained for planting. Figure 6 shows a schematic diagram of established 

live stakes and illustrates the difference in angles for the top and bottom cuts. 

3. To keep stakes from drying out, remove most leaves and small branches as soon as possible 

after cutting. Keep stakes moist in a bucket of fresh water or wet burlap sacks until ready to 

plant. Plant stakes within 24 hrs of collecting. If it is hot, keep them in shade until planted. 

36

4. Use a rubber mallet to drive the angled end of the stake into the soil, perpendicular to the 

slope, at least 30 cm deep (the deeper the better, without burying the two top buds). Leave 

15 to 20 cm above ground so stakes can 

sprout leaves from the buds. Because 

planting will take place once fall rains have 

started, the soil should be moist and pliable; 

if it is hard, use a length of rebar or planting 

stick to start the hole. 

Figure 6. Diagram of live stakes (adapted 

from Gray and Sotir 1996, and Minnesota 

Dept of Natural Resources). 

Layering 

To propagate by layering from an existing plant, a low growing, flexible and living stem is bent to 

the ground. Part of the stem is then covered with soil, leaving the remaining 15 to 30 cm above 

the soil. The tip is then bent into a vertical position and staked in place (Figure 7). The sharp 

bend will often induce rooting, but wounding the lower side of the bent branch may help also. 

Figure 7. Method for layering snowberry (Evans and Blazich accessed 2008). 

37

Appendix 4⎯Cultural features on Anniversary Island 

INTERNAL USE ONLY 

38






Chapter 6 

Outreach and Public Involvement 

Contents 

6.1 Introduction................................................................................5 

6.1.1 Overview of this Chapter....................................................7 

6.2 Communicating with the Public................................................7 

6.2.1 Overview..............................................................................7 

6.2.2 Building a Communications/Outreach Strategy................8 

6.2.3 Restoration Planning: Public Participation...................... 10 

Case Study 1. San Juan Preservation Trust: Community 

Support = Bluebird Re-Introduction Success ................................ 11 

6.2.4 Decision-making for Public Process..................................12 

6.2.5 Effective Communication Methods..................................12 

Case Study 2. Scotch Broom Project Halted................................. 13 



6-1


Case Study 3. Habitat Acquisition Trust (HAT) Good 

Neighbours Program..................................................................... 22 

6.3 Social and Cultural Aspects of Restoration............................24 

6.3.1 Historical Cultural Relationships.......................................24 

Case Study 4. Field Trip with Cowichan Tribes.............................26 

6.3.2 Social Implications of Restoration................................... 27 

Case Study 5. Tsawout First Nation: Restoring Land, 

Language, and Culture...................................................................28 

6.3.3 Bringing People Back into the Ecosystem.......................29 

6.4 Stewardship.............................................................................30 

Case Study 6. Mt. Tzuhalem Volunteer Stewardship................... 31 

6.4.1 Building a Stewardship Ethic............................................ 32 

A Few Strategies to Build Stewardship.................................... 32 

6.4.2 Stewardship Challenges...................................................33 

Case Study 7. City of Victoria: Volunteer Groups 

Banding Together..........................................................................34 

6.4.3 Community-based Restoration........................................36 

Case Study 8. Strawberry Vale Elementary: Engaging 

Elementary Students in Restoration and Stewardship................ 37 

Case Study 9. Swan Lake Christmas Hill Nature Sanctuary: 

Engaging Secondary School Students.......................................... 37 

6.4.4 Youth and Stewardship....................................................38 

Case Study 10. Girl Guides of Canada: Uplands Park 

Stewardship Project......................................................................39 

Case Study 11. University Undergraduate Involvement in 

Restoration: Trinity Western University Crow’s Nest 

Ecological Research Area ............................................................ 40 

6-2 



6.4.5 Landowner Contact Programs.........................................42 

Case Study 12. Sharp-tailed Snake Recovery Project: 

Pender Island’s Local Champion...................................................44 

Case Study 13. Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT): 

Working With Landholders to Protect Species at Risk................47 

6.5 Volunteer Programs................................................................ 49 

Case Study 14. Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site: 

Volunteers Help Control Invasive Species....................................50 

Case Study 15. Swan Lake Christmas Hill Nature Sanctuary’s 

Formal Volunteer Program............................................................ 51 

6.5.1 Volunteers in Restoration Projects.................................. 52 

6.5.2 Developing a Volunteer Program....................................53 

6.5.3 Essential Elements of Volunteer Programs.....................54 

Case Study 16. Saanich Garry Oak Restoration Project 

(GORP): Risk Management...........................................................55 

6.5.4 Managing a Volunteer Program......................................56 

6.5.5 Volunteer Program Resources.........................................59 

6.6 Celebration.............................................................................. 60 

6.7 References .............................................................................. 61 

6.8 Additional Resources...............................................................63 

Appendix 6.1 ................................................................................. 64 

Deciding Whether Public Involvement is Needed.................. 64 

Appendix 6.2 Example Volunteer Intake Forms and Waivers......67 



6-3


6-4 



Chapter 6 

Outreach and Public Involvement 

by Carolyn MacDonald, with contributions by Chris Junck and Jenny Eastman 

Elise Croteau knee-high in camas (Camassia spp.) at Playfair Park in Saanich. Photo: Carolyn MacDonald 


… social engagement is a vital part of restoration and 

not merely an afterthought. (Higgs 2003) 

Ultimately, successful protection and restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems will depend on the 

support and values of the public and communities in which these ecosystems exist. In Canada, 

the last remnants of Garry Oak ecosystems are found primarily in and around areas occupied by 

people. A well-planned public involvement and outreach approach can provide project support 

through community stewardship, funding opportunities, volunteer activities, and even restoration 

efforts that are expanded to adjacent properties. Communicating and working with the public and 

other stakeholders from the beginning planning stages can directly influence project success and 

sustainability. 



6-5


The Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT) is guided by the Recovery Strategy for Garry 

Oak and Associated Ecosystems and their Associated Species at Risk in Canada (www.goert.ca/ 

documents/RSDr_Feb02.pdf). This Recovery Strategy acknowledges that communication and 

developing public involvement, awareness, and participation are essential aspects of the ecosystem 

recovery program (GOERT 2002). The Recovery Strategy identifies “motivating public and private 

protection and stewardship activities” as a key objective. Garry Oak ecosystem restoration projects 

play an important role in meeting Recovery Strategy objectives, which include public outreach and 

facilitating stewardship. 

One of the preliminary restoration tasks outlined in the Society for Ecological Restoration’s 

Guidelines for Developing and Managing Ecological Restoration Projects (Clewell et al. 2005) is to 

establish liaison with the public and publicize the project: 

Local residents automatically become stakeholders in the restoration. They need to know 

how the restored ecosystem can benefit them personally. For example, the restoration may 

attract ecotourism that will benefit local businesses, or it may serve as an environmental 

education venue for local schools. If residents favor the restoration, they will protect it and 

vest it with their political support. If they dislike the restoration, they may vandalize or 

otherwise disrespect it. (Clewell et al. 2005) 

As you plan restoration, it is important to consider what level of commitment you are prepared to 

devote to the project. This chapter provides tools and resources for designing public involvement 

and public outreach for Garry Oak ecosystem restoration projects. No matter what scale or type of 

restoration project you are taking on—a grassroots, community-led project or a multi-stakeholder, 

government managed initiative—community consultation, education, public outreach, and 

volunteer management may be essential to your success. 

Examples of Outreach and Public Involvement 

• Public consultation meetings 

• Public presentations 

• Educational field trips to Garry Oak ecosystems 

• Information and resources provided to the public 

• Parks interpretive programs 

• Public signage 

• Volunteer programs 

• Landowner/neighbour contact programs 

• Education programs within the schools 

6-6 



6.1.1 Overview of this Chapter 

This chapter provides descriptions, best management practices, tools, and resources for 

developing outreach programs for Garry Oak ecosystem restoration projects and addressing 

public participation throughout project planning and implementation. 

• Section 6.2 provides an overview of how to communicate with the public, gives guidelines and 

tools for building a communications/outreach strategy, and provides information on public 

involvement and consultation. This section ends with descriptions of, and tools for, effective 

communication methods. 

• Section 6.3 looks at the social and cultural aspects of restoration, including historical cultural 

relationships, social implications of restoration, and implications of bringing people back 

into the ecosystems. 

• Section 6.4 describes the building of a stewardship ethic, provides considerations regarding 

stewardship challenges, gives an overview of community-based restoration, and describes 

stewardship programs for youth. This section concludes with a description of, and best 

management practices for, landowner contact programs. 

• Section 6.5 covers tools and best management practices for managing volunteer programs. 

• Section 6.6 ends with “celebration” as a reminder of the importance of celebrating the 

ecosystems and our work. 

6.2 Communicating with the Public 

6.2.1 Overview 

The world we have created today as a result of our thinking thus far has 

created problems that cannot be solved by thinking the way we thought when 

we created them. (Albert Einstein) 

Successful ecological restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems needs to be based on both participatory 

action and scientific knowledge. Outreach and public involvement strategies are best considered 

at the beginning stages of a project and should be re-evaluated throughout its implementation. 

A project that includes the community in its vision, goals, and objectives from the start is much 

more likely to have success and long-term sustainability. Successful projects not only reach out to 

the broader community and stakeholders but also see the community as active participants and 

knowledge holders who can assist with many facets of the overall restoration program. 

Communicating with the public can be viewed as a spectrum of activities ranging from informing 

and educating to involving and collaborating with the public and other stakeholders in the 

project. Careful planning and implementation of this process ensures key concerns, information, 

and other goals are considered and incorporated into the project planning process. Ongoing 

outreach maintains the project’s profile and community interest, support, and stewardship. 

In planning for public communication, consider the following: 

• Who is your audience? 

• What do they want to know? What do they have to contribute to the project? 



6-7


• When (and at what points) do you need to implement different types of communication? 

• Why are you communicating? Are you informing, asking for participation, or looking for full 

collaboration? 

• How do you want to communicate? What are your resources and goals? 

• How can the community communicate their concerns and provide input? 

It is important to develop a communications or outreach strategy for your 

restoration project. This strategy may be the key to building community 

support or collaboration and long-term sustainability. 

6.2.2 Building a Communications/Outreach Strategy 

In order to build a communications/outreach strategy, consider the following: 

Objectives: Define your communication and outreach objectives (e.g., 

“Objective 1: To build awareness and educate the community about Garry Oak 

ecosystems and ecological restoration”). 

Audience: To be successful in communication, it is vital to know your audience. Consider who 

your audience is, including their knowledge, perspectives, interests, and the best ways to reach 

them, and start from where they are. 

Key Message: Be very clear about what message you are communicating to the public. 

Achieving Objectives: Identify which communication, outreach, and public involvement 

strategies you will use to achieve your objectives. 

Resources: Identify available resources to help you with your strategies. 

Evaluating Success: How will you know if you are successful? For each strategy, identify 

evaluation techniques (e.g., for site tours: number of people who attend, response of participants, 

successful engagement of the media). 

Adjust Strategy: Be prepared to adjust your strategy as you evaluate its success. 

Objectives 

Identifying specific goals and objectives will help you to be more focused and effective. This will 

also help you to effectively evaluate the success of your public outreach. When you are developing 

objectives, carefully consider the available resources, timeframe of your project, stakeholders, and 

other considerations specific to your project that may impact a communications strategy. 

Using the SMART technique is one way to develop effective objectives (see also Chapter 5): 

Specific – Is the scope narrow enough that it can be attained? 

Measurable – How do you know when you have achieved your outcome/objective? 

Achievable – Can this objective be achieved with the time and funding available? 

Realistic – Is this objective or activity realistic, and relevant to the over-riding goal? 

Timed – What is the timeframe? Can the task be completed in this timeframe? 

A communications 

strategy may be 

the key to building 

community 

support and 

long-term 

sustainability for 

your restoration 

project. 

6-8 



Audience 

One of the most important considerations for effective outreach planning is to identify your 

target audience. You may have a number of different audiences and different methods of 

communicating with each. Consider their individual needs and knowledge, and how they best 

receive information. 

Consider who needs to be informed and/or involved. How does your audience relate to your 

project goals? Do you: 

• require volunteers? 

• need to change behaviours around site use and stewardship (such as trampling and dumping 

of garden waste)? 

• have goals that include public participation or consultation in the project? 

• want to expand restoration efforts to neighbouring properties? 

• need funding and other support from your audience? 

Key Message 

Consider what specific messages you want to convey to your audience in order to achieve your 

objectives. When communicating with the public, the simplest messages can be the most 

effective. Be careful not to overwhelm people with information. Adapt your key message(s) to your 

specific audiences and be prepared to change those messages in response to community feedback. 

Achieving Objectives 

Once you have considered your objective(s), audience, and key message(s), you then need to 

select the best communication strategies. You may want to focus on one specific method that 

seems to be best for your audience, or develop a few strategies to reach your audience(s) in 

different ways. Most restoration projects use a variety of outreach strategies targeted at different 

goals or objectives. Signage and presentations may work best to change the behaviours of certain 

audiences, whereas media, newsletters, and direct contact may work best in engaging and 

involving other audiences. 

Resources 

There are many great examples of effective outreach tools for restoration projects. To conserve 

time and resources, look at outreach tools that have been developed by related organizations, 

existing manuals for ideas and guidance and even other Garry Oak ecosystem restoration 

projects with outreach programs. The list at the end of this chapter includes helpful resources 

for developing outreach tools. Also see Section 6.2.3 for descriptions of effective communication 

methods. 

Evaluation Methods 

There are many different ways you can evaluate the success of your public outreach program. You 

may use evaluation methods that have specific, measurable goals such as behavioural changes or 

participation levels. If you are evaluating a specific part of your outreach program, the method 

you use should be specific to that component. For example, if you are evaluating your volunteer 

program, you may use: 



6-9


• focus groups 

• participant surveys 

• ongoing participation statistics 

One evaluation technique, SWOT analysis, requires you to carefully examine your objectives, and 

then evaluate your success. This analysis may be done in a group setting. In your group, evaluate 

each of the four elements listed below (evaluation elements “SWOT”). For each element, make 

sure everyone in the group clearly understands the element, then brainstorm and discuss. For 

example: does everyone understand “strengths”—what are the strengths of this activity (specific 

activity) in achieving the objective(s)? When everyone is clear, brainstorm or discuss the strengths, 

creating a list. After the group has completed an analysis of each SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, 

opportunities, and threats), compare and group the lists gathered for each and analyze the results. 

Evaluation Elements 

Strengths: attributes that help in achieving the objective 

Weaknesses: attributes that are harmful in achieving the objective 

Opportunities: external conditions that are helpful to achieving the objective 

Threats: external conditions that could damage the objective 

Adjusting your Strategy 

Use the results of your evaluation to adjust your ongoing and future public outreach and 

involvement strategies so they become increasingly effective. 

6.2.3 Restoration Planning: Public Participation 

Restoration represents an indefinitely long-term commitment of land and 

resources, and a proposal to restore an ecosystem requires thoughtful deliberation. 

Collective decisions are more likely to be honored and implemented than are those 

that are made unilaterally. (Society for Ecological Restoration, SERISPWG 2004) 

Public participation should be considered carefully because it implicitly includes the promise 

that the contributions of the public will influence the project. A good public participation process 

requires planning, effective facilitation, and follow-up (Figure 6.1). The benefits of the process may 

include increased project support. 

Public involvement can be vital to a restoration project’s credibility, support, and long-term 

sustainability. The benefits can include: 

• the opportunity to address concerns of stakeholders and neighbours early in the project, and 

identify options that will be supported by the community 

• the chance to use the public’s knowledge about the site, which will inform the restoration 

planning process 

• the ability to build awareness and understanding of the project 

• the opportunity to build long-term support for the project, which may include labour, 

resources, funding, and/or general stewardship 

6-10 



Case Study 1. San Juan Preservation Trust: 

Community Support = Bluebird Re-Introduction Success 

At one time, Western Bluebirds (Sialia mexicana) were a significant part of the landscape of the 

San Juan Islands in Washington State. As their habitat and landscape changed, including the 

loss of large dead trees for cavity nesting, Western Bluebird populations began to decline in 

the 1930s. By the 1960s they were extirpated from the northern extent of their range in the U.S.A. 

Small populations persisted on southern Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands until the mid-1990s. 

In 2007, the San Juan Islands Western Bluebird Re-introduction Project began with a five year 

strategy to re-establish breeding populations of birds on the islands. 

CASE STUDY 

From the planning stages of this project, community outreach and involvement was considered 

essential. Public seminars were held before the project was implemented, to educate and gain 

support from the target communities and to engage volunteers. As the re-introduction began, the 

project depended on community volunteers as nestbox hosts and monitors. Monitoring is now 

conducted by a paid technician, but volunteer hosts play an invaluable role not only by providing 

space for the nestboxes, but in some cases also feeding mealworms to clutches (with some pairs 

having as many as three clutches in the season). 

The San Juan Preservation Trust has overseen the majority of public education and outreach, 

providing not only the educational seminars and volunteer coordination, but wider public outreach. 

The Trust has reached out through nestbox building workshops, nestbox kit sales, outreach booths 

at local farmers’ markets, educational programs for school children, media releases, a website blog, 

newsletter and even a bluebird haiku poetry contest (Kathleen Foley, personal communication 2010). 

Elyse Portal inspects a Western Bluebird nestbox on San Juan 

Island. Photo: Carolyn Masson 

Making partnerships in the 

community, conducting a sustainable 

volunteer program, and reaching out 

to build community support have been 

crucial to the success of this project. 

Re-introduction of the birds began 

in 2007, and the results of the 2010 

spring and summer monitoring season 

were very encouraging. Twentyfour 

Western Bluebirds returned, 

seventeen more were translocated 

that season, and a total of eighty-four 

juvenile birds were banded. As the 

project continues and support grows, 

GOERT is planning a re-introduction 

project across the border on 

Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands, 

with translocations to begin in spring 2012. The Canadian bluebird project will have the added benefit 

of lessons learned and experience gained through the successful San Juan Islands work. For more 

about this project, see Case Study 3 in Chapter 4 or go to www.sjpt.org/page.php?content_id=92. 



6-11


a definition of stakeholders and public participation 

(The International Association for Public Participation, www.iap2.org) 

We define stakeholders as any individual, group of individuals, organizations, or political entity 

with a stake in the outcome of a decision. We define the public as those stakeholders who are 

not part of the decision-making entity or entities. 

We define public participation as any process that involves the public in problem-solving or 

decision-making and that uses public input to make better decisions. 

6.2.4 Decision-making for Public Process 

Deciding what level of public process to undertake during the planning stages of a restoration 

project involves consideration of many factors, such as the mandate of the project, if being 

steered by an agency; goals for public participation; complexity of issues; community-related 

impacts; and First Nations participation. Appendix 6.1 provides an adapted version of the District 

of Saanich’s checklist Deciding Whether Public Involvement is Needed. The checklist has been 

adapted to apply specifically to a restoration project. As described in the IAP2 public participation 

spectrum (Figure 6.1), each approach to public participation comes with expectations from the 

public that should be considered carefully. Good public process and/or involvement can make or 

break the success of a project. 

6.2.5 Effective Communication Methods 

After considering what level of public outreach and/or involvement best suits your project and 

after identifying your objectives, audience, and key messages, you will need to decide which 

communication methods are most effective for your situation. 

This is where you can be both creative and resourceful by looking at what methods have been 

the most effective for other projects with similar objectives and audiences. These methods may 

include: 

• printed materials (such as brochures, newsletters, articles, flyers, and letters) 

• visual outreach tools (such as signage and posters) 

• on-line media (websites and on-line social media such as Facebook and Twitter) 

• events (including presentations, meetings, workshops, media events, and unique gatherings) 

• direct contact (landowner contact and volunteer programs) 

• tours (e.g., as in peak seasons) 

6-12 



Case Study 2. Scotch Broom Project Halted 

by Christian Engelstoft 

Even though Garry Oak ecosystems do not occur on Haida Gwaii, lessons learned about the 

importance of public outreach in restoration are worth sharing. Scotch Broom (Cytisus 

scoparius) was introduced to the islands in the early 1920s and to the Tlell area prior to 1936. 

In the fall of 1999, a program to control Scotch Broom was started in the Tlell area. Within a very 

short time, the work had to be stopped because the local community was in an uproar. Local 

citizens really liked the yellow flowering plant as it was one of the only plants that provided the 

landscape with colour and beauty; they saw no reason to pull it out. The outcome of that project 

could likely have been much different had the local community been educated about the effects of 

Scotch Broom on native ecosystems and consulted prior to the removal. To this day, Scotch Broom 

is a prominent part of the landscape, but control projects are now on-going. 

CASE STUDY 

Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius). Photo: Chris Junck 

Christian Engelstoft is a consulting biologist specializing in wildlife inventories and environmental 

studies, and is co-owner of Biolinx Environmental Research Ltd. 



6-13


Figure 6.1 Public Participation Spectrum (from the International Association for Public 

Participation 2007; used with permission). 

A survey of outreach and communication methods used in twelve Garry Oak ecosystem 

restoration projects conducted on Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands 1 indicated that the 

most popular methods were signage, newsletters, media, and presentations. The most effective 

methods, although not necessarily the most popular ones, were either direct personal contact 

and/or involving people in the project (however, signage was also one of the most effective 

methods). 

Public outreach and involvement has many positive effects. The survey of Garry Oak ecosystem 

projects cited the most positive effects of their outreach to be increased volunteer participation, 

greater connection of children with the ecosystems, greater empowerment of people, increased 

community support and stewardship for the project/site, and greater public awareness of the 

values of Garry Oak ecosystems and threats to them. 

1 A survey was conducted by C. MacDonald (2009/2010) through a questionnaire sent via email to key contacts of Garry 

Oak ecosystem restoration projects in British Columbia that had outreach and public involvement programs. In total, 12 

completed questionnaires were received. 

6-14 



Presentation at Playfair 

Park restoration site. Photo: 


Interpretation 

Many effective communication methods can be described as “interpretive”. 

Interpretation can be defined as: 

Any communication process designed to reveal meanings and 

relationships of cultural and natural heritage to the public, through 

first-hand involvement with an object, artifact, landscape or site. 

(Interpretation Canada 1976) 

Increased 

volunteer 

participation, 

increased 

community 

support, 

and greater 

connections 

between children 

and the natural 

world are some of 

the most positive 

effects of public 

outreach around 

restoration 

projects. 

Interpretation comes in many forms, from a sign or publication to a guided walk or theatrical 

program. In practice, it is a way of communicating enthusiasm, meaning, value, and wonder. 

Interpretation fosters connections between people and places, which is especially important for 

Garry Oak ecosystems. 

Far beyond the dissemination of factual information, interpretation aims to create in visitors 

meaning, so that they can put a place into personal perspective and identify with it in a 

way that is more profound and enduring than random fact-learning can alone produce. 

Interpretation is meaning making. (Ham 2002) 

A good place to search for interpretation resources is the Interpretation Canada website 

(www.interpcan.ca/new). 

The following descriptions profile some of the commonly used communication methods. The 

resources referred to here will help you to make the best use of each of these specific techniques. 

Signage 

Most signage used for Garry Oak ecosystem restoration sites identifies a site or project, 

and may provide a map, site interpretation, and other key information for site visitors. The 

twelve restoration projects surveyed identified signage as one of the most commonly used 

communication techniques. 



6-15


The following are common types of signage used for ecological restoration sites: 

• basic site/project identification signs 

• interpretive signage 

• kiosk-style map and interpretive signs 

• seasonal signs 

• sandwich boards (temporary) 

Government-led projects will likely have their own signage production in-house 

and/or established procedures for signage development. Other projects and 

organizations may look to community professionals to provide information and 

assistance for signage development, production, and installation. 

The following are some things to consider when planning for site signage: 

• Is landowner consent (or partnership) required? 

• Who is the main audience? (What are their needs and level of engagement?) 

• What are the key messages (concise) and purpose of the signage? 

• Is funding available? 

• Is a project contact required? If so, consider the best long-term contact information. What 

materials are required to reduce the impacts of vandalism? 

• What is the ideal location for, and height of, installation? 

Sandwich boards can be 

used to inform site users 

about temporary project 

activities, for example, on 

work party days to explain 

what volunteers are doing. 

Photo: Carolyn MacDonald 

There are many resources available to help you plan for creating effective signage, e.g., A Sense of 

Place: An Interpretive Planning Handbook (Carter 2001). 

GOERT offers this 

series of “Stay 

on Track” signs 

to conservation 

partners to 

promote 

responsible 

use of sensitive 

ecosystems. 

For more, see 

www.goert.ca/ 

stayontrack. Photo: 

Chris Junck 

Kiosks can provide detailed site information such as maps 

and habitat descriptions. This photo shows the kiosk 

at Woodlands at Government House in Victoria. Photo: 


6-16 



With signs such as this 

Habitat Steward sign, 

GOERT recognizes 

landowners who allow 

access to their property 

for restoration and 

species at risk surveys. 

Photo: Chris Junck 

Simple signs can be an unobtrusive way to inform 

users about a restoration site, such as this sign at 

Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site. Photo: Carolyn 

MacDonald 

Newsletters 

Keeping regular contact with project partners, neighbours, volunteers, and other key stakeholders 

can be essential to the sustainability of your project. Newsletters are one way to keep people 

informed, interested, and even participating. A good newsletter can be provided with minimal 

costs, depending on your goals. Newsletters can be distributed via email, mail, and/or the 

internet. 

There are many helpful tips on the internet for producing effective newsletters. Create a plan, an 

appealing design, and follow these guidelines: 

• Banner: The banner should be simple and bold, clearly identifying the project or agency and 

including the publication date and number. 

• Layout: Use consistent formatting such as fonts with a clean design. Printed newsletters often 

use 2–3 columns. 

• Headlines: Make headlines eye-catching to draw in your readers. 

• Graphics: Use good quality graphics to add interest and professional quality to your 

publication as well as making the newsletter easier to read. 

• Writing style: Use a writing style that is brief, to the point, and uses a less formal style. Subheadings 

help break up longer articles. 

• Audience: Know your audience and what they want or need. Knowing your audience will also 

help decide what are the most important things to communicate about your project. 

• Contact information: Make sure your contact information can be found easily in a consistent, 

strategic location. 

• Distribution: Consider how best to distribute the publication for your intended audience, or 

provide a few options (such as print and email). 



6-17


Websites 

Increasingly, the public is accessing and wanting information through the internet. Websites 

can provide a way of promoting Garry Oak restoration sites and stewardship, and can be a way 

to connect participants with information, event announcements, newsletters, and resources. 

Currently, Garry Oak restoration projects are using a wide range of website approaches, from 

one very simple webpage with links to project webpages within a larger organization’s website, to 

elaborate and professionally designed websites. 

Most of us recognize the basic dos and don’ts of website design based on our own experience 

with accessing websites. The best designs are attractive, consistently formatted, and user friendly. 

Ecological restoration projects need to provide readily obtainable information about how to get 

involved, along with current contact information. Following are examples that have been created 

for Garry Oak restoration projects: 

Mt. Tolmie Conservancy 

http://members.shaw.ca/mttolmieconservancy 

This simple website has one main page which includes a clear statement of the project’s purpose, 

contact information, and a list of upcoming events. The webpage provides links to a map, 

historical information, and photos. It is a very basic website with easy upkeep, and it focuses on 

providing specific information rather than using an engaging design. 

Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve 

www.natureconservancy.ca/site/PageServer?pagename=bc_ncc_CGOP 

The Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve is an example of a project that has webpages within a larger 

organization’s website (The Nature Conservancy of Canada, www.natureconservancy.ca). 

The main page directs readers to summaries and contacts for key aspects of their program, 

and information on upcoming events, research, and volunteer events. It also offers a concise 

description of the ecological and cultural history of the site, profiling why it is special. 

Crow’s Nest Ecological Research Area 

www.twu.ca/crowsnest 

Trinity Western University provides webpages for its Crow’s Nest research area within their 

larger website. The Crow’s Nest pages are nicely organized and include a directory, giving it 

the appearance of an independent website. The site includes unique features, such as a digital 

herbarium, an inventory database of vertebrates and invertebrates, and an on-line tour of the 

research area using a map and photo links. The main purpose of the project is clearly stated, and 

the research description and links are easily accessible. 

Garry Oak Restoration Project 

www.gorp.saanich.ca 

This website features a number of restoration sites, and the footer on each webpage includes 

contact information for the project coordinator. The website provides basic information about the 

project, as well as more in-depth information, newsletters, and announcements for volunteers 

and other interested parties. Maps provide information about each site, including how to access it 

by bus or walking trails. Note that information such as event listings are kept updated, which is an 

important website feature. 

6-18 



Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team 

www.goert.ca 

GOERT’s website provides a good example of the key elements of successful website design. The 

website is attractive, carefully designed, and very user-friendly. Content is constantly updated, 

providing a go-to hub of Garry Oak ecosystem information. The website meets the needs of a wide 

variety of audiences, from engaging individuals who are new to Garry Oak ecosystems to providing 

in-depth information, resources, and tools for professionals. Extra links at the top of the banner 

provide easy access to contact information and information on donating to the organization or 

subscribing to its newsletter. 

Salt Spring Island Conservancy 

www.saltspringconservancy.ca 

This website is a great one to visit if you are looking to design a dynamic website for a nongovernment 

organization. Information is detailed and laid out in a very user-friendly manner. The 

footer at the bottom of each page tells you when the site was last updated. Specific project pages are 

especially in-depth. For example, the Sharp-tailed Snake (Contia tenuis) page includes good quality 

photos, information about the species and “how to help”, and links to related resources, and the 

owl pages provide photos and species profiles, plus links to information on owl calls and nest box 

designs. 

Carolyn MacDonald and 

Judith Carder pose at 

Chatterton Hill Park for a 

news story about supporting 

community projects. Photo: 

Diana Nethercott 



6-19


On-line Social Media 

Although many of us may still experience a “cringe factor” related to on-line social media or 

networking, it is a buzz we may need to listen to. There are many examples of projects and 

campaigns that have taken off due to their use of simple, on-line networking platforms. The most 

popular types of platforms include: 

• microblogging (e.g., Twitter; short content on-line conversations) 

• blogging (including free platforms such as Google Blogger) 

• video (the most popular being YouTube) 

• social networking (e.g., Facebook and MySpace) 

On-line social networking is a means of connecting with people, and it can provide a way to reach 

a broader audience or even effectively communicate with a specific audience, such as youth. Many 

social networking sites provide a place to creatively draw interest and support for your project or 

campaign. If you aren’t sure about venturing into this new world, find a young person to get you 

started! 

Presentations 

Presentations can be an excellent way to engage people and provide key messages or information 

about a project. They can also be a great way to put people to sleep or to put them off a topic. With 

careful planning and practice, presentations can be effective in reaching out to specific audiences. 

Plan your presentations so that you present key messages in a concise, engaging manner, and 

consider the following: 

• Know your audience. Why is this relevant to them? 

• Plan, prepare, and practice your presentation. 

• Capture your audience’s attention right from the start. 

• Briefly tell your audience what you plan to present. 

• Ensure your audience that you will not waste their time. 

• Engage your audience. Pose a question or ask for some kind of response. 

• Speak clearly, and use emphasis and pauses. 

• Check your body language. Be confident. 

• Look at your audience throughout the presentation. 

• Use humour and enthusiasm. 

• Tell short stories or provide examples to illustrate key points. 

• Use visual aids, such as props, overheads, slides, or PowerPoint presentations. 

• Keep to your allotted time. 

• Have a clear conclusion and briefly summarize your key points. 

• Ask your audience if they have any questions. 

Use of PowerPoint and Other Slide Presentation Formats 

Effective use of slide presentations uses this medium to enhance and highlight a presentation, 

rather than provide the substance of the presentation. Use good quality pictures, a standard 

6-20 



The author presenting a 

workshop on restoration. 

Photo: District of Saanich 

design throughout, a minimum of text in abbreviated (even bulleted) form, and limit the use of 

tables, details, and anything with small text. Over-use of animation and different types of transition 

can be annoying and distracting. The focus of the presentation should be on the presenter, with 

PowerPoint slides serving as emphasis. 

Workshops 

Workshops are an effective way of engaging people in a topic. If your restoration site would benefit 

from good neighbours who are practicing stewardship on adjacent properties or if you need to train 

volunteers for a specific conservation project (such as rare species identification and protection or 

invasive species management), hosting a workshop might be the right approach. 

Whether you host a workshop and bring in a skilled workshop facilitator/presenter or facilitate your 

own workshop, some general best practices apply: 

• Have clear objectives 

• Provide an icebreaker or an engaging welcome 

• Start and end on time 

• Provide a workshop agenda 

• Know your audience (and start from where they are at) 

• Address basic needs (comfort, washrooms, breaks/food) 

• Use different types of activity types, such as small groups, brainstorming, and hands-on 

activities 

• Provide participants with evaluation forms so they can provide feedback on the workshop 

Workshop facilitators try to balance the input of participants; maintain focus; address disruptive 

behaviour; encourage brainstorming, questions, and discussion; and clarify workshop outcomes. 

Building trust and sharing enthusiasm are also important roles for facilitators. 

Landowner Contact Programs 

Landowner contact programs have been shown to be one of the most effective tools for encouraging 

land stewardship (Archibald et al. 2005). A description of best practices is provided in Section 6.4.5. 



6-21


Case Study 3. Habitat Acquisition Trust (HAT) 

Good Neighbours Program 

Habitat Acquisition Trust, based in Victoria, B.C., has developed an award-winning landowner 

contact program for protection and stewardship of Garry Oak ecosystems in the Capital 

Regional District (CRD). Through their Good Neighbours program, HAT has reached out to 

neighbours of protected areas to increase stewardship within protected areas, increase landscape 

connectivity and buffers on surrounding private lands, and raise awareness and appreciation within 

the community. One of the Good Neighbours projects reached the neighbours of Knockan Hill Park in 

2008, aiming to bolster the on-going efforts of the Friends of Knockan Hill Park Society. Working with 

the Society, Royal Roads University, and other conservation partners, HAT reached out to landowners 

through information postcards, direct contact by phone, and landowner visits. The Knockan Hill Good 

Neighbours project delivered information to 97 interested residents following the postcard mail-out, 

provided 37 private land care consultations, and eventually signed 25 land care agreements. One of 

the successful social marketing tools used by HAT is stewardship signs, which land care stewards 

placed on their properties. 

CASE STUDY 

In addition to the direct landowner contact, HAT engaged the community through a speaker series in 

the park (historical and natural history topics) and a nature photography workshop. HAT promoted 

their vision for whole ecosystem conservation by engaging with local Cub Scouts to paint storm 

drains, reminding residents of salmon downstream. The success of this Good Neighbours project was 

marked by the great responses, action, and increased stewardship by Knockan Hill residents. In 2009, 

the CRD recognized HAT’s creative 

and effective community-based 

stewardship approach with the Eco- 

Star Award for Land Stewardship. 

Saanich Parks staff member/arborist 

Ron Carter discusses the value of 

wildlife trees and tree diagnostics with 

local residents at Knockan Hill Park. 

Photo: Todd Carnahan 

6-22 



Volunteer Programs 

One of the most important methods of increasing stewardship and support for Garry Oak 

ecosystem restoration projects has been the development of volunteer programs. Successful 

volunteer programs share certain key elements whether they are developed within a grassroots 

community organization or as a formal program managed by a government body or agency. 

Volunteer programs and related resources and tools are described in Section 6.5. 

Community-based Social Marketing 

Community-based social marketing is an effective approach to promoting behavioural change that 

is becoming increasingly recognized and adopted. The following description is based on the book 

Fostering Sustainable Behaviour: 

Community-based social marketing is an attractive alternative to information-based 

campaigns. Community-based social marketing is based upon research in the social sciences 

that demonstrates that behaviour change is most effectively achieved through initiatives 

delivered at the community level, which focus on removing barriers to an activity while 

simultaneously enhancing the activity’s benefits. (McKenzie-Mohr and Smith 1999). 

Community-based social marketing involves four steps: 

1. identifying the barriers and benefits* 

2. developing a strategy that uses tools that have been shown to be effective in changing 

behaviour 

3. piloting the strategy 

4. evaluating the strategy once it has been implemented across a community 

*Note: barriers and benefits refer to the barriers to a particular behaviour change and the benefits 

of that behaviour change. 

The types of tools that can be used in a strategy include: 

• commitment techniques 

• prompts 

• social norms 

• effective messages 

• incentives to act 

For detailed descriptions of these techniques and how to use them, see McKenzie-Moore and 

Smith (1999). The book also describes techniques for removing external barriers to behavioural 

change, and designing and evaluating effective programs. Much of the book’s content is available 

on-line at www.cbsm.com. 

Local programs have successfully used social marketing techniques to increase stewardship of 




6-23


“The Coast Salish peoples of southern Vancouver Island cleared rocks and brush from their camas 

(Camassia spp.) meadows, leaving stretches of open parkland interspersed with stately Garry 

Oak trees (Quercus garryana). This practice utilized disturbance to maintain an early successional 

habitat in close association with mature forest habitat. The tending of the successional habitat 

mosaic provided the best possible conditions, not only for camas, but also for other root 

vegetable species, for wild strawberries (Fragaria spp.) and other berries, and for deer and other 

game at the edges of the woodlands, thus increasing the diversity of resources available in a 

limited geographic space.” (Turner et al. 2003) 

6.3 Social and Cultural Aspects of Restoration 

…what is being restored encompasses cultural beliefs and practices 

along with ecological processes, structures and patterns. (Higgs 2003) 

6.3.1 Historical Cultural Relationships 

Historically, First Nations had a relationship with the land that included stewardship of natural 

systems that provided them with things like food and trade items. The First Nations peoples’ 

historic use of fire maintained important wildlife habitat, plant resources, and the open canopy 

and understorey structure of Garry Oak ecosystems (see Chapter 2: Distribution and Description, 

and Chapter 3: Natural Processes and Disturbance). In this chapter, we describe some of the 

cultural and social aspects of restoration as they apply to planning public outreach, public 

involvement in the restoration project, and efforts to restore human relationships with the land. 

It is important to include historical 

cultural practices in restoration 

projects. This photo shows 

prescribed burning at Playfair Park in 

Saanich. Photo: Carolyn MacDonald 

6-24 



Making Cultural Connections 

The following are some ways restoration projects can make and enhance cultural connections 

with the site, with Garry Oak ecosystems, and with historical relationships and practices: 

• restoration planning 

• traditional cultural practices at the site 

• education and interpretation 

• volunteer programs 

• printed outreach materials 

• site signage 

• special events, celebrations 

• website 

Gordon deFrane of the Chemainus/Penelakut First Nations wrote the following description and 

introduction for Garry Oak Ecosystems of British Columbia: An Educator’s Guide (MacDonald and 

Staniforth 2005): 

O Si’em na si’aya 

The first inhabitants of what is now called Victoria referred to themselves as the people of 

the windy place, the Lekwungen. Their ancestors today are more frequently thought of as 

the Songhees. The Songhees are one of four social, linguistic and culturally distinct and 

unique indigenous nations that have continuously inhabited Vancouver Island since long 

before Vancouver, Cook or Juan de Fuca ever explored the waters off the coast of British 

Columbia. 

In the southern region of the island, the Straits Salish nation called Victoria, the Saanich 

Peninsula and the San Juan Islands home. From the north side of the Malahat to near 

Cape Mudge Island, the Coast Salish family of nations have lived and existed since the first 

humans fell from the skies long ago. From Cape Mudge to the north end of the Island is 

home to the kwakwak’awakw family of nations. The Nuu-chah-nulth family of nations calls 

the west coast of the island home. 

Each nation, clan or tribal group derived their livelihoods from the forests, rivers, oceans, 

mountains, marshes, lakes and…Garry Oak ecosystems. The Garry Oak ecosystems are 

ancient landscapes bounded up in the lives, lore and legends of the First Peoples of 

the Island. Healthy Garry Oak ecosystems meant healthy communities. Therefore, it is 

important to recall and to remember the ancestors of the First Peoples of Vancouver Island; 

each footstep stirs the dust of the ancestors that have gone before, which leaves a memory of 

the ancestors to follow. (Gordon deFrane) 



6-25


Case Study 4. Field Trip with Cowichan Tribes 

In May 2009, GOERT and several conservation partners in the Cowichan Valley provided students 

with a day-long tour of two Garry Oak ecosystem restoration sites. Thirty middle school 

students and about sixty youth and adult students from Cowichan Tribes schools attended. 

The day began at the Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve. Along with Nature Conservancy of Canada 

staff members who manage the site, facilitators included three Cowichan Tribes leaders and a rare 

plant specialist. The participants toured a Garry Oak meadow in bloom and a native plant nursery 

where rare plants are being grown, and ate their lunch while sitting under the largest Garry Oak 

tree in Canada. Students learned about uses of native plants, traditional camas digging practices, 

and words for some plants in the Hul’qumi’num language. The day wrapped up at nearby Somenos 

Garry Oak Protected Area with a walk around the site and a discussion of native plants and invasive 

species. For more, see www.goert.ca/news/2009/08/cowichan-tribes. 

CASE STUDY 

Cowichan Tribes leader Ken Elliott speaks 

to students about native plants in the 

nursery at Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve. 


Cowichan Tribes leader Doug 

August greeted students at the 

big oak. Photo: Carolyn Masson 

6-26 



Cultural practices such as stewardship of meadows, use of fire, and harvesting of bulbs led to 

values that sustained ecosystems and spiritual connections with the land. It is recognized that 

“intensive cultural activity has shaped this ecosystem for millennia and appears necessary to 

maintain it into the future” (MacDougall et al. 2004). Restoring culturally sustained Garry Oak 

ecosystems that are currently threatened due to contemporary values and practices requires 

restoration of the relationships between people and the ecosystems. 

The cultural landscapes of southern Vancouver Island have changed dramatically in the last 

160 years. Environmental change was not only influenced by shifting climatic and ecological 

processes, but by the behavior, practices, and economic choices of humans who dwelled 

within the environment. (Beckwith 2004) 

Brown and Mitchell (2000) described the “…growing understanding of the link between nature 

and culture: that healthy landscapes are shaped by human culture as well as the forces of nature, 

that rich biological diversity often coincides with cultural diversity, and that conservation cannot 

be undertaken without the involvement of those people closest to the resources.” 

In terms of historical cultural aspects of restoration planning and outreach, it is important to 

include First Nations and historical cultural practices in planning and implementing Garry 

Oak ecosystem restoration projects. Any opportunity to engage First Nations should be taken 

to encourage the mutual sharing of information and to include First Nations as partners or key 

stakeholders in restoration planning. Engaging and educating youth are likewise important, 

especially for hands-on learning and cultural education with First Nations partners. 

6.3.2 Social Implications of Restoration 

…restoration must be conceived in a way that makes the connections 

between culture and ecology, people and place, prominent. (Higgs 2003) 

Although some restoration sites may seem to exist in relatively isolated places, any restoration site 

has a community context that needs to be acknowledged. Historical First Nations practices on 

the site or practices used only since European settlement may be known. Recent historical use is 

also important in terms of the social implications of conducting restoration. For example, the site 

may have been used by the community as a place for local children to play, a favourite dog walking 

spot, a privacy barrier (e.g., a shrub hedge) from a road, a site for annual Easter egg hunts, a picnic 

destination, or a place where neighbours dumped yard waste. Both the historical (see Chapter 

3: Natural Processes and Disturbance) and contemporary uses of the site need to be considered 

within restoration planning as well as outreach and public involvement. 

Chapter 8: Restoration Strategies describes historical and cultural practices in relation to 

restoration strategies, and the impact of contemporary values and management of the use of the 

site by humans and dogs. The management of human use and impact of dogs are both big issues 

for restoration projects in urban areas. Restoration planning needs to address how to engage the 

community in the restoration project and how to design the project within the unique context of 

that community. 

Restoration practices that hold firm to ecological fidelity and embrace 

social and cultural goals are much more likely to prosper and endure (Higgs 1997). 



6-27


Case Study 5. Tsawout First Nation: Restoring Land, Language, 

and Culture 

Members of Tsawout First Nation are working to restore their ancestral lands, and at 

the same time, to restore their language and culture. Saanichton Bay has traditionally 

been a place of abundant harvest for the Tsawout Nation, but today shellfish beds are 

contaminated by excessive nutrients and sediments from upstream. With the help of Habitat 

Acquisition Trust’s (HAT) TIXEN/Cordova Shore Good Neighbours Project and other partnerships, 

community members have been working to restore sand dunes, rare bluffs, a salt marsh, eelgrass 

meadows, and clam beds by repairing damage from development, excessive stream nutrients, foot 

traffic, vehicles, dogs at large, and invasive species. Festivals and guided activities have helped to 

engage the community in the project. 

CASE STUDY 

“The Tsawout Lands Advisory Committee really identified with the concept that their 

threatened culture is an aspect of biodiversity worth protecting, that their language defines 

a unique world view, and that they as a People are therefore endangered. This story is one 

of community-based ecological restoration in the most comprehensive sense—that restoring 

community is just as important as restoring the land.” 

–Todd Carnahan, HAT 

“The success of our common goal to conserve sensitive ecosystems really depends on the 

willingness of everyone to work together, and this is what we felt was so critical to the 

partnership with HAT, because they provided education to the public and our own members 

and created a better understanding of what we were trying to achieve. So I think this type of 

partnership is worthwhile for any community that has the goals to conserve the plants and 

medicines and water that we all thrive on.” 

–Gwen Underwood, Tsawout Lands Advisory Committee 

The project was highlighted for the conservation community when a panel from Tsawout First 

Nation presented at HAT’s annual Conservation Connection Forum. 

Photos: Todd Carnahan 

6-28 



People and Ecological Restoration. Who should be involved? 

• Restoration practitioners 

• Specialists (e.g., botanists) 

• Neighbours 

• First Nations 

• Community volunteers 

• Funders 

• Community organizations 

• Schools; children and youth 

• Post-secondary students 

• Local businesses 

GORP volunteers 

touring 

Woodlands at 

Government 

House 

restoration site. 

Photo: Carolyn 

MacDonald 

Engaging the community in a restoration project may impact land management practices 

surrounding the site and within the community. The public, especially project volunteers and 

participants of landowner contact programs, may be engaged enough to change practices and 

increase stewardship surrounding the restoration project such as in private backyards, school 

grounds, church properties, and on municipal lands. There are excellent resources and programs 

available to support less formal efforts to conserve native species and habitats, especially on 

private lands, including the Naturescape BC program and GOERT’s Garry Oak Gardener’s 

Handbook (GOERT 2009). Landowner contact programs (see Section 6.4.5) can be a very 

successful way to engage and connect with the community. 

6.3.3 Bringing People Back into the Ecosystem 

Restoration is a social and cultural act, an interaction 

between humans and nature (Edgar 2007). 

There are both positive and negative implications of bringing people back into the ecosystem. On 

the positive side, the people involved will develop greater awareness and appreciation of Garry 

Oak ecosystems and will increase their understanding and knowledge of the ecosystems over 

time, which ideally will lead to increasingly positive actions in protecting and restoring Garry Oak 

ecosystems. 

As we seek to bring people back into the ecosystem and develop healthier relationships between 

humans and the land, we face of the challenge of trying to balance the impacts of increased 

human traffic and use with environmental preservation. Conserving culturally modified 

ecosystems infers that people should be part of the system. However, determining what the 

appropriate human-nature relationship should now be can be challenging. 



6-29


Lindon Carter with a Garry 

Oak Restoration Project 

sign in Playfair Park, 

Saanich. Photo: Ron Carter 

No matter how straightforward it appears to be, a restoration project is constructed by 

social norms. Sense of place, land tenure, sources of livelihood and traditions of community 

organizing all mediate the relationship between people and place (Edgar 2007). 

The Society for Ecological Restoration’s Guidelines for Developing and Managing Ecological 

Restoration Projects (Clewell et al. 2005) state that restoration planning should include cultural 

objectives that “pertain to the realization of cultural project goals. These objectives may involve 

publicity campaigns, public celebrations of restoration in progress, participation of stakeholders 

and school children in restoration implementation and monitoring, and other actions that ensure 

cultural intimacy with ecosystem recovery.” 

Restoration has a greater chance of success when a project is designed within a community 

context and in partnership with stakeholders, when it works to build stewardship of the site and 

within the community, when it seeks to rebuild cultural connections and practices, and when it 

takes on the delicate balance between maintaining ecological integrity and bringing people back 

into the ecosystem. 

6.4 Stewardship 

The real substance of conservation lies not in the physical projects of 

government, but in the mental processes of its citizens. (Aldo Leopold) 

There is a lack of consensus regarding definitions of environmental/ecological stewardship 

(Worrell and Appleby 2000; Fuchs 2004). Many definitions include elements of careful or 

responsible management, consideration of future generations, caring for natural systems, or 

consideration of cultural values and ethics. Stewardship is described as both an action and an 

ethic or value. Stewardship should be defined within restoration project planning so that its 

meaning and related objectives are clear. Establishing stewardship as an ethic within our society 

and local communities is an important overall goal in successfully protecting and restoring Garry 

Oak ecosystems. 

6-30 



Case Study 6. Mt. Tzuhalem Volunteer Stewardship 

Syd Watts first visited the Mount Tzuhalem Garry Oak area as a Scout in 1938, at age 11. As a 

teen in the 1940s, Syd spent many happy hours exploring on the slopes of Mount Tzuhalem. 

It is not surprising that the area was made an ecological reserve in 1984 after Syd spent years 

leading tours and talking to people about the unique site. By that time, he had also spent five years 

with his wife and naturalist friends (many from the Cowichan Valley Naturalists’ Society) clearing 

broom from the flower meadows he loved. Syd became the first (and so far only) warden for the 

ecological reserve. His work to spearhead broom removal since the late 1970s was taken over in 

2003 by crews funded through the Habitat Stewardship Program. The beautiful flower meadows of 

Mount Tzuhalem Ecological Reserve are a testament to the dedication of Syd Watts and his willing 

crew of stewards. 

CASE STUDY 

Since the 1970s, Syd Watts and the Cowichan Valley Naturalists’ Society have preserved this 

meadow, with its large population of Endangered Deltoid Balsamroot (Balsamorhiza deltoidea), 

from the ravages of Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) invasion. 


(Balsamorhiza deltoidea). 

Photos: Dave Polster 



6-31


The following are definitions of interest regarding stewardship: 

In its broadest sense, stewardship is the recognition of our collective responsibility 

to retain the quality and abundance of our land, air, water and biodiversity, and to 

manage this natural capital in a way that conserves all of its values, be they environmental, 

economic, social or cultural. (The Land Stewardship Centre of Canada, 

www. landstewardship.org) 

Efforts to creature, nurture, and enable responsibility in landowners and resource 

users to manage and protect land and its natural and cultural heritage. 

(Brown and Mitchell 2000) 

A few of the challenges in defining stewardship include the tendency for the term to imply 

dominion over the natural world, that actions regarded as stewardship are essentially good 

(when this may be open to interpretation) and may imply delivery of some type of public benefit 

(Worrell and Appleby 2000). These issues reinforce the need to define stewardship in relation to 

the specific goals and objectives of a restoration project and in relation to the goals and objectives 

of the Garry Oak and associated ecosystems Recovery Strategy (GOERT 2001). 

6.4.1 Building a Stewardship Ethic 

The Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team was formed to coordinate efforts to protect and 

restore endangered Garry Oak and associated ecosystems and the species at risk that inhabit 

them. Stewardship is an important element of successfully protecting and restoring Garry Oak 

ecosystems. In this context, stewardship would describe the human care, management, and value 

of Garry Oak ecosystems. Because these ecosystems are at risk primarily due to human activities, 

the mitigation of risk and the protection and restoration of these ecosystems will depend on the 

activities and values of people and society. 

We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. 

When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin 

to use it with love and respect. (Leopold 1949) 

The Cowichan Community Land Trust Society has worked to build stewardship ethics in the 

community, in part by connecting with people on the land. A report (Archibald et al 2005) of their 

landowner contact programs showed this direct contact with landowners changed land ethics 

significantly. Surveys of participants in landowner contact programs reported most significantly 

changes in attitudes about land stewardship, increased knowledge and understanding of land 

stewardship issues, and changes in environmental management practices (especially relating 

to wildlife habitat). Landowners were also more likely to join environmental and conservation 

organizations and contribute towards land acquisition campaigns (Archibald et al. 2005). See 

more on landowner contact programs in section 6.4.5. 

A Few Strategies to Build Stewardship 

with inspiration from Oregon State Parks, Centennial Horizon Principle 4 (2008) 

• Inspire people to make connections with Garry Oak ecosystems by involving them in 

restoration projects or inviting them to explore the beauty of your restoration site with you. 

6-32 



• Embrace new ways to reach out to people, exchange ideas, and engage them in stewardship. 

• Listen to people and what they are interested in; hear their stories. 

• Offer interpretive programs and make the Garry Oak restoration site come alive. 

• Promote regional and community approaches to stewardship, fostering a sense of place. 

• Encourage teachers and post-secondary students (and professors) to use the restoration site 

as a laboratory, and contribute to site monitoring and research (see Section 6.4.4). 

• Develop good volunteer programs that provide long-term stewardship and training 

opportunities (see Section 6.5). 

• Reach out to neighbours through Landowner Contact Programs (see Section 6.4.5). 

• Create partnerships for the restoration site to build community. 

6.4.2 Stewardship Challenges 

Many Garry Oak restoration projects have been initiated and their on-going success is due to the 

invaluable contributions of volunteers. “Volunteer stewardship programmes…have a critical role, 

not merely for the important habitats that are restored and monitored, but also for their influence 

in building a potentially powerful constituency of knowledgeable advocates for the environment” 

(Langenfeld 2009). Successful restoration projects aim to achieve a proper balance between 

stewardship and science. 

In her paper, Does Stewardship Work? Lessons from the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team, 

Fuchs (2004) identified concerns and limitations about the reliance on volunteer stewardship 

for Garry Oak ecosystem recovery and restoration efforts. While Fuchs acknowledged that 

volunteer stewardship is vital to Garry Oak ecosystem recovery, she cited a “lack of clarity about 

the relative importance of social vs. ecological goals and objectives”. Challenges occur when 

restoration projects rely primarily on non-expert volunteers for site assessment, identification of 

rare species, development of scientifically-based management strategies, long-term commitment, 

and “scientifically meaningful monitoring.” Fuchs advocates for identifying appropriate roles 

in recovery efforts and finding methods and tools to “bridge the gap between science and 

stewardship”. 

Fuchs (2004) described two-thirds or more species at risk in Garry Oak ecosystems as being 

“cryptic and/or extremely difficult to identify in the field”, and requiring identification by 

taxonomic experts. Because many of these species are extremely rare, the “consequences of 

inappropriate actions are potentially extremely serious”. Fuchs advocates for the use of “experts to 

conduct inventories, design site and species specific management strategies”, and she stresses that 

“research and rigorous monitoring are key components of the recovery program.” 

Science should inform stewardship practice by helping define ecological goals and 

objectives, and by helping identify appropriate and effective actions to meet those goals 

(Fuchs 2004). 

Fuchs (2004) identified concerns about public involvement in Garry Oak ecosystem restoration: 

volunteer participation “[drops] off after the large exotic shrubs have been removed”, and there 

is a lack of interest in cryptic, non-showy species, a reluctance to undertake key elements of 

restoration planning, and a lack of “resources, expertise, or interest to institute scientifically 

meaningful monitoring programs.” 



6-33


Case Study 7. City of Victoria: Volunteer Groups 

Banding Together 

In the City of Victoria, eleven community volunteer groups have taken an interest in their local 

parks and green spaces. Some of the key parks include the Garry Oak ecosystem sites of Beacon 

Hill and Summit Park. Others, such as the Ryan Greenway, may provide important stepping 

stones between the larger remnant sites. The City does not have a formal volunteer program as 

there is no agreement with the union for this, so City support is generally limited to an advisory 

role, supply of materials including soil and mulch, and removal of debris. These eleven groups 

are invited to meet monthly at the City’s training room to share experiences and for training. The 

meeting is facilitated by the City of Victoria and training is provided by request. These groups have 

now formed a loose, larger organization called the Native Ecosystems in Victoria Public Areas 

Network (www.nevpan.org). Working together, their intention is to create a more cohesive voice 

in addressing city council and staff over parks and natural areas issues. They are exploring the 

possibility of becoming a non-profit society with the intention of applying for environmental grants 

that are open to such groups. 

CASE STUDY 

Volunteers at Beacon Hill Park. 

Photo: City of Victoria 

6-34 



In her Master’s thesis The Value of Ecological Restoration Volunteer Programs: a Case Study 

in Western Washington State, Langenfeld (2009) found limitations in the use of volunteers in 

restoration programs. In her case study of Garry Oak prairie restoration in Washington State, she 

found that the rate of volunteer “turnover and burnout” and conflicts between volunteers and 

managers regarding “visions of restoration goals” had negative effects on restoration programs. 

Langenfeld (2009) stated that these limitations can be addressed through proactive volunteer 

management and specific methods, and that investing in highly effective volunteer programs was 

essential to accomplishing restoration goals. 

Ryan et al. (2001) showed that an important element in building a strong program that involves 

volunteers was to retain long-term volunteers by responding to their motivations as volunteers. 

One of their key findings was that volunteer involvement resulted in “transform[ing] the way 

that people view the natural environment and environmental issues” (Ryan et al 2001), which 

illustrates the importance of volunteer programs to stewardship and environmental education 

goals. 

Langenfeld (2009) found that the longer volunteers are involved in a program, the more 

specialized their roles become and the more vital they are to the success of the restoration 

program. Volunteers with the South Sound Prairie Restoration Group moved from initial roles 

in invasive plant removal, seed collection, native planting, placement of habitat structures, 

and educational outreach to leadership roles and roles requiring ecological knowledge and 

specialized training, including mechanical and chemical alien invasive plant control, propagation 

of native plants, and ecological monitoring. Langenfeld states that maintaining staff and expert 

roles, as described by Fuchs (2004), is essential to consistently “bridge the gap between science 

and stewardship”, but that volunteers provide invaluable contributions to the science of this 

restoration program. 

These individuals [volunteers] hold an invaluable amount of localized knowledge 

sometimes not held by anyone else. Skillful contributions...are by far some of the greatest 

advantages to long-term investment in volunteers. (Langenfeld 2009). 

Woodlands at Government 

House volunteer leader 

Patricia Boyle giving a 

tour for GORP volunteers. 




6-35


6.4.3 Community-based Restoration 

Many restoration projects begin with or depend on grassroots community efforts. Stewardship as 

a community effort can be very powerful and effective. It is doubtful that Garry Oak ecosystems 

will recover without community-based efforts and initiatives. Fortunately, many of the challenges 

associated with this approach can be overcome with the support, resources, and tools now available 

to community-led projects. The following is a summary of some of the unique initiatives and tools 

available for community stewardship and restoration projects. 

Tips for Starting a Project 

The following is adapted in part from the Citizen’s Handbook (www.vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook) 

and Community Stewardship: a Guide to Establishing Your Own Group (Fraser Basin Management 

Board 1996). The Community Stewardship guide and many other excellent resources for 

community-based projects are available through the Stewardship Centre of BC 

(www.stewardshipcentre.bc.ca). 

Before starting a project, consider the following: 

• Research your proposed site and project before jumping in. 

• Is there an existing project or organization to address this? 

• Is there community support for this project? 

• Who can help? 

When starting a community-based project, ask yourself the following questions: 

• What are we trying to do? 

• What are your goal(s) and objectives? (Strategize) 

• Who is able to provide support? 

• Are there groups to partner with? 

• What skills/people do we need? 

During restoration project planning, consider the following: 

• Be clear regarding land ownership and establish official permission for the project. 

• If the site is a park, work with land managers throughout the project stages. 

• A good site assessment is an important place to start. 

• If species at risk occur on the site, engage experts and GOERT in the project. 

• Create an adaptive restoration plan with help from this publication. 

• Strategize how to build support and resources for this long-term endeavour. 

• Engage the community and celebrate! 

Community-based Projects 

There are many great tools available to support community-based restoration projects. The 

following are a few examples. Successful projects can take advantage of these existing tools and 

programs to reach their goals. 

6-36 



Case Study 8. Strawberry Vale Elementary: Engaging 

Elementary Students in Restoration and Stewardship 

Strawberry Vale Elementary School in Victoria has a strong history of environmental 

stewardship thanks to dedicated teachers. The school community has engaged in a few 

restoration-type projects including stewardship of a heavily invaded Garry Oak ecosystem 

remnant on municipal land next to the school. In 2003-2004, students in grades 6 and 7 not only led 

a school-wide effort to remove English Ivy (Hedera helix) from this Garry Oak area, but also designed 

a costumed skit they performed for each class in the school. The skit was an engaging way to 

introduce Garry Oaks, the concept of an invasive species, and conservation messages. Strawberry 

Vale leaders went beyond student involvement, reaching out to families, the community, and 

partners in order to achieve their goals. With assistance from the District of Saanich, the Habitat 

Acquisition Trust (HAT), and others, the school undertook this restoration project not only for the 

restoration value, but also for the educational and stewardship values for the whole community. 

CASE STUDY 

Strawberry Vale students with 

the sign for their restoration 

project, which began as a legacy 

project for students in grades 

6 and 7. The older students 

provided leadership and gave 

presentations to the younger 

students, including skits. Photo: 

Ron Carter 

Case Study 9. Swan Lake Christmas Hill Nature Sanctuary: 

Engaging Secondary School Students 

Nature sanctuary staff designed a project that would be interesting and manageable to 

engage local Reynolds Secondary students. A program was designed to teach the students 

about the role of fire in Garry Oak ecosystems, to introduce them to plot monitoring, and 

to engage them in active participation. In return, the nature sanctuary received valuable monitoring 

information about a burn site on Christmas Hill. The initial participants from Reynolds school were six 

grade 10 students, expanding to on-going plot monitoring for future students. The program teaches 

the students about mapping, using binoculars, taking samples, and learning to identify invasive and 

native plants. It was made to be highly engaging and fun. The wrap-up for a field session is usually 

wild tea made on the spot with natural ingredients like licorice root and arbutus bark. 





Community Mapping has been a very successful endeavour for empowering community groups 

in British Columbia. Identifying unique features of the community and building a sense of place 

can be a powerful way of building awareness and beginning community dialogues. See Section 

6.8 (Additional Resources) for Giving the Land a Voice: Mapping Our Home Places (Abbedey et al. 

1995). 

Conservation Networks can provide vital support for individual organizations or projects. For 

example, in the Capital Regional District (CRD), Habitat Acquisition Trust maintains a webbased 

network (www.conservationconnection.bc.ca), holds an annual Conservation Connection 

event (see their website at www.hat.bc.ca), and oversees a conservation listserv. There is also 

an ecoregional group, the Cascadia Prairie-Oak Partnership, which hosts a listserv focused on 

exchange of information related to conservation of prairie-oak ecosystems throughout their range 

west of the Cascade Mountains. The listserv is used to exchange technical information and to 

announce events related to prairies and oak woodlands in Cascadia. To subscribe, send a request 

to info@goert.ca. 

Networks can be a great way to find partner organizations, avoid project overlaps, build support 

and constituency for your project, communicate your needs and events, learn from others and, 

well … network! 

For more information and resources, see the following websites: 

• Stewardship Centre of BC (www.stewardshipcentre.bc.ca) 

• Citizen Handbook (www.vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook) 

• Community-based ecosystem monitoring 

(www.forrex.org/publications/forrex%20series/fs13.pdf) 

6.4.4 Youth and Stewardship 

Restoring Garry Oak ecosystems creates a legacy in both the physical and cultural landscape. 

Therefore, it makes sense to involve youth in restoration as much possible. Restoration projects 

provide unique opportunities for connecting youth with stewardship of Garry Oak ecosystems, 

thereby providing them with hands-on experiences, ecological literary, stewardship ethics, and 

skills training for future careers. 

• The Salt Spring Island (SSI) Conservancy has a school program called Stewards in Training 

for students in Grades 1 to 8. The Garry Oak Ecosystem Stewardship sessions take place at 

the Andreas Vogt Nature Reserve and at Channel Ridge. These are hands-on environmental 

education programs with an action component that contributes to ecological restoration 

activities at the site. 

• The SSI Conservancy Stewards in Training Program Manual describes the benefits of the 

program for the student participants. It also provides a fitting summary of the overall benefits 

of involving children and youth in stewardship and restoration. For example, students 

develop: 

-a connection to the natural world 

-an ecological understanding 

-a set of environmental ethics 

6-38 



Case Study 10. Girl Guides of Canada: Uplands Park 

Stewardship Project 

Since 1993, the Oak Bay Girl Guide groups have been stewards of Uplands Park, along with 

other partners including Scouts, other Girl Guides and school groups. The Girl Guides and their 

partners have targeted their contribution towards the restoration of Uplands Park on longterm 

removal of Scotch Broom (Cystisis scoparius). They not only have been successful in removing 

massive amounts of Scotch Broom in this time, but also have created a great deal of attention for 

the site through involving the media with the draw of what the young people are accomplishing. 

Leaders report the project has had a great impact on the children and youth involved, including 

building a connection with Garry Oak ecosystems and giving them a sense of empowerment. After 

17 years of leading the Oak Bay Girl Guides as Uplands Park stewards, Margaret Lidkea has begun 

working with the local Glenlyon-Norfolk Middle School removing English Ivy (Hedera helix) and 

Spurge-laurel (Daphne laureola), tying stewardship action projects in with the B.C. curriculum. The 

Guides and other young people have much to gain from active participation in this project. Aside 

from becoming stewards of Garry Oak ecosystems, they are participating in healthy activity, gaining 

confidence, increasing social skills, and developing their sense of place. 

CASE STUDY 

Girl Guides of Canada have 

removed massive amounts of 

Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) 

from Uplands Park since 1993. 

Photos: Margaret Lidkea 



6-39


Case Study 11. University Undergraduate Involvement in 

Restoration: Trinity Western University Crow’s Nest Ecological 

Research Area 

by David R. Clements 

CASE STUDY 

Every spring, several students are hired by Trinity Western University to serve as restoration 

practitioners and researchers on Trinity Western University Crow’s Nest Ecological Research 

Area (CNERA) on Salt Spring Island. Projects range from inventory and monitoring, to 

invasive species control, to involvement in Trinity Western faculty research projects. Many students 

end up completing an undergraduate thesis project related to Garry Oak ecosystem restoration. 

Recent research areas have included evaluating growth rings on Douglas-fir (Psuedotsuga menziesii) 

and Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) trees, biology of the Propertius Duskywing (Erynnis propertius) 

butterfly, lichens as indicators of Garry Oak ecosystem health, impacts of Scotch Broom, impacts 

of herbivory, impact of herbivores on Garry Oak tree growth, spatial studies of Garry Oak meadow 

boundaries, and the chemical ecology of invasive Sweet Vernalgrass (Anthoxanthum odoratum). 

The students also do work on nearby sites on Salt Spring Island. 

The camp at CNERA has three cabins to house students and researchers, as well as a cook shelter, 

a composting toilet, and a storage shed. Every other year, Trinity Western University faculty also 

lead a set of travel study courses in plant ecology and marine biology on Salt Spring Island. The 

plant ecology course makes extensive use of CNERA, and students learn restoration techniques 

in the process, including practical experience in invasive species removal. Students working at 

CNERA also work with other groups involved in Garry Oak restoration such as the Salt Spring Island 

Conservancy. The exposure students get to Garry Oak restoration through these experiences is 

valuable for developing their awareness of the many restoration ecology issues surrounding Garry 

Oak ecosystems, which they can go on to apply either within this system or other ecosystems. 

One alumnus of the plant ecology and marine biology courses has arranged field trips to the site 

with his elementary school class, thus passing on his experiences to the next generation. For more 

information on CNERA, see the website: www.twu.ca/sites/crowsnest. 

David Clements is Professor of Biology & Environmental Studies at Trinity Western University, 

Langley, B.C. 

Trinity Western 

University students 

hard at work 

removing invasive 

plants. Photos: 

Trinity Western 

University 

6-40 



-a sense of place 

-a set of hands‐on and observational skills 

-an understanding of stewardship of the natural world 

-a sense of self 

(Bateman and McEwan 2009) 

• Environmental education goals are summarized well in Leap into Action (Staniforth 2004): 

Environmental education includes three critical components: developing 

awareness of, and appreciation for, the environment; developing knowledge 

and understanding of environmental, social, and economic systems; and 

creating potential and capacity for appropriate actions. 

• Garry Oak Ecosystems of British Columbia: An Educator’s Guide. In 2005, a team of Garry 

Oak ecosystem conservation partners completed a manual to support formal and non-formal 

educators in connecting youth with Garry Oak ecosystems (MacDonald and Staniforth 

2005). The manual used B.C.’s curriculum guidelines in order to be a recommended resource 

for teachers. It provides background information on Garry Oak ecosystems and includes 

environmental education activities around Garry Oak ecosystems and supporting appendices. 

The manual and hands-on workshops are available through Wild BC (www.wildbc.org) of the 

Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation. 

Youth Programs: Schools 

Many schools and teachers have been interested in Garry 

Oak ecosystem restoration and stewardship on their school 

grounds. Projects have included invasive species management, 

planting of native plants, mulching over non-native grasses, and 

educational signage. Some schools have used the Educator’s 

Guide (above) to continue connecting students with their school 

ground stewardship area while achieving curriculum learning 

outcomes. 

One of the challenges of school ground restoration projects is 

long-term sustainability. Teachers may be too busy or schools 

may be challenged to keep the project going from year to year. 

There are organizations, such as Habitat Acquisition Trust in 

Victoria (www.hat.bc.ca) and Evergreen (www.evergreen.ca), 

that provide support and help schools keep projects moving 

forward. 

While some ambitious schools and teachers have taken on 

restoration projects on their own properties (or adjacent ones), 

others have joined in as partners on a nearby restoration site. Participating in existing projects 

can be an excellent way for students to participate in restoration, learn valuable skills, and become 

stewards of a project that may be led by local experts and agencies or conservation groups. 

Many teachers have also used specialized educational opportunities within restoration sites to 

contribute to curriculum outcomes. 



6-41


Restoration projects that provide programs for schools may want to consider using the following 

elements to engage this specialized audience: 

• pre-trip information and warm up activities 

• classroom visits* before the field component is undertaken 

• specialized curriculum for specific grades 

• age-appropriate approaches 

• interactive, hands-on involvement as much as possible 

• post-trip follow-up 

• information to pass on to families through the students 

*Note: classroom visits prior to the field component can be valuable to prepare students with some 

basic awareness and knowledge, expectations for the field session, and build enthusiasm for their 

participation in the project. 

Youth Programs: Community Groups 

Many restoration projects have benefitted from volunteer efforts and stewardship activities 

of community youth organizations, such as Scouts, Guides, church youth groups, and young 

naturalist clubs. Some groups have environmental stewardship in their mandate, many can 

provide on-going stewardship and participation from year to year, and some may even be able to 

contribute other resources. Some of the considerations described above for working with school 

groups will also apply to youth community groups. Leaders of youth groups may even have the 

skills and willingness to take on a specific on-going role in the restoration project. 

Youth Programs: Families 

Involving families, especially neighbours of the site, can provide a wonderful stewardship 

opportunity. If a restoration project is going to include volunteers of different ages, some thought 

must be given to the types of safety issues, supervision, and activities that are appropriate for 

engagement. For more information on some of these volunteer considerations, see Section 6.5. 

Beyond Youth: Post-Secondary Programs 

Garry Oak restoration projects often benefit from the involvement of post-secondary students 

(of all ages) who may have special skills to contribute, are looking for training and experience in 

their chosen field, and enjoy the networking and social aspects of volunteering. These volunteers 

are potential future leaders in the field of ecological restoration (or related fields). Engaging postsecondary 

volunteers can also help train potential future staff for the project. 

6.4.5 Landowner Contact Programs 

Landholder contact (LHC) has become a popular environmental tool in British Columbia 

and elsewhere. In LHC programs, representatives of an environmental organization or 

agency visit… landholders for the purpose of encouraging improved land stewardship. This 

may take the form of environmental education, assistance with restoration, facilitation 

of contact with stewardship resources, non-binding stewardship pledges, voluntary land 

management plans, legally binding management agreements, or conservation covenants 

(easements) (Lawrance et al. 2000). 

6-42 



Essential elements of landowner contact 

• Planning 

• Program coordination to reduce multiple contacts by other organizations 

• Professional, knowledgeable staff or volunteers 

• Outreach products 

• Promotion 

• Public involvement/community support 

• Tracking of landowner contact data, site information 

• Information/data sharing (if landholders permit) 

• Follow up 

• Thanks and recognition 

• Evaluation 

Landowner contact (LOC) or landholder contact programs involve direct communication with 

property owners or managers by representatives of conservation organizations, recovery teams, 

or government agencies for the purpose of increased wildlife and habitat protection. This may be 

achieved through land stewardship, informal land management plans and stewardship pledges, 

legally binding management agreements, conservation covenants (easements), tax incentives, 

the federal Ecological Gifts program, or similar means. Comprehensive LOC/LHC programs 

may include letters, phone calls, leaflet drops, public presentations or workshops, and/or door 

knocking campaigns to initiate contacts; distribution of written materials, environmental 

education, and facilitation of stewardship funding and other resources; property visits, biological 

inventories; assistance with stewardship or restoration plans and activities; follow-up monitoring; 

and further assistance as required. 

Good landowner contact programs produce some or all of the following benefits: 

• greater understanding and appreciation by landholders of the significance of habitat and 

species on their property 

• improved cooperation among landholders, recovery teams, non-government organizations, 

and government agencies, and increased participation of stakeholders in the recovery 

planning process 

• better land use decisions and improved land stewardship/restoration practices 

• reduced harm, more protection, and recovery of endangered species and ecosystems 



6-43


Case Study 12. Sharp-tailed Snake Recovery Project: 

Pender Island’s Local Champion 

The Sharp-tailed Snake (Contia tenuis) is a small, Endangered, Red-listed, elusive snake that 

occurs in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems and has been the target of outreach efforts 

throughout the CRD. On Pender Islands, Habitat Acquisition Trust (based on Vancouver 

Island) and the Pender Islands Conservation Association (PICA) collaborated on this outreach 

program. 

CASE STUDY 

In the spring of 2005, biologist Christian Engelstoft gave a public talk on Pender Island about the 

Sharp-tailed Snake’s biology and identification. After his presentation he was approached by local 

naturalist David Manning, who handed him a bag with a dead snake he had found that week. He 

thought that it might be a Sharp-tailed Snake but wanted it confirmed. To Christian’s surprise, it was 

the elusive Sharp-tailed Snake. Together, they visited the site where he had found the snake and it 

became clear that David would be a good person to involve in the Pender Island outreach program. 

From years of hiking the islands, and his involvement with eagle nest monitoring, David knew the 

landscape, and he was well-known and well-thought-of in the community. Thanks to his gentle 

and immediately likeable personality, he opened many doors in the community and the outreach 

program took off. 

One of the outreach goals of this project was to encourage landowners to sign a land-care 

agreement. In other areas in the CRD, the Sharp-tailed Snake outreach project was successful 

in signing agreements with about 50% of visited landowners. On Pender Island, with this local 

champion, David bumped it to 99%. This is a great example of the benefits of engaging wellconnected 

local stewards. 


(Contia tenuis). 

Photo: Christian 

Engelstoft 

6-44 



Landowner contact considerations 

• Have landowners previously received land care information? 

• Are they interested in the topic? 

• What is their level of education and/or experience? 

• Are they physically and financially able to do stewardship? Do they need assistance? 

• How long have they owned their land? 

• Evaluation 

Best Practices for Landowner Contact Programs 

Based on Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP) Landowner Contact evaluation report (Kilburn & 

Passmore 2009) 

Who Should You Contact? 

With the vast array of communications tools available it is possible to reach all landowners within 

a designated area, but time and resource restrictions usually limit the number of landowners that 

an organization can effectively engage. It is usually best to focus on a subset of landowners. 

What is the best way to select contact groups? Some organizations use a geographic or bio-centric 

approach. Their programs concentrate on property owners adjacent to parks or other important 

habitat areas. GOERT’s program focuses mainly on landholders of properties that have or are 

likely to have species at risk occurrences, and/or other prominent ecological values. 

Another approach that has proven to be highly successful is to identify local champions to 

promote your program—the “early adopters” and highly motivated individuals in a community. 

These leaders are often willing to take independent action after initial guidance and then promote 

their stewardship initiatives to friends and neighbours. They are often able to use their reputation 

and networking skills to achieve greater rates of landowner engagement. However, research also 

shows the merit of investing time and resources in developing high-quality workshops and other 

programs for the remaining landowners. 

Effective Methods for Contacting and Engaging Landowners 

The most successful landholder contact programs employ a combination of communication 

and engagement methods in a multi-step process. Wide-reaching communication tools, such 

as media campaigns, posters, pamphlets, and letters can introduce a contact program and raise 

awareness. Workshops and community events provide opportunities for small groups of property 

owners and their neighbours to receive in-depth information about habitat stewardship best 

practices. These approaches can lead to personal, direct contact with landowners at a later date. 

One of the most important aspects of landholder contact work is developing and maintaining 

strong interpersonal relationships with landowners. It is critical to employ contact personnel 

who have exceptional interpersonal skills as well as biological knowledge. To maintain landowner 



6-45


contact consistency, it is ideal to retain one core staff person who will work with landowners over 

multiple years. 

Successful landowner contact programs provide regular, consistent contact that is tailored to 

individual needs and communication preferences. Even a six-month break in contact can be 

enough for landowners to lose interest. If regular, direct contact cannot be achieved, you can try 

to maintain contact by inviting landowners to events or send them educational materials and 

newsletters. Repeated contact promotes strong interpersonal relationships—which is the key to 

securing landowner participation in habitat stewardship initiatives. See HAT’s Good Neighbours 

Program (Case Study 3). 

Best Practices for Building Strong Relationships with Landowners 

• Let the landowner take the lead 

• Work on their time frame 

• Start small and build gradually 

• Respect confidentiality and privacy 

• Be warm, friendly, sincere, professional, and respectful 

• Use tact, diplomacy, sensitivity, and patience 

• Find shared interests to build rapport 

• Be an active listener 

• Address questions and concerns promptly 

• Be knowledgeable 

• Present information in a non-judgmental way 

• Use appropriate humour 

• Quickly follow up contact with promised support 

Motivating Landowners to Practice Stewardship 

The most effective way to motivate landowners to practice land stewardship is to visit them on 

their property and point out the significant natural features on their land. This is especially true 

if the site visits are conducted by species at risk experts and knowledgeable staff or volunteers 

who can address the landowners’ questions and concerns, identify species, point out threats, and 

discuss mitigation or restoration strategies. 

The best way to engage landowners is to talk about their interests, then promote habitat 

enhancement work that ties in with their interests. For example, many people are avid gardeners 

or enjoy watching birds and butterflies, so promoting Naturescaping with native plants can be a 

good first step towards land stewardship. Encouraging landowners to help professional biologists 

survey and monitor species at risk populations is another effective engagement tool. 

The federal Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP) Landowner Contact Evaluation Report (2009) 

identifies other motivators for landowners: 

Some landowners are motivated by their belief in the intrinsic value of conserving 

biodiversity. Other landowners are more motivated to conserve certain habitats and species, 

usually with a focus on high profile “charismatic mega-fauna”. LOC programs that highlight 

6-46 



Case Study 13. Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT): 

Working With Landholders to Protect Species at Risk 

by Chris Junck 

CASE STUDY 

The Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team’s outreach program is guided by a comprehensive 

recovery strategy that aims to protect and restore Garry Oak ecosystems and their associated 

species at risk (SAR). The landholder contact program component is directed towards a 

diverse range of target audiences, some of which are often overlooked in other landowner contact 

programs. A variety of outreach approaches is used for three main audience groups: 

First Nations and Local Government Land Managers and Planners 

• meetings, seminars, and field workshops 

• distribution of species at risk (SAR) occurrence data and maps, reports, and other relevant 

outreach materials and information 

• provide input into development plans, land-use bylaws, official community plans 

Development Industry 

• provide information about Garry Oak ecosystems and SAR 

• provide information about habitat and SAR protection measures 

• provide technical advice and input into development plans 

• participate in the development planning process 

Private, Corporate, Industrial, and Institutional Landowners and Managers; 

Conservation Organizations 

• letters, pamphlet drops, phone calls 

• site visits and SAR inventories 

• follow-up consultations to provide SAR inventory reports and maps and develop restoration 

plans and stewardship activities 

• restoration signs 

• stewardship agreements 

• formal protection measures 

Although these outreach initiatives are generally well-received, there are often challenges that 

need to be addressed: 

• too few SAR experts available for plant inventories, workshops, and advice 

• difficulty of building trust with landholders, especially when they are concerned about the 

possible implications of having SAR on their property 

• balancing overall program objectives with the objectives and timelines of funding agencies. For 

example, the Recovery Team often contacts landowners on behalf of the federal government to 

secure permission to access properties for SAR assessments and critical habitat delineation, or 



6-47


GOERT staff Shyanne 

Smith and Chris Junck with 

landowner Rod Mitchell. 

Mitchell participates in 

restoration for species at risk 

on his land. Photo: GOERT 

CASE STUDY 

to provide assistance for the Species At Risk Act consultation process. This often happens with 

tight deadlines and there isn’t always enough time to build rapport before delivering all of the 

required consultation messages, requesting permission for property access and data sharing. 

Evaluation 

GOERT uses several methods to evaluate the success of landowner contact: 

• tracking all landowner contact sessions and outcomes. 

• local government seminars and workshops—questionnaires, follow-up telephone interview 

with some of the managers approximately 6 months after the program to see how many SAR 

harm reduction strategies were or are planned to be implemented. 

• GOERT has participated in a comprehensive evaluation of landholder contact programs 

conducted by Environment Canada, which included qualitative and quantitative evaluations 

(including a questionnaire and telephone interviews of landowners involved in contact 

programs), and a follow-up workshop with organizations engaged in LOC programs. 

Chris Junck is the Species at Risk Outreach Specialist with GOERT. 

6-48 



the protection of at least one charismatic ‘flagship’ species are more likely to achieve broad 

public support. The Land Conservancy of B.C. works in bighorn sheep habitat, and although 

this species is not federally listed, it is an excellent flagship species for the program as it is a 

highly valued component of the ecosystem. Protecting this species in turn contributes to the 

protection of other SARA-listed species that occupy similar habitat. Once landowners are 

engaged, introducing less charismatic species to the program forefront is easier. 

HSP recipients also recommended that landowners be publicly recognized and appreciated 

for their efforts and commitments to stewardship. Public recognition schemes where 

landowners are honoured for their stewardship activities are known to help build crucial 

community support and to maintain and build landowner motivation. Community-based 

social marketing advocates also note the importance of employing an appreciation and 

recognition scheme as a component of maintaining dedication to new behaviours and 

actions. 

Securing Habitat Through Non-Binding Stewardship Agreements 

Written and verbal stewardship agreements have been very effective tools for habitat protection 

and restoration projects. While these voluntary stewardship agreements do not guarantee 

permanent preservation, they are a good starting point for raising awareness and promoting 

sustainable land management practices. These protection measures are not legally binding, so 

there is no sacrifice in property value, legal fees, land survey costs, or other expenses associated 

with conservation covenants or other legal agreements. Landowners can focus on stewardship 

instead of financial trade-offs and the potential for lost market value. Legally binding habitat 

protection is generally easier to achieve once landowners have a greater understanding of the 

importance of habitat protection, and of the financial benefits associated with legally binding 

agreements. 

Investing in the Future 

Planning and carrying out a comprehensive landowner contact program requires a multiyear 

commitment of time and resources. Carefully managed landowner contact programs 

provide many benefits for conservation organizations and restoration programs. Building and 

maintaining long-term working relationships with property owners and land managers can yield 

better restoration results, greater protection of habitats and species at risk and more support for 

an organization’s programs. 

6.5 Volunteer Programs 

Volunteers are often essential to creating successful ecological restoration programs. Volunteer 

programs may achieve some of the project’s education and outreach goals and build stewardship 

for the site. Volunteer programs range from informal to formal, engage volunteers occasionally 

to regularly, and provide simple to varied types of volunteer opportunities. Positive volunteer 

experiences keep volunteers coming back, and successful programs provide valuable support, 

resources, and labour for restoration projects. 

This section provides information, resources, and considerations for volunteer programs in Garry 

Oak ecosystem restoration. 



6-49


Case Study 14. Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site: 

Volunteers Help Control Invasive Species 

Invasive species removal can be a large and daunting task requiring the commitment of many 

years of management. At Fort Rodd Hill and Fisgard Lighthouse National Historic Sites of Canada 

in Colwood, B.C., volunteer efforts to control species such as Scotch Broom and Spurge-laurel 

have been ongoing since 2003, when Parks Canada adopted a volunteer program to assist in 

invasive species removal. Recently, co-op students working for Fort Rodd Hill have managed the 

program; their work includes organizing the program, advertising, and supervision of volunteers. 

The goals of the volunteer program are (1) to raise public awareness of invasive species, (2) to 

educate the public on ecosystem restoration, invasive species removal techniques, and on the value 

of rare Garry Oak and associated ecosystems at the site, and (3) to provide invaluable volunteer 

labour for invasive species removal. Each of the three objectives is considered of equal importance. 

CASE STUDY 

The volunteer program at Fort Rodd Hill encourages volunteer groups from a broad range of ages 

and abilities, with the understanding that removal of large quantities of invasive species is not the 

singular goal of the program. Volunteer education and experience builds long-term stewardship 

ethics and behaviour. Volunteers become increasingly skilled each time they attend an invasive 

species removal day, removing greater quantities of invasive plants with increased care. By 

providing positive volunteer experiences, the Fort Rodd Hill program encourages volunteers to 

return again and again. 

Parks Canada Species at Risk 

Recovery Planner Conan Webb 

leads a tour at Fort Rodd Hill 

National Historic Site. Photo: 


6-50 



Case Study 15. Swan Lake Christmas Hill Nature Sanctuary’s 

Formal Volunteer Program 

In Victoria, this non-governmental organization (NGO) operating a nature sanctuary on public 

lands has a long-established formal volunteer program with a staff Coordinator of Volunteers. 

While there are different types of volunteer positions, many volunteers are involved in the Garry 

Oak native plant garden and restoration in natural areas of the sanctuary. With a shortage of staff, 

volunteers play a vital role in achieving restoration and native garden goals. All volunteers are 

formally registered, work in supervised teams, and receive good training. The volunteer program 

also includes youth and adults from correctional programs. One important restoration project that 

volunteers are assisting with is a burn site in the Garry Oak rock outcrops on Christmas Hill. Site 

Manager June Pretzer notes that the burn site is at an exciting stage with all the invasive Orchardgrass 

(Dactylis glomerata) now eliminated and the Hairy Cat’s-Ear (Hypochaeris radicata) under 

control. In 2009, volunteers at the sanctuary contributed about 10,000 hours of work. 

CASE STUDY 

Volunteers removing 

invasive plants at Swan 

Lake Christmas Hill Nature 

Sanctuary. Photo: June 

Pretzer 



6-51


Volunteer work party at 

Little Mount Douglas in 

Saanich. Recent studies show 

that Canadian volunteers 

are increasingly seeking 

opportunities for flexible 

work that incorporates 

socialization and fitness. 

Photo: District of Saanich 

6.5.1 Volunteers in Restoration Projects 

Many Garry Oak restoration projects in Canada depend on volunteers, and many projects are 

coordinated by volunteer stewardship groups. Successful restoration projects often depend on 

restoration practitioners who can carefully plan and encourage long-term committed volunteer 

involvement. While the benefits of working with volunteers in restoration projects are many, there 

are also complications that must be considered. 

Recent Canadian trends show that volunteers increasingly seek out the types of experience that 

Garry Oak restoration projects can offer: meaningful, flexible work that incorporates socialization 

and fitness (Volunteer Canada 2007). Restoration projects offer very visible, tangible results for 

volunteers to experience in their neighbourhoods. Keeping the project messages positive and 

offering hands-on involvement are strong features that attract volunteers. 

There are many benefits to including volunteers in restoration projects. Some of the key benefits 

are: 

• providing “people power” and enthusiasm 

• bringing community connections to the project 

• providing broader perspectives and ideas 

• accessing diverse abilities and skills 

• increasing funding opportunities 

• enabling messages to reach wider audiences 

Along with the benefits of volunteers, there are also important implications and requirements 

involved in running volunteer programs. The following should be considered in the planning 

stages: 

• increased cost, depending on the size and format of the program 

• increased time to organize and supervise volunteers 

6-52 



• development of risk management procedures 

• development of volunteer management procedures (such as intake) 

• provision of training and services needed by volunteers 

• processes for addressing volunteer issues and problem solving 

The experiences that Canadian volunteers seek are changing. Recent trends tracked by Volunteer 

Canada (2007) show that volunteers wish to be involved in short-term projects that allow them 

to interact with family and friends. They want to make a real difference on projects that matter 

to them. They want to register and serve as volunteers in a quick and flexible manner. Volunteers 

also want to learn and use new skills. Increasingly, Canadians are seeking out volunteer 

opportunities with environmental projects. Remaining aware of changing trends in volunteerism 

will help restoration practitioners tailor their volunteer programs so that the success of their 

projects is enhanced. 

6.5.2 Developing a Volunteer Program 

Whether a volunteer program is formal or informal, or led by the community, an agency, or 

organization, it is wise to give consideration to minimum organizational standards: 

• volunteer position (or role) descriptions 

• policy development to address issues such as risk management 

• volunteer intake procedures that are clear and efficient 

• training for volunteers (and staff who work with them) 

• volunteer recognition 

Informal Programs 

Some volunteer programs spontaneously spring up in communities as like-minded people 

organize themselves to achieve a common goal. For example, neighbours may start removing 

invasive plants and start a larger effort to restore a local park. Informal volunteer programs can 

move rapidly and be very successful. They may also eventually have some challenges to work 

through in regards to organization, resources, and long-term commitment. 

In Section 6.4.3, community-based restoration projects are described along with tips specific to 

community based restoration projects, resources, and case studies. 

Informal volunteer programs should still have: 

• a key contact or coordinator 

• a system to organize volunteer information 

• waivers as required 

• basic equipment (safety vests, gloves, first aid kit) 

• a safety policy or agreement 

• an agreement about project guidelines (e.g., how the work will be done, restrictions, public 

communication) 



6-53


Formal Programs 

Formal volunteer programs are often coordinated by a government agency or an established 

organization. They have a coordinator, policies and procedures for volunteer involvement, 

volunteer positions, and a management system for volunteer information, and may provide 

insurance and other benefits for volunteers. Often, formal programs have set intake procedures 

and may do some level of screening for appropriate volunteers. Whether the resources are 

available to create a formal program or not, aspects of these programs can be successfully 

implemented by almost all restoration projects that include volunteers. 

6.5.3 Essential Elements of Volunteer Programs 

Policies and Procedures 

Depending on the project, policies and procedures may outline how and when work is conducted, 

what safety procedures are required, what training is required, and what types of communication 

policies are needed. Policies regarding volunteers may include requirements for the following: 

• attending an orientation session before participation (or within a time period) 

• training for different types of volunteer jobs 

• obtaining criminal record checks 

• addressing appropriate on-site conduct 

• developing effective communication methods (e.g., who to contact for 

difference situations) 

• developing public communication policies (e.g., media interview 

procedures, basic public outreach messages) 

Spending time in developing these policies will help your organization 

communicate clearly with volunteers, avoid conflicts or misunderstandings, 

and smoothly integrate volunteers into the project. 

Volunteer Canada 

is the national 

professional 

organization that 

sets standards, 

suggests policies, 

and provides 

leadership on 

volunteer issues. 

Risk Management 

Identification and assessment of risks for your volunteer program is essential. Risks include 

health, safety, and legal risks. Agencies or organizations may have a risk manager who develops 

risk management forms, documents, and policies. If your agency or organization does not have 

a risk manager, you can look at what types of risk management systems other organizations have 

developed. You may also want to consult with a lawyer to ensure that all the legal implications of 

your volunteer program have been addressed. 

Risk management includes creating safe work environments and developing policies to avoid 

risks to health and safety. Policies may be developed for various aspects of the project, such as 

how work will be conducted near a road, how site visitors will be alerted to risks while work is 

being conducted, how tools will be used safely and by whom, what safety equipment will be used, 

and how garbage pick-up will be handled safely. Other ways to address potential risks include 

developing volunteer medical alert information, planning first aid procedures, and creating 

reporting procedures for incidents. Insurance policies can also be obtained to provide registered 

volunteers some assistance in the case of accident or injury. 

6-54 



Case Study 16. Saanich Garry Oak Restoration Project (GORP): 

Risk Management 

The District of Saanich employs a Risk Manager who works with staff and the GORP 

Coordinator of Volunteers regarding risk management policies and forms. A formal safety 

policy has been developed that includes volunteer supervision requirements, safety 

equipment requirements, waivers, site safety policies such as signage on trails and garbage pickup, 

safe work practices (such as not working under the influence of drugs or alcohol and policies 

for work party supervisors). Saanich’s waiver forms were developed by the Risk Manager and the 

Municipal Solicitor, with special forms for group waivers, individual registered volunteers, and a 

consent form for volunteers under the age of 19. The Risk Manager also coordinates an insurance 

policy for volunteers, providing limited insurance for injuries and loss of work for registered 

volunteers who have accidents while volunteering for the program. All this planning has provided 

for smooth procedures and safe work environments for 11 years of this program. 

CASE STUDY 

GORP volunteers removing 

Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus 

discolor) root crowns from 

the Camas Park site on 

McKenzie Avenue. Photo: 

Breanna Newhouse 

Planting native 

grass plugs for trial 

restoration plots at 

Playfair Park GORP 

site in Saanich. 

Photo: Carolyn 

MacDonald 



6-55


Legal risks also need to be addressed. Legal waiver forms are commonly used by organizations, 

agencies, and landowners/managers to address legal risks associated with land ownership, 

supervising volunteers, and with volunteers working on that land. Consider how you will address 

legal implications of working with minors (i.e., persons under 19 years of age), who cannot legally 

sign a waiver. There are also legal implications regarding the collection and care of personal 

information. See Appendix 6.2 for examples of waivers. 

Risk management is becoming increasingly important to ensure the safety of volunteers and to 

address legal liabilities. It is critical to consider what risks volunteers and your organization will 

be exposed to and plan to minimize and address these risks. Staff and volunteers should all be 

aware of risk management policies and procedures. 

6.5.4 Managing a Volunteer Program 

Managing a volunteer program requires organization and enthusiasm to be effective. A 

coordinator of volunteers who values the efforts of volunteers and who has essential skills can 

lead and develop a successful program. It takes time and careful planning to organize volunteers. 

The effort put into this task will pay off in meaningful volunteer participation and long-term 

commitment. 

Volunteer management is a distinct, established discipline. Many resources and types of support 

are available for developing successful programs. 

Recruitment 

Before recruiting volunteers, consider what kinds of volunteers are needed and what tasks they 

should be assigned. A critical first step is to develop position descriptions that specify what types 

of skills and qualities a volunteer should have (e.g., physical fitness, special training, or people 

skills), and what kinds of expectations volunteers should be prepared to meet. Consider what the 

organization can offer to volunteers, for example, career training or social opportunities. 

When recruiting, target the places where you may find the volunteers that meet your needs. The 

following are possible sources of volunteers: 

Volunteers and staff work side by 

side at Playfair Park in Saanich. 

When developing a volunteer 

program, it is important not only to 

develop clear roles for volunteers 

but also to ensure that they are 

able to achieve their goals and gain 

valuable experiences and training. 


6-56 



• post-secondary institutions (and specific programs, such as Environmental Studies) 

• high schools (sources of keen, youthful volunteers) and other local schools 

• local clubs and organizations with similar values (e.g., natural history groups) 

• local youth groups 

• organizations such as service groups with volunteer requirements (e.g., cadets, scouts) 

• volunteer organizations (see Section 6.5.5) 

• conservation or “green” minded businesses 

• neighbourhood organizations 

• site neighbours 

Volunteer Intake 

Focused and efficient volunteer intake is an important part of a program. Initial screening is 

critical to developing a reputable and sustainable volunteer program. Spending time on the 

first contact with a potential volunteer can be important. An application form provides basic 

information needed, and can be provided on-line or in paper form. Sample forms are provided in 

Appendix 6.2. 

Interviewing a volunteer can help you determine what they hope to gain from volunteering, 

what types of skills and training they have, and how they will fit within the project. During the 

interview, the volunteer should be given a brief orientation to the organization, the project, and 

Garry Oak ecosystem restoration. The volunteer can be asked to provide personal references to 

complete the intake process, and criminal records checks can be requested if required by your 

program. Other screening methods are described on Volunteer Canada’s website 

(www.volunteer.ca) under “Topics and Resources”. 

Placement 

A successful volunteer program generally has clear roles for volunteers. A detailed position 

description provides volunteers and staff with a clear outline of what is expected and what success 

looks like. The overall goal is for the volunteers to help in achieving the project/organization 

goals. It is often best to place a new volunteer with a more experienced volunteer who can serve 

as a mentor. Checking in with new volunteers (especially in the first six weeks) can be very 

important and will help everyone make adjustments, as needed. This will help build long-term 

relationships. It is important to thank and recognize volunteers, and check in periodically on their 

training needs. One of the keys to placement is to make sure the volunteer is able to achieve his or 

her goals and gain valuable experiences and training. 

Orientation and Training 

Once volunteers have been brought into an organization or project, they need some kind of 

orientation. Many organizations have orientation sessions for groups of new volunteers, or may 

have an orientation procedure for one-on-one situations. Orientation sessions cover the basics 

of the organization and project, related policies and procedures, and any other requirements 

or expectations of the volunteers. Orientation sessions should be enjoyable, build enthusiasm, 

and provide refreshments (particularly in group sessions) as a way of thanking and welcoming 

volunteers. 



6-57


Health Check for a Volunteer Program 

The following questions should be considered when you are developing or evaluating your 

volunteer program. Strive to answer “yes” to each of these questions: 

• Do your staff and volunteers work together and feel like a team? 

• Do you track volunteer hours? 

• Are your volunteers covered by insurance? 

• Do your volunteers get thanks on a regular basis? 

• Do you recruit from the whole diverse community? 

• Do your volunteers have position descriptions? 

• Does your volunteer program have a budget? 

• Are volunteers thoroughly screened and trained at intake? 

• Do you offer ongoing training? 

• Do you deliver what you promise to your volunteers? 

On-going training can be offered as needed, but should be provided at least several times a year 

to help volunteers develop and enhance their skills and knowledge. Training may be an important 

goal for some volunteers. Consider bringing in special speakers or guest trainers and include 

topics that keep alive the sense of wonder about Garry Oak natural areas. Providing training is 

also a good way to thank and recognize volunteers. 

Evaluation 

A healthy volunteer program places importance on evaluation. In addition to being evaluated 

in their position, volunteers should be given the opportunity to evaluate their experiences with 

the organization and the progress of the project. Evaluation and feedback to volunteers can be 

very informal, through frequent verbal comments and coaching by the volunteer coordinator. 

It can also be a formal process involving an annual interview between the coordinator and the 

volunteers. The coordinator should keep records of the feedback provided and received. 

It is important for volunteers to be able to provide feedback in ways that feel comfortable for 

them. Having times when feedback is requested—either anonymously or otherwise—can be 

valuable in building strong organizations and relationships. 

Retention and Recognition 

Recognition of volunteers is important. Volunteers who feel appreciated and happy in their role 

are more likely to be retained long term and to bring in more volunteers and raise the public 

profile of the organization. Providing refreshments at work parties, social opportunities, and 

6-58 



reference letters for employment are some great ways of showing appreciation for your volunteer 

efforts. Some programs host annual recognition events and provide certificates or awards, small 

gifts, and verbal recognition. Other forms of on-going recognition include informal notes and 

frequent words of appreciation for volunteer accomplishments. Volunteers also appreciate being 

kept informed about the organization or project, and should be allowed to provide feedback on 

how they like to be recognized. Consider what fits best for your team of volunteers and be creative. 

Record Management 

Volunteer programs need to manage the personal information of volunteers and their application 

forms, updated contact information, interview notes, reference checks, volunteer hours, and other 

key information. All personal information about volunteers must be kept in a secure location, 

and access to that information must be carefully controlled. Anyone in charge of keeping such 

information, especially within government organizations, should be aware of the requirements 

outlined in the Freedom of Information Act and the implications of keeping personal information. 

Communication 

Volunteers should be kept informed about the project, and clear lines of communication must 

be established between the volunteers and the volunteer coordinator and staff. Changes in the 

program or organization should be communicated directly to the volunteers rather than through 

the media. Volunteers like to be kept informed, and they do their jobs best when they are 

included in the program’s communications network. 

6.5.5 Volunteer Program Resources 

There are many valuable resources available to enhance or build your volunteer program. The 

following list will help you get started. Sample forms and other key resources from formal 

volunteer programs for Garry Oak ecosystem restoration are included in the appendices. 

A variety of resources are available through Volunteer Canada (www.volunteer.ca): 

• Sample forms for volunteer programs 

• Issues and policies related to developing volunteer programs 

• Advice about requesting criminal record checks 

• Canadian Code for Volunteer Involvement 

• Other valuable information for developing volunteer programs 

Local Volunteer Centres (examples) 

Volunteer Victoria (www.volunteervictoria.bc.ca) 

Volunteer Cowichan (www.volunteercowichan.bc.ca) 

Volunteer Nanaimo (www.volunteernanaimo.ca) 

Volunteer Salt Spring (www.volunteersaltspring.com) 

These centres provide a central clearinghouse for interested community volunteers. By joining 

your local centre you will be able to participate in workshops about volunteering and will likely be 

part of a database that will profile your program for potential new volunteers. 



6-59


Celebrating Garry Oak Ecosystems and Restoration 

• Artistic celebrations 

• Tree Appreciation Day 

• Wildflower celebrations 

• Volunteer recognition 

• Earth Day and Biodiversity Day 

• Fundraising celebrations 

• Community picnics 

• Poetry contests 

• and more: honouring, engaging, 

and giving thanks 

Thanking your volunteers can involve training days, 

awards, and time spent enjoying Garry Oak ecosystems. 

In this photo, GORP volunteers share a lunch at Gonzales 

Hill during a field-trip day where they visited a variety of 

restoration sites. Photo: Carolyn MacDonald 

6.6 Celebration 

Communities are strengthened through the gathering 

of energy and commitment. (Higgs 2003) 

The Canadian Oxford Dictionary definition of “celebrate” includes “make publicly known; extol, 

praise widely”. The word originates from the Latin word celebrare, meaning honoured. Honouring 

and celebrating Garry Oak ecosystems raises public awareness, inspires, and helps build a sense 

of place and connection. Honouring and celebrating people and culture in relation to Garry Oak 

ecosystems builds connections, relationships, support, commitment, and a sense of belonging 

and community. Celebrating the restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems may play an important role 

in recognizing volunteers and other valuable contributions, may help with fundraising efforts, and 

may be a way to share joy in the success of good work. 

“Restoration is a social and cultural act, an interaction between humans and nature” (Edgar 

2007). As such, restoration may help restore relationships between people and the land, and thus 

become a meaningful and even sacred activity that brings people closer to nature (VanWieren 

2008). We honour and celebrate that which we value—and value is a fundamental necessity for 

successful recovery and restoration of these rare ecosystems. 

6-60 




Archibald, A., F. Cormier and J. Scull. 2005. Stewardship progression report: follow-up evaluation 

of 11 years of landowner contact in the Cowichan region. 

Cowichan Community Land Trust. Duncan, B.C. www.stewardshipcentre.bc.ca/files/scnBC/1076_ 

Report_CCLT_Stewardship_Progression_Evaluation.pdf 

Barber, K. 2004. The Canadian Oxford Dictionary. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford 

Univ. Press. www.oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/views/ENTRY. 

html?subview=Main&entry=t150.e11439 (Accessed Nov. 15, 2010). 

Bateman, S. and C. McEwen. 2009. Salt Spring Island conservancy stewards in training program 

manual. Salt Spring Island Conservancy, Salt Spring Island, B.C. 

Beckwith, B.R. 2004. The queen root of this clime: ethnoecological investigations of blue camas 

(Camassia quamash, C. leichtlinii; liliaceae) and landscapes of southern Vancouver Island, 

B.C. Doctoral dissertation, School of Environmental Studies and Depart. of Botany, Univ. of 


Brown, J. and B. Mitchell. 2000. Landscape stewardship: new directions in conservation of nature 

and culture. The George Wright Forum 17(1). 

Carere, D., K. Harding, E. Rafuse and R. Underhill. 2009. Species and ecosystems at risk: Fort 

Rodd Hill and Fisgard Lighthouse national historic sites of Canada summer 2009. Prepared for 

Parks Canada Agency, Ottawa, Ont. 

Carter, J. (editor). 2001. A sense of place: an interpretive planning handbook. Tourism and 

Environment Initiative, Inverness, Scotland. www.scotinterpnet.org/uk/pages/resources 

(Accessed Mar. 14, 2010). 

Clewell, A., J.Rieger and J.Munro. 2005. Guidelines for developing and managing ecological 

restoration projects, 2nd Edition. Society for Ecological Restoration International. 

www.ser.org/content/guidelines_ecological_restoration.asp. (Accessed April 6, 2011). 

Edgar, T. 2007. Restoration in mind: placing ecological restoration in a cultural context. 

Environments Journal 35(1):25-43. 

Fraser Basin Management Board. 1996. Community stewardship: a guide to establishing your own 

group. The Stewardship Series: Canadian Wildlife Service, Fraser Basin Management Board, 

Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Watershed Restoration Program, Vancouver, B.C. 

Fuchs, M.A. 2004. Does stewardship work? Lessons from the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery 

Team. In: Proc. Species at Risk Pathways to Recovery Conf., March 2-6, 2004, Victoria, B.C. 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2002. Recovery strategy for Garry Oak and 

associated ecosystems and their species at risk in Canada, 2001–2006. Victoria, B.C. 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team (GOERT). 2009. The Garry Oak gardener’s handbook: 

nurturing native plant habitat in Garry Oak communities (2nd edition). Garry Oak Ecosystem 

Recovery Team Society, Victoria, B.C. (www.goert.ca/gardeners). 

Ham, S.H. 2002. Meaning making: the premise and promise of interpretation. Scotland’s First 

Natl. Conf. on Interpretation, April 4, 2002, Royal Botanical Gardens, Edinburgh. 

www.cnrhome.uidaho.edu/default.aspx?pid=70565.(Accessed Mar. 14, 2010). 



6-61


Higgs, E. 1997. What is good ecological restoration? Conservation Biology 11(2):338-348. 

Higgs, E. 2003. Nature by design: people, natural processes and ecological restoration. 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. 

International Association of Public Participation. 2007. IAP2 spectrum of public participation. 

www.iap2.org/associations/4748/files/IAP2%20Spectrum_vertical.pdf 

Interpretation Canada. Updated Feb. 12, 2010. www.interpcan.ca. (Accessed March 14, 2010). 

Kilburn, V. and M. Passmore. (2009). An evaluation of the habitat stewardship program’s 

landowner contact projects in the Pacific and Yukon region. A joint project conducted by the 

Canadian Wildlife Service, FORREX and HSP Partner Agencies. Ottawa, Ont.: Unpublished 

report. 

Land Stewardship Centre of Canada. www.landstewardship.org/stewardship (Accessed Nov. 21, 

2010). 

Langenfeld, C. 2009. The value of ecological restoration volunteer programs: a case study in 

western Washington State. MES Thesis. Evergreen State College, WA. 

Lawrance, R., S. Littley, & J. Scull. 2000. Three landholder contact programs in British Columbia. 

In: Caring for our Land: Stewardship and Conservation in Canada. 8th Intl. Symp. on Soc. and 

Nat. Resource Manag., June 4, 2000, Univ. of Guelph, June 4, 2000, and, Western Washington 

University, June 19, 2000.www.landtrustalliance.bc.ca/docs/landholder.pdf. (Accessed 2010). 

Leopold, A. 1949. A Sand County almanac. Oxford University Press, N.Y. 

MacDougall, A.S., B.R. Beckwith and C.Y. Maslovat. 2004. Defining conservation strategies with 


Biology 18(2):455-465. 

MacDonald, C. and S. Staniforth. 2005. Garry Oak ecosystems of British Columbia: an educator’s 

guide. Wild BC, Habitat Conservation Trust Fund, Victoria, B.C. 

McKenzie-Mohr, D. and W. Smith. 1999. Fostering sustainable behaviour: an introduction to 

community-based social marketing. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, B.C. 

Oregon State Parks. 2008. Centennial horizon: shaping the future of Oregon’s parks, recreation, 

conservation and preservation. Salem, Oreg. www.oregon.gov/OPRD/documents/cent_hor. 

(Accessed Mar. 2010). 

Ryan, R. L., R. Kaplan and R. E. Grese. 2001. Predicting volunteer commitment in environmental 

stewardship programs. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 44(5):629-648. 

Society for Ecological Restoration International Science & Policy Working Group (SERISPWG). 

2004. International primer on ecological restoration. Society for Ecological Restoration 

International. www.ser.org/content/ecological_restoration_primer.asp. (Accessed Mar. 3, 

2010). 

Staniforth, S. 2004. Leap into action! Simple steps to environmental action. Wild BC and BC 

Conservation Foundation, Surrey, B.C. 

Van Wieren, G. 2008. Ecological restoration as public spiritual practice. Worldviews: Global 

Religions, Culture and Ecology 12:237-254. 

Volunteer Canada. 2007. Canada survey on giving, volunteering and participating 2007. Volunteer 

Canada, Ottawa, Ont. 

6-62 



Turner, N.J., I.J. Davidson-Hunt and M. O’Flaherty. 2003. Living on the edge: ecological and 

cultural edges as sources of diversity for social-ecological resilience. Human Ecology 31(3):439- 

463. 

Worrell, R. and M. C. Appleby. 2000. Stewardship of natural resources: definition, ethical and 

practical aspects. Kluwer Academic Publications, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental 

Ethics 12:266-277. 

6.8 Additional Resources 

Aberley, D., M. Dunn and B. Penn. 1995. Giving the land a voice: mapping our home places. 

Saltspring Island Community Services Society. Salt Spring Island, B.C. 

Andreasen, A.R. 1995. Marketing social change: changing behavior to promote health, social 

development and the environment. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, Calif. 

Brock, S. 2001. Managing environmental volunteer programs. The Sierra Club of British Columbia 

and the GAIA Project, Victoria, B.C. 

Connors, T. (Editor). 1995. The volunteer management handbook. John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd. 

Dietz, T. and P.C. Stern. 2002. New tools for environmental protection: education, information 

and voluntary measures. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 

Duynstee, T. 1997. Landowner contact guide for British Columbia. Ministry of Environment, 

Lands and Parks and Environment Canada, Victoria, B.C. www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/216861. 

pdf (Accessed Mar. 14, 2010). 

Kaner, S., L. Lind, S. Fisk and D. Berger. 2007. Facilitator’s guide to participatory decision-making, 

2nd Ed. Community at Work. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif. 

Fischer, P. A. and J. C. Bliss. 2008. Behavioral assumptions of conservation policy: conserving oak 

habitat on family-forest land in the Willamette Valley, Oregon. Conservation Biology 22: 

275-283. 

Graff, L. 1997. By definition: policy development for volunteer agencies. Linda Graff and 

Associates, Dundas, Ont. 

Graff, L. 2005. Best of all: the quick reference guide to effective volunteer management. Linda 

Graff and Associates, Dundas, Ont. 

Hilts, S., J. Moull, J.Razadki and M. Van Patter. 1991. Natural heritage landowner contact training 

manual. National Heritage League, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont. 

Holland, K.M. 1994. Restoration rituals: transforming workday tasks into inspirational rites. 

Restoration and Management Notes 12. 

Jacobson, S. K., M. McDuff and M. Monroe. 2006. Conservation education and outreach 

techniques. Oxford University Press Inc., N.Y. 

Lydon, M. 2000. Finding our way home. Alternatives Journal 26:4. 

Ritchlin, J. 2001. Healing the land… healing ourselves: a guide to ecological restoration resources 

for BC. BC Environmental Network Educational Foundation, March 2001. 



6-63


Washington State Department of Ecology. 1992. Designing community environmental education 

programs—a guide for local government. Olympia, WA. 

Yarnell, P. and D.V. Gayton. 2003. Community-based ecosystem monitoring in British Columbia: 

a survey and recommendations for extension. FORREX – Forest Research Extension 

Partnership, Kamloops, BC. FORREX Series 13. 

6-64 



Appendix 6.1 

Deciding Whether Public Involvement is Needed 

Adapted with permission from: District of Saanich Toolkit for Public Process (2002). 

Public involvement includes the promise that the public’s contribution will play a role in the 

decision process (though not necessarily determining what the decision will be). Informing and 

educating the public about a project should be incorporated even when a decision is made not to 

engage in a public involvement/planning process. 

Always do public involvement when: 

• Recommended – for example, by the funders or managers backing or requesting the project 

• Critical information is lacking – available information isn’t adequate to make a sound 

decision and it is anticipated that the quality of the decision would be enhanced by 

community involvement 

• Issues of conflict, heightened public concern, or public risk – dispute or conflict that 

needs to be resolved; high degree of concern over the decision to be made (or project) or when 

there is the perception that the decision (or project) holds significant implications for public 

health or safety 

• Highly complex issues – when the issue(s) or project is highly complex and/or there is not a 

clear understanding of the implications and outcomes of the decision or project 

• Consent and compliance needed – there is a perception that involvement is essential to 

ensure a sense of shared responsibility and commitment to the project and/or when it is likely 

that compliance or cooperation is not assured unless all those affected are involved in the 

decision 

• Facing a strategic choice or unclear priorities – when the decision involves a strategic 

choice between apparently equal alternatives or when public priorities are unclear 

Applicable Examples 

• Projects that involve a statutory requirement for public involvement (e.g., within rezoning 

applications and development proposals) 

• Major changes in land use 

• Changing the use of public space (e.g., park plans) 

• The project or decision will impact people’s daily lives by altering: 

-the character of the neighbourhood 

-parks, recreation facilities 

-road infrastructure 

-the streetscape (e.g., landscaping, trees) 

-traffic and parking 

-pedestrian movement 

-levels of safety 

-levels of service (e.g., garbage removal) 



6-65


Usually do public involvement when 

• The public expresses interest in having input or the decision is likely to be seen as significant 

• The decision has significant policy implications (e.g., enforcement issues) 

• There is actual or potential conflict or dissenting views in the public around the issue/ 

decision at hand 

• There is a need to build awareness of the issues through public involvement 

• There are financial implications such as those that involve spending money on new amenities 

or a taxation levy 

• The negative impacts of a project can be mitigated based on advice from the public 

• You need help choosing between options 

• The decision is highly value-laden versus being driven by technical considerations 

Rarely do public involvement (more informing) when 

• Choices are limited or highly constrained; there are few options 

• You know that public opinion is behind the project for the most part 

• Choices are highly focused and technical and there is little room for influence based on values 

• A clear consensus has already been reached through other processes (e.g., public petition) 

• Less complex, minor decisions are being made 

Never do public involvement when 

• Your goal is to announce a decision 

• The decision (or project) cannot be affected because 

the decision is already made 

the decision will be made outside of the public involvement process 

staff/landowners must make a decision and take action in an emergency situation 

• The time frame and/or resources are too short for meaningful, informed input and cannot be 

changed 

• You don’t know what you’re asking from the public 

• You do not have support from the landowners or managers to engage in public involvement 

Inform the public when 

• Public involvement is not warranted, but the public needs to be alerted to a change or to 

understand what is going on 

• You want to encourage public support of a project that is underway 

6-66 



Appendix 6.2 Example Volunteer Intake Forms and Waivers 

(forms follow) 



6-67


6-68 


Regional Parks T: 250.478.3344 

490 Atkins Avenue F: 250.478.5416 

Victoria BC Canada V9B 2Z8 www.crd.bc.ca/parks 

Mill Hill Restoration Project ~ Volunteer Application Form 

Contact Information 

Last Name: 

Given Name(s): 

Address: City: Postal Code 

Home Phone Number 

( ) 

Date of Birth (for insurance purposes): 

Work Phone Number 

( ) 

Email Address: 

Cell Phone Number 

( ) 

In case of Emergency notify: 

Last Name: First Name: Relationship: 



( ) 


( ) 


( ) 

Allergies: 

Medications/Medi-alert needs: 

How did you find out about the 

Mill Hill Restoration Project? 

I understand that my services will involve working outdoors in steep and uneven terrain under the direction of 

the Environmental Conservation Specialist and a Parks Worker 5 staff member or the Coordinator of 

Volunteers. I will be removing young broom seedlings and daphne at Mill Hill Regional Park. I understand that 

I will be following the directions and safety procedures that will be instructed on the day prior to volunteering. 

I understand that in the event of a personal injury I am not covered by WCB but instead would be eligible for 

benefits under the CRD Volunteer AD&D policy (subject to terms and conditions). 

I understand that I am responsible for the safety and security of all my property and possessions. 

I understand that the CRD will indemnify me against any claims for damages arising out of the performance of 

my duties and, in addition, pay amounts required for the protection, defense, or indemnification arising there 

from provided that I am not guilty of dishonesty, gross negligence, or wilful misconduct, or the cause of the 

action libel or slander. 

Signature of Volunteer 

Date 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION WAIVER 

Personal information contained on this form is collected under the authority of the Local Government Act and is subject to the 

Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The personal information will be used for purposes associated with the 

Volunteer program. Enquiries about the collection or use of information in this form can be directed to the Freedom of Information 

and Protection of Privacy contact: Capital Regional District, Senior Coordinator, FOI (250) 360-3000. 

Revised Sept/2007

Photo waiver 

Regional Parks and the Capital Regional District has my permission to use any 

photographs, film, or other images taken of me participating in Parks-related activities. 

I understand my photograph/image may be used in brochures, newsletters, fact sheets, 

news articles, posters, audio/visual materials, on the CRD website, or in other printed 

materials. 

Signature 

Date 

I decline to have my image used. 

Revised Sept/2007

Regional Parks T: 250.478.3344 

490 Atkins Avenue F: 250.478.5416 

Victoria BC Canada V9B 2Z8 www.crd.bc.ca/parks 

Parental Consent Form 

(Required for youth volunteers under 19 years of age) 

Name of Youth Volunteer 

Date of Birth (for insurance purposes): 

Parent or Guardian Information 

Last Name: 

Given Name(s): 



( ) 


( ) 


( ) 

In case of Emergency notify: 

Last Name: First Name: Relationship: 



( ) 


( ) 


( ) 

Allergies: 

Medications/Medi-alert needs: 

I 

hereby give consent for my son/daughter/legal ward, named above, to 

volunteer with the Capital Regional District Parks Volunteer-In-Parks program at 

I affirm that I am the parent/guardian of the above named volunteer. I understand that there could be some 

risks associated with this activity. I have read the attached position description of the work the volunteer will 

perform and will discuss it with my son/daughter/legal ward. 

In the event that my child/legal ward requires medical attention, I consent to my child being transported to the 

nearest emergency centre, including by ambulance if necessary, and accept that I am responsible for cost of 

such ambulance service. 

Parent/Guardian signature of Youth Volunteer 

Date 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION WAIVER 

Personal information contained on this form is collected under the authority of the Local Government Act and is subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy 

Act. The personal information will be used for purposes associated with the Volunteer program. Enquiries about the collection or use of information in this form can be directed 

to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy contact: Capital Regional District, Senior Coordinator, FOI (250) 360-3000. 

W:\VIP\Guidelines\Programs\Youth\Parental Consent Form.doc 

Revised Aug/2007

Photo waiver 

Regional Parks and the Capital Regional District has my permission to use any 

photographs, film, or other images taken of me participating in Parks-related activities. 

I understand my photograph/image may be used in brochures, newsletters, fact sheets, 

news articles, posters, audio/visual materials, on the CRD website, or in other printed 

materials. 

Signature 

Date 

I decline to have my image used. 

W:\VIP\Guidelines\Programs\Youth\Parental Consent Form.doc 

Revised Aug/2007

The Corporation of the District of Saanich 

RELEASE OF LIABILITY, WAIVER OF CLAIMS, 

ASSUMPTION OF RISKS AND INDEMNITY AGREEMENT 

GROUP FORM 

BY SIGNING THIS DOCUMENT YOU ARE WAIVING CERTAIN LEGAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT 

TO SUE - PLEASE READ CAREFULLY 

To: the District of Saanich, its officers, employees, elected officials, agents and volunteers, 

And to: the owners and occupiers of private premises on which I conduct volunteer work for the District of 

Saanich, 

(hereinafter called the “Releasees”) 

ASSUMPTION OF RISK 

I am aware that my volunteer work for the District of Saanich may involve risks caused or contributed by 

natural and man-made terrain, wildlife, plants, climatic conditions, my own physical condition, actions of the 

Releasees and other third parties, vehicular traffic, tools and equipment. I am also aware that such risks may 

foreseeably result in personal injury, illness, loss of life or property damage, but I freely assume the legal and 

physical consequences of these risks. 

RELEASE and WAIVER 

In consideration of being accepted as a volunteer for the District of Saanich, I covenant not to sue and hereby 

waive, release and discharge the Releasees from any and all claims of liability for personal injury, illness, loss 

of life or property damage of any kind or nature whatsoever and howsoever arising either directly or indirectly 

as a result of my volunteer work. This Release and Waiver applies to all claims, foreseen and unforeseen, 

including negligence and breach of statutory or other duty of care and is binding on my heirs, executors, 

administrators, or any others who may claim on my behalf. 

INDEMNITY AGREEMENT 

In consideration of being accepted as a volunteer for the District of Saanich, I agree to indemnify and save 

harmless the Releasees from any claim, lawsuit, liability, debt, demand, loss or judgment (including costs, 

defence expense and interest) whatsoever and howsoever arising either directly or indirectly as a result of any 

act or omission by me that is grossly negligent, wilful or outside my scope of authority or duties as a volunteer 

for the District of Saanich. 

I acknowledge that I have read and understand the above, and I recognize that by signing this 

document I am waiving certain legal rights, including the right to sue. 

Please sign accompanying sign-in sheet.


RELEASE OF LIABILITY, WAIVER OF CLAIMS, ASSUMPTION OF 

RISKS AND INDEMNITY AGREEMENT 

By signing this document I acknowledge that I have read the accompanying form titled “Release of 

Liability, Waiver of Claims, Assumption of Risks and Indemnity Agreement” and that I am waiving 

certain rights, including the right to sue. 

NAME (PRINT) ADDRESS SIGNATURE DATE


RELEASE OF LIABILITY, WAIVER OF CLAIMS, 

ASSUMPTION OF RISKS AND INDEMNITY AGREEMENT 

BY SIGNING THIS DOCUMENT YOU ARE WAIVING CERTAIN LEGAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE 

RIGHT TO SUE - PLEASE READ CAREFULLY 

To: the District of Saanich, its officers, employees, elected officials, agents and volunteers, 

And to: the owners and occupiers of private premises on which I conduct volunteer work for the District 

of Saanich, 

(hereinafter called the “Releasees”) 

ASSUMPTION OF RISK 

I am aware that my volunteer work for the District of Saanich involves risks caused or contributed to by 

natural and man-made terrain, wildlife, plants, climatic conditions, my own physical condition, actions of 

the Releasees and other third parties, vehicular traffic, tools and equipment. I am also aware that such 

risks may foreseeably result in personal injury, illness, loss of life or property damage, but I freely 

assume the legal and physical consequences of these risks. 

RELEASE and WAIVER 

In consideration of being accepted as a volunteer for the District of Saanich, I covenant not to sue and 

hereby waive, release and discharge the Releasees from any and all claims of liability for personal injury, 

illness, loss of life or property damage of any kind or nature whatsoever and howsoever arising either 

directly or indirectly as a result of my volunteer work. This Release and Waiver applies to all claims, 

foreseen and unforeseen, including negligence and breach of statutory or other duty of care and is 

binding on my heirs, executors, administrators, or any others who may claim on my behalf. 

INDEMNITY AGREEMENT 

In consideration of being accepted as a volunteer for the District of Saanich, I agree to indemnify and 

save harmless the Releasees from any claim, lawsuit, liability, debt, demand, loss or judgment (including 

costs, defence expense and interest) whatsoever and howsoever arising either directly or indirectly as a 

result of any act or omission by me that is grossly negligent, wilful or outside my scope of authority or 

duties as a volunteer for the District of Saanich. 

I acknowledge that I have read and understand the above, and I recognize that by signing this 

document I am waiving certain legal rights, including the right to sue. 

________________________________ 

Volunteer Signature 

________________________________ 

Volunteer Name (please print) 

_______________________________ 

Witness Signature 

_______________________________ 

Witness Name (please print) 

________________________________ 

Volunteer Address 

________________________________ 

Date 

06/2010


INFORMED CONSENT / PERMISSION FORM 

THIS FORM MUST BE READ AND SIGNED BY EVERY MINOR WISHING TO PARTICIPATE IN 

VOLUNTEER WORK FOR THE DISTRICT AND A PARENT OR LEGAL GUARDIAN OF THAT MINOR. 

A MINOR IS A PERSON UNDER 19 YEARS OF AGE. 

ELEMENTS OF RISK 

I am aware that volunteer work for the District of Saanich may involve certain elements of risk. Injuries may 

occur while working, including; allergic reactions, cuts, abrasions, sprains, fractures, spinal injury and even 

death. 

The risk of sustaining injury results from the nature of the activity itself, natural and manmade terrain, 

wildlife, plants, climatic conditions, the actions of third parties and the worker’s own physical condition and 

actions. Injury can occur without any fault on the part of either the worker, the District of Saanich, its 

employees, consultants or other volunteers. By choosing to take part in this activity, you are accepting the 

risk that you/your child may be injured. 

The chance of injury can be reduced by carefully following instructions and safe work practices at all times 

while engaged in the activity. 

PARTICIPANT’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

I HAVE READ THE ABOVE AND THE VOLUNTEER SAFETY POLICY. I AGREE TO FOLLOW 

INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY AND EXERCISE SAFE WORK PRACTICES AT ALL TIMES. 

Name of participant (please print): 

Signature of participant: 

Date: 

PARENT/GUARDIAN’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND PERMISSION 

I HAVE READ THE ABOVE AND HAVE BEEN PROVIDED OR OBTAINED SUFFICIENT INFORMATION 

TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION ABOUT MY CHILD’S VOLUNTEER WORK. I ACKNOWLEDGE 

THAT THE DISTRICT OF SAANICH PROVIDES LIMITED ACCIDENTAL DEATH, DISABILITY, 

DISMEMBERMENT OR MEDICAL EXPENSE INSURANCE FOR REGISTERED VOLUNTEERS AND 

THAT BY ALLOWING MY CHILD TO WORK AS A VOLUNTEER, I AM ASSUMING THE ASSOCIATED 

RISKS AND UNINSURED EXPENSES. I GIVE MY CHILD PERMISSION TO WORK AS A VOLUNTEER. 

Name of Parent/Guardian (please print): 

Signature of Parent/Guardian: 

Emergency contact: 

Date: 

Phone: 

Important health information: 

Revised February 11, 2008






Chapter 7 

Ecological Inventory and 

Monitoring 

Contents 

7.1 Introduction................................................................................3 

7.1.1 Guiding Principles for Inventory and Monitoring...............4 

7.2 Inventory: Determining What is Present...................................7 

7.2.1 Design Considerations for Inventory and Monitoring.......7 

7.2.2 Characterizing the Site...................................................... 10 

Case Study 1. Photo-point Monitoring...........................................12 

7.2.3 Ecological Classification.................................................... 14 

7.2.4 Ecological Description...................................................... 16 

7.2.4.1 Vegetation.................................................................. 18 

7.2.4.2 Soils, Landforms, and Surficial Geology................... 22 



7-1


7.2.4.3 Inventory and Monitoring of Animals...................... 25 

7.2.4.4 Water (Hydrology)....................................................33 

7.2.4.5 Climate.......................................................................34 

7.3 Monitoring: Assessing Success................................................34 

7.3.1 What is Monitoring and Why is it Important?..................35 

7.3.2 What Sites Should be Monitored?....................................36 

7.3.3 What Should be Measured? ............................................. 37 

7.3.4 What Methods Should be Used?...................................... 37 

7.3.5 When, How Often, and for How Long Should 

Monitoring be Done?.................................................................39 

7.4 References ............................................................................... 41 

Appendix 7.1...................................................................................45 

Photo-point Monitoring Protocols and Analysis Methods 

Used in Restoration Monitoring at Fort Rodd Hill National 

Historic Site................................................................................45 

7-2 



Chapter 7 

Ecological Inventory and Monitoring 

by Don Eastman and Christian Engelstoft, in collaboration with Brenda Costanzo, Fred 

Hook, James Miskelly, Todd Golumbia, Richard Hebda, Carrina Maslovat, Robert Maxwell, 

Dave Polster, and Conan Webb 

Biologists Matt Fairbarns and Hans Roemer survey rare plants. Photo: Dave Polster 


Inventory and monitoring are key steps in restoring Garry Oak ecosystems (see Chapter 5: 

Restoration Planning). Without these activities, the success (or failure) of restoration projects 

cannot be evaluated, nor can the need for intervention be detected in a timely way. This chapter 

provides guiding principles and approaches for inventory and monitoring stages of Garry Oak 

restoration and describes commonly used methods. It shows practitioners how to design ecological 

inventory and monitoring programs that yield information on project outcomes that can be 

compared readily to data from other studies. Inventory and monitoring activities unique to the 

social component of restoration are addressed in Chapter 6: Outreach and Public Involvement. 



7-3


Inventory is the process of collecting information to describe the state of an 

Inventory is 

ecosystem or ecosystem characteristics at a particular point in time. Inventory 

the process 

is an integral element of a restoration project and corresponds to Stages 2 and 

of collecting 

3 of the Restoration Project as presented in Chapter 5: Restoration Planning. 

An inventory provides information to assess the current status of a site (how 

information to 

badly degraded is the area and does it merit restoration?) and identifies what 

describe the state 

species are present and their abundance (what kind of restoration is needed?). 

of an ecosystem 

Inventory helps identify key ecological processes and problems that need 

or ecosystem 

attention (e.g., invasive species), and provides the basis for deciding what 

characteristics at a type of restoration is needed. It also identifies “assets” of the site, such as 

particular point in the number and abundance of native species. Inventory is also the essential 

time. 

first step in the monitoring chain, as inventory data provide the baseline 

against which future observations will be compared. Without a baseline, 

change cannot be detected or measured. Finally, inventory is essential 

for characterizing reference ecosystems; these are critical for defining restoration targets and 

assessing progress. 

Monitoring is the act of making repeated measurements of a meaningful 

indicator. It is an integral part of a restoration project, and corresponds to 

Stage 7 of the restoration project stages (Table 5.1 in Chapter 5). Monitoring 

is the “Achilles’ heel” of restoration; too often, considerable effort applied at 

the outset of a restoration project wanes after the initial work is done. This 

scenario plays out time and again in Garry Oak restoration projects and in 

many other types of restoration. Failure to monitor is short-sighted because 

without monitoring there is no objective way to establish success. Why invest 

time and money in a project without knowing if the goal is achieved? Without 

monitoring, how can emerging problems be detected? Without monitoring, 

how can adaptive management be implemented? 

Monitoring is 


making repeated 

measurements to 

detect change over 

time. 

7.1.1 Guiding Principles for Inventory and Monitoring 

In this publication, four key principles guide ecological inventory and monitoring: 


2. Ensure reliability 

3. Match effort with outcomes 

4. Adopt an ecosystem-based approach 

These principles apply specifically to the ecological aspect of restoration; they also apply to the 

important “social” dimension of ecological restoration covered in Chapter 6. 

1. Setting Clear Objectives 

Clear objectives are essential to project success. Unclear objectives often cause disagreements 

among participants, lead to lost opportunities, require additional expenditure of time or money 

or both, and can result in overlooking the collection of important data or collecting the wrong 

kind of data. Developing specific and measurable objectives takes time and careful consideration. 

For example, it is difficult to evaluate the success of a project for an objective such as “to restore 

7-4 



four key principles guide ecological inventory and monitoring 


2. Ensure reliability 

3. Match effort with outcomes 

4. Adopt an ecosystem-based approach 

These principles apply specifically to the ecological aspect of restoration; they also apply to 

the important “social” dimension of ecological restoration covered in Chapter 6. 

the native plant community”. It is far easier to evaluate success when objectives are clearly defined, 

such as, “to reduce the distribution and abundance of Common Snowberry (Symphoricarpos 

albus) by 20% in two years” or “to increase the cover of Western Buttercup (Ranunculus 

occidentalis) by 50% in five years.” In these two examples, it is clear that the inventories should 

record the distribution and abundance of the two species before restoration starts, and that 

monitoring should include techniques to measure the plant cover of each species. From the 

perspective of inventory and monitoring, defining clear objectives before a project begins is 

important for determining sampling design and methods. 

As discussed in Chapters 5 and 6, one way of assessing whether or not objectives are useful is to 

see if they are “SMART”, that is, are they: 

Specific 

Measurable 

Achievable 

Realistic 

Timed 

If project objectives pass the SMART test, they will likely be successful. 

2. Ensuring Reliability 

Defining clear 

objectives before 

a project begins 

is important for 

determining 

sampling design 

and methods. 

Since many decisions are based on inventory and monitoring data, it is important to take steps 

to help ensure that data are objective and reflect the actual situation “on the ground”. One step 

that helps ensure reliability is to collect data following standard methods that are applicable to 

Garry Oak ecosystems. A second step is to have appropriate sampling and experimental designs. 

However, the requirement to meet statistical goals is sometimes very onerous and may not even 

be possible because of small site sizes. In these cases, reporting results from all sites to a central 

clearing site may help at least strengthen “anecdotal” information. Notwithstanding these cases, 

restoration practitioners should aim for reliability of their data to promote the understanding and 

sharing the results of restoration projects and to further promote the recognition of restoration as 

a professional field. 



7-5


3. Matching Effort with Objectives and Outcomes 

Projects vary in the level of detail they require for inventory and monitoring. For example, 

restoring an urban backyard by removing invasive species requires different levels of monitoring 

than a project involving re-introduction of a rare species. The scope of inventory and monitoring 

activities should be driven by the scope and complexity of the project. Applying too much effort 

is unnecessary and impractical, and it wastes resources. In the first example above, photo-point 

monitoring might do the trick and show more flowering camas from year to year. In the second 

case, specific cover measurements in fixed-frame plots with measurements of cover, flowering 

success, and plant survivorship might be needed. Applying too little effort is short-sighted and 

can compromise the collection of relevant and reliable data. One method for implementing this 

principle is to have intensive and extensive sites within an overall restoration project site. At 

intensive sites, considerable effort is expended on detailed inventory and monitoring. At extensive 

sites, the level of effort is reduced with the aim of ensuring that the results from the intensive site 

are evident at other sites (that is, the results are generally applicable over the area of interest). 

4. Adopting an Ecological or Ecosystem-Based Approach 

In this approach, all ecosystem components on the site, including species and key processes, are 

evaluated for their significance to the project’s objectives. In most restoration projects, only a 

subset of components (such as the abundance of one or two species) is measured. Nevertheless, 

it is important to evaluate all major components at the outset in order to select the elements 

that warrant measurement and ensure that the selected subset of components is representative. 

In an ecosystem-based approach, sites adjacent to the project are also examined. This approach 

encourages restoration practitioners to look at several spatial scales, including the landscape in 

which a restoration project is situated. 

Biologist Carrina Maslovat conducts a vegetation survey using standardized methodology. 

Photo: Dave Polster 

7-6 



7.2 Inventory: Determining What is Present 

7.2.1 Design Considerations for Inventory and Monitoring 

Five key design principles guide ecological inventory and monitoring: 

1. Locate and describe reference sites and conditions 

2. Establish control or untreated site(s) 

3. Replicate sampling 

4. Distribution of sample plots 

5. Clearly organize information collection into three categories (stages) 

1. Locate and Describe Reference Sites 

It is critical to define and describe reference conditions for the restoration site—that is, the target 

ecosystem characteristics (see Chapter 8, Section 8.4). Therefore, the first design consideration 

is to locate and describe reference sites. The usual objective of restoration projects is to restore an 

ecosystem so that it resembles what was found historically on the site, or at least to restore it to 

an undamaged condition (except in the case of novel ecosystems (Hobbs et al. 2006, 2009)). Since 

degraded sites no longer resemble what was historically present, there is a need to determine 

what the undisturbed system looked like, i.e., the target ecosystem. Many approaches are used to 

determine what target ecosystems should look like, however, the standard way is to locate one or 

more reference sites that are ecologically comparable but not highly degraded. This strategy is not 

easy to apply, because all Garry Oak ecosystems are degraded. Other sources of information need 

to be examined to provide reference or target information, such as historical written accounts, old 

maps, photographs, paintings, and oral histories. For Garry Oak ecosystems, the undamaged state 

is usually taken to be what existed before settlement by Europeans. 

five key design principles for ecological inventory and 

monitoring: 

1. Locate and describe reference sites and conditions 

2. Establish control or untreated site(s) 

3. Replicate sampling 

4. Distribution of sample plots 

5. Clearly organize information collection into three categories (stages) 



7-7


2. Establish Control or Untreated Site(s) 

Control sites provide a reference to compare sites at which intervention occurs. Usually such 

sites are located in the restoration area and match the treated area in all respects, except for not 

being treated. A possible exception to this guideline is with projects involving the removal of 

invasive species. In these cases, control sites may have to be established away 

from the restoration site to avoid plants from the control site re-invading 

the restored area (D. Polster, pers. comm. 2010). Controls enable the effects 

of other factors, such as a very dry spring or an unexpectedly late frost, to be 

disentangled from the effects of the restoration treatment itself. Year-to-year 

variation needs to be distinguished from long-term trends if the real progress 

due to restoration is to be detected. 

3. Replicate Sampling 

Replication strengthens confidence in the results. When only one plot or site 

is inventoried, it is unclear just how well that plot represents the entire site, 

even if the sample is chosen to be typical of the conditions. Sampling several 

areas at different locations within the restoration site helps characterize and 

appreciate variation. Both the size and the variability of a site influence the 

number of samples that should be taken, and both sample size (the number of 

plots) and plot size and shape are important considerations. 

Sample size: The number of samples that should be taken depends on the variability of 

a site rather than its size. Large and very homogenous areas can be sampled with a low 

number of plots because variability is low; but large and very heterogeneous areas require 

large numbers of samples because of variability and not size. A rule of thumb used by Garry 

Oak restoration practitioners is to sample 15–30 plots but statistical formulae can be used to 

determine appropriate sample size. 

Plot size and shape: This topic is addressed under each ecological component as it varies 

with the component being measured. 

Garry Oak ecosystems are heterogeneous, creating difficulties in setting up a sampling design 

that is equally suitable for all component ecosystems (and the components of each ecosystem!). 

The desirable number of replicates (i.e., replicate samples, or plots) can be calculated by using 

statistical formulae (Zar 2009). However, one of the difficulties with relying on traditional 

statistical formulae is the high variability of many sites. Traditionally, accounting for this 

variability would involve increasing the number of sample plots at a site (i.e., increasing sample 

size). However, in ecosystems where variation is a natural characteristic of the ecosystem, for 

example small seepage areas on rock outcrops, using a greater number of small plots will not 

resolve the issue of high variance. In these cases, it may be more suitable to incorporate the 

ecosystem’s natural variability into the sampling design by using larger plots, instead of more 

of them. Sample size and plot design are described in more detail in section 7.2.4, however, a 

full discussion of replication and statistical study design is beyond the scope of this document; 

restoration practitioners should consult appropriate textbooks (e.g. Zar 2009). 

Controls enable 

the effects of other 

factors, such as a 

very dry spring or 

an unexpectedly 

late frost, to be 

disentangled 

from the effects 

of the restoration 

treatment itself. 

7-8 



4. Distribution of Sample Plots 

Plots are distributed in one of three ways: random, systematic, or representative (Zar 2009). All 

three designs have been used in Garry Oak restoration projects. 

Random distribution of plots is necessary to make inferences with specified levels of 

precision and confidence. An element of randomness can be incorporated into a sampling 

design in a variety of ways. A common way of distributing sample plots is to use a table of 

random numbers, such as those that are found in most statistical textbooks, e.g., Zar (2009), 

to select the “x” and “y” coordinates shown on a grid superimposed on a map of the site (Note 

that random sampling method can be stratified to improve efficiency and obtain better 

results). 

In systematic sampling, plots are distributed over a site according to a 

spacing rule, e.g., every tenth metre on a set of transects evenly spaced 25 

metres apart. 

Representative sampling requires that observers select site(s) that 

they think best represent the typical variation in an area. This subjective 

assessment is commonly used in British Columbia for characterizing 

ecosystems (BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks; BC Ministry 

of Forests 1998). It is the basis of the sampling that was conducted to 

develop the ecological classification of the Province (Biogeoclimatic 

Ecosystem Classification), and thus has gained wide acceptance within 

the professional community as an effective sampling design for the 

diverse ecosystems of B.C. However, data collected from representative 

sample plots cannot be analyzed statistically. 

Whichever of these three methods is selected, it may mis- or under-sample 

conditions that are rare but important. For example, small ephemeral pools 

may represent less than 1% of the landscape in a Garry Oak area, and any of the three sampling 

methods could miss these pools. 

Selective sampling of uncommon ecosystems or elements can provide an increased level of confidence 

that these parts of the ecosystem are being adequately described and effectively monitored. 

Whatever sampling system is used, no matter how many replications are sampled, and whatever 

reference sites are chosen, the same methods must be used during the life of a project, or else 

comparisons among plots and sites over the life of a project will be invalid. 

5. Clearly Organize Information Collection into Three Categories (Stages) 

Selective sampling 

of uncommon 

ecosystems 

or elements 

can provide an 

increased level of 

confidence that 

these parts of the 

ecosystem are 

being effectively 

monitored. 

It is vital that information be collected in a systematic way, using standard formats. Among other 

Whatever sampling system is used, no matter how many replications are sampled, and 

whatever reference sites are chosen, the same methods must be used during the life of a 

project, or else comparisons among plots and sites over the life of a project will be invalid. 



7-9


Biologist James 

Miskelly surveys 

plants at a 

translocation site for 


(Castilleja levisecta). 

See Case Study 1, 

Chapter 4. Photo: 

Nicole Kroeker 

benefits such as reproducibility, this approach avoids duplicating effort (A. Harcombe, pers. 

comm. 2009). The three parts are: 

• Collecting information on the project area or property (Characterizing the site, 7.2.2) 

• Defining the ecological units (Ecological classification, 7.2.3) 

• Sampling within the ecological units (Ecological description, 7.2.4) 

The next three sections describe details of these stages. 

7.2.2 Characterizing the Site 

Once a decision is made to restore a site, the first step is to inspect it, assuming that legal access 

to the land has been secured, and that the landowner has agreed to the restoration. The Land 

Trust Alliance of BC’s Guide to Baseline Inventories (LTABC 2006) provides detailed procedures for 

producing a baseline inventoryreport for conservation properties and may serve as a useful guide 

for restoration practitioners. On the first field visit, the biophysical and geographical scope of the 

project area needs to be recorded, using notes and sketches. Often, this initial information helps 

confirm or revise project objectives and sampling plans. Preliminary samples can be collected, 

such as specimens of dominant plant species and water for chemical analyses. Since some analyses 

take many weeks and even months to complete, an early start on sample collection may save time 

later on. 

Efficient and effective data collection requires adequate preparation prior to visiting the site. This 

implies having a sturdy, waterproof field notebook, preparing and printing data forms, securing 

maps, and gathering together appropriate equipment and field guides. 

Characterizing a site involves recording basic information for the area. The Field Manual for 

Describing Terrestrial Ecosystems, 2nd edition, provides a section on site description that 

contains a list of relevant information, a description of each feature, and a form called the 

7-10 



Ground Inspection Form, number FS882C1) (www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/docs/Lmh/Lmh25-2. 

htm). This version builds upon an earlier edition (Province of British Columbia 1998: note that 

this inventory manual is a revision of a yet earlier version by Luttmerding at al. (1990) which 

has a greater level of detail (D. Polster, pers. comm. 2009)). Additional information that is often 

required for restoration projects can be found in Vesely and Tucker (2004) (see below). 

Standard attributes on the Ground Inspection Form: 

• exact location and boundaries, recorded as latitude and longitude or as UTM coordinates 

• elevation or elevational range in metres 

• general slope in percent or degrees and meso-slope position (crest, upper, middle, lower, toe) 

• predominant aspect and range of aspects in cardinal directions or degrees 

• topography at meso- and macro- levels (relative position of the site within the local area), 

including surface shape—convex, concave, even 

• Ecoregion and Biogeoclimatic subzone or variant 

• moisture regime 

• nutrient regime (general conditions only, no need for detailed soil tests at this point) 

• access points 

• general climate 

• drainage features, especially areas of waterlogging, wetlands, and drainage patterns 

Additional information for Garry Oak and associated ecosystem restoration projects (adapted 

from Vesely and Tucker (2004) and Green and Klinka (1994)): 

• land status: public or privately owned, presence of covenants or other 

legal features, legal boundaries 

• land-use history, e.g., roads, trails, logging, mining, farming 

• natural features on or in the vicinity of the site, such as cliffs and caves 

• contact information for local environmental organizations. These groups 

often are valuable sources of information and can provide long-term 

stewardship for restored areas. 

The use of photopoint 

monitoring 

is strongly 

recommended for 

conducting both 

inventory and 

monitoring. 

As well as recording the above features, the project area should be 

photographed from different perspectives. One method is to take 

photographs in the four cardinal directions from the centre of an ecosystem polygon, as in the 

study of Anniversary Island in the Gulf Islands National Park Reserve (Parks Canada Western and 

Northern Service Centre 2008a). As well, a diversity of photographs should be taken each time 

the site is visited as these will be useful for presentations on the restoration project. The use of 

photo-point monitoring is strongly recommended for conducting both inventory and monitoring. 

Photographs from fixed points provide a visual record of baseline conditions and can be used as a 

monitoring tool to document changes over time. Hall (2002) provides detailed field procedures, 

concepts, and analysis methods. Also, Chapter 6 of the Grassland Conservation Council of 

British Columbia’s grassland monitoring manual describes a photo-point monitoring procedure 

that could be adapted to Garry Oak ecosystems (Delesalle et al. 2009). (Download Grassland 

monitoring manual for BC at www.bcgrasslands.org/publications.htm.) 



7-11


Case Study 1. Photo-point Monitoring 

by Conan Webb 

Photographs are perhaps the easiest method of creating a record of site conditions. When 

taken over a time interval, photographs can record vegetation changes over time—it is for 

this reason that photo-point monitoring is widely used in documenting changes. 

CASE STUDY 

Photos can be used for qualitative reference or for quantitative analysis; quantitative analysis, 

however, requires attention to repeatable protocols. Even if you don’t plan on performing 

quantitative analysis, following a few simple protocols will make qualitative comparisons easier. 

In addition, following some simple protocols will make quantitative analysis possible if someone 

chooses to take this on at a later date. 

Photo-point monitoring requires that each photo in the series be taken from exactly the same point 

(establish a permanent marker!) and precisely framed to encompass the same area of the site (try 

to include an immovable object such as a rock outcrop to assist with framing). Including a vertical, 

brightly-painted pole of a known length within the frame allows viewers to estimate heights of 

ground vegetation layers (this pole should be a known distance from the camera). Make sure that 

you take each photo at the same time every year so that the series shows long-term vegetation 

trends, not seasonal changes in foliage. Keep good notes about your photo sessions; it is all too 

easy to end up with just a pile of photos, and photos alone are useless if you don’t know some basic 

details about where and when they were taken. Notes about the landscape might be important as 

well: while the identity of that yellow flower may have been obvious when you took the photo, it 

may not be identifiable a couple of years later from the photograph alone. 

“Before” photo: The initial baseline 

photo taken in July 2002 prior to 

broom removal and deer fence 

installation. Note that this photo was 

taken at a different time of year and 

is not directly comparable to the May 

2007 photo. The protocol for this site 

calls for both late- and early-season 

photos to be taken each year. The lateseason 

photos such as this one capture 

late season flora such as grasses and, in 

general, can be directly compared only 

to other photos from the same season. 

However, invasive Scotch Broom 

(Cytisus scoparius), which is a perennial 

shrub and the primary species of 

interest, is obviously lacking from the 

May 2007 photo following. 

7-12 



“After” photo: A monitoring 

photo taken in May 2007 after 

six years of broom removal and 

two years after a deer fence 

was installed. This photo shows 

the early-season bloom of 

camas which is not evident in 

late-season photos. This is also 

a good time of year to capture 

Scotch Broom when it is in bloom 

and shows up well in photos. 

Note that the protocol has been 

updated to include a photo 

identification number and date 

on a chalkboard in the image. 

This keeps such information with 

the photo. 

CASE STUDY 

The preceding paragraph touches on only some of the considerations for photo-point monitoring. 

The Photo Point Monitoring Handbook: Field Procedures (Hall 2002) covers photo monitoring in much 

more detail. These protocols have been adapted for use in photo-point monitoring of Garry Oak 

ecosystems at Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site and are included in Appendix 7.1. 

The advantage of photos is that they are relatively quick to take; however analyzing the 

photographs still takes time and it is easy to end up with a backlog of photographs waiting for 

analysis. If analysis is planned time must be set aside for it. The Photo Point Monitoring Handbook: 

Part B: Concepts and Analysis (Hall 2002) goes over photo analysis in detail. While Hall’s method is 

based on prints, this method has been adapted to a completely digital workflow for use at 

Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site. This digital workflow uses free software and is outlined in 

Appendix 7.1. 

While photographs are a widely used method, they do have limitations and the usefulness of 

photo-point monitoring must be assessed in light of project objectives. Photos are best for 

measuring changes in shrubs and trees, while some easily recognizable forbs can be monitored 

using photo-point monitoring, not all species can be easily identified in a photo. 

References 

Hall, F. C. 2002. Photo point monitoring handbook, Forest Service, U.S. Dept. Agriculture. 

www.treeresearchfs.fed.us/pubs/3255. (Accessed 2010). 

Carere, D., K. Harding, E. Rafuse, and R. Underhill. 2010. Species and ecosystems at risk: Fort Rodd 

Hill and Fisguard Lighthouse National Historic Sites of Canada: Summer 2009. Unpublished 

report prepared for Parks Canada Agency, Government of Canada, Victoria, B.C. 

Conan Webb is a Species at Risk Recovery Planner with Parks Canada Agency, Victoria, B.C. 



7-13


7.2.3 Ecological Classification 

Classifying a site into its component ecosystems is important because different ecosystems: 

• may have different restoration challenges 

• often require different treatments 

• may respond to treatments in different ways 

• vary in their suitability for various native species, and 

• provide a reference framework for comparison and may indicate reference conditions. 

The appropriate level of ecological classification depends on the restoration objectives and 

the complexity of the area to be restored. Typically, small areas are generally uniform, so their 

ecological classification is straightforward. However, most Garry Oak ecosystems are ecologically 

complex, consisting of at least several different ecological units. 

Classification involves subdividing the restoration area into component 

ecosystems that are generally uniform (i.e., have similar ecological attributes) 

within themselves but differ from others. Identifying ecosystems present on a 

site is often straightforward because the differences among them are obvious, 

even to the “untrained” eye. For example, a shallow soil ecosystem can be 

separated easily from a deep soil ecosystem by the plant community. 

The different ecosystems are mapped as individual “polygons” on a study area 

map. Aerial photographs are a valuable source of information for delineating 

ecosystems. Generally, the most recent colour photographs at a scale of 1:5,000 

or 1:10,000 are suitable for most restoration projects in Garry Oak ecosystems. 

Coverage of this sort is available for most of the range of Garry Oak 

ecosystems on Vancouver Island. Also, aerial photographs can obtained from 

the provincial government at http://archive.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/crgb/airphoto/ 

index.htm. Aerial photographs can be viewed at the Map Library at the MacPherson Library at 

University of Victoria. Individuals with a University Library card can also check out photographs 

and borrow stereoscopes (calling ahead to 250-721-8230 will help ensure that library staff are 

available to help). Viewing aerial photographs stereoscopically is even more helpful in delineating 

ecosystems because slopes, aspects, and vegetation heights are discernable. 

The CRD Regional Community Atlas is a very useful tool for sites in the Capital Regional District 

(www.crdatlas.ca). It has relatively recent colour orthographic aerial photographs, on which you 

can make measurements, and with the capability of displaying contour intervals. In most cases, 

individual trees are easily recognizable and identifiable. 

Ecological classification can also be completed using satellite imagery combined with Geographic 

Information Systems to create three-dimensional images. Other imaging technologies, such as 

LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), can also be used to facilitate ecological classification. 

Several terrestrial ecological classification systems are used in British Columbia, and at least 

three have been used for Garry Oak ecosystems (Blackwell 2007, Erickson and Meidinger 2007, 

Green and Klinka 1994). For the purposes of this publication, the Restoration Ecosystem Units 

Classification 

involves 

subdividing the 

restoration area 

into component 

ecosystems that 

are generally 

uniform within 

themselves but 

differ from others. 

7-14 



Figure 7.1 A preliminary attempt, for illustration purposes, at applying the Restoration Ecosystem Units (REU) 

classification system to the vegetation of Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site of Canada. 

(REU) system proposed in Chapter 2 is recommended. The REU classification is ecologically 

sound because it is based upon previous studies of Garry Oak ecosystems by qualified ecologists 

(Erickson and Meidinger 2007). As well, the REU classification system is compatible with 

the two other ecological classification systems that are widely used in British Columbia—the 

biogeoclimatic system (Meidinger and Pojar 1991) and the ecoregional system (Demarchi 

1995). REUs are of special importance to restoration practitioners because they also function 

as treatment units, i.e., all polygons of a particular type of REU should respond similarly to a 

restoration treatment. 

The CRD Regional Community Atlas is a very useful tool for sites in the Capital Regional District 

(www.crdatlas.ca). It has relatively recent colour orthographic aerial photographs, on which 

you can make measurements, and with the capability of displaying contour intervals. In most 

cases, individual trees are easily recognized and identified. 



7-15


The Restoration Ecosystem Units (REU) system proposed in Chapter 2 of this publication was 

developed to create functional treatment units for restoration practitioners. It is based on 

previous studies of Garry Oak ecosystems and is compatible with other ecological classification 

systems used in B.C. 

Typically, delineated REU polygons will contain small areas of other ecosystems. Following 

protocols used in Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping (BC Ministry of Forests and Range 2007), 

these inclusions are usually not mapped if they comprise


Typically, choosing appropriate methods for conducting inventories is a 

daunting task because each ecosystem component can be described by many 

different methods. Two considerations help narrow the choices: First, the 

methods must produce data that relate clearly to the objectives. For example, 

if an objective is to decrease the cover of exotic grasses, then a technique 

that measures the cover of these grasses is vital. Second, methods should 

be selected from recognized methodologies because they yield reliable data 

which enable comparisons to be made with information from other projects. 

In cases where there are no established methods, subject-area experts can 

help to develop suitable approaches. The following table may help select 

appropriate methods (Table 7.1). 

In British Columbia, established methods for inventory of ecosystem 

components are well documented in the series published by the British 

Columbia Resources Inventory Standards Committee (www.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/ 

risc/pubs/index.html), and the reader is referred to this source for additional 

information on inventory methods. 

Two key 

considerations will 

help to choose 

appropriate 

inventory 

methods. The 

methods must 

produce data that 

relate clearly to 

the objectives, and 

follow recognized 

methodologies. 

Table 7.1 Levels of inventory for restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems 

Level of 

detail 

Cost and degree 

of effort 

Sampling system 

(how information is 

collected) 

Rigor, reliability 

and utility 

Ecosystem components 

examined (scope and 

depth of detail) 

I 

Low 

Whole area surveys; 

no replication 

Subjective; low rigor; 

applies only to site; 

often used for 

reconnaissance 

Most conventional 

components covered but 

not in depth; overall 

picture recorded; 

qualitative, lists of species 

for example 

II 

Medium 

Representative 

sampling; some 

plot-based sampling; 

little or no 

replication 

Subjective or without 

estimate of error; 

improved reliability 

Vascular plants; conspicuous 

animals, mostly 

vertebrates; general soil 

features such as texture 

and depth; some invertebrates; 

hydrology; 

quantitative 

III 

High 

Systematic or 

random; plot-based 

with replication 

Improved reliability 

and utility; results 

may be publishable in 

technical journals 

Vascular and non-vascular 

plants; vertebrates and 

many invertebrates; 

increased attention to 

soils and hydrology; 

quantitative; basic 

statistical analyses 



7-17


Emily Gonzales 

conducts a 

vegetation survey 

in a Garry Oak 

meadow. Photo: 

Rebecca Best 

7.2.4.1 Vegetation 

Vegetation inventory documents the distribution and abundance of plants in an area slated for 

restoration or in a reference site. Many methods are available for collecting this information (see 

Table 7.3), and the final choice is based on restoration objectives, the scope and complexity of the 

restoration area and time available. Whatever methods are selected, the aim is always to collect 

data that can document the success or failure of the restoration. 

Whatever methods are used, reliable vegetation inventories have several features in common. 

They: 

• Collect voucher specimens. Ideally, this should be done for all species, but certainly for 

unidentifiable plants, according to methods described by Brayshaw (1996). Rare species 

should not be collected but photographed instead. 

• Make multiple visits to a site (Hebda 2007). Limiting factors or essential ecosystem 

characteristics are often not evident if only a single visit is made during a pleasant time of the 

year. Also, some plant species, including some rare ones, are visible only early in the growing 

season. Hence, they would not be detected during a summer or autumn survey. Thus, a plant 

survey at the wrong time of the year may not provide the information needed to carry out a 

successful restoration, or worse, the restoration activities might destroy an endangered or 

threatened species. It is also important to visit a site after extreme events or conditions, e.g., 

heavy rainfall, snow, drought. 

• Note plant vigour. Lack of vigour may indicate nutrient shortages or toxicities. Special 

attention needs to be given to plants that have narrow ecological tolerances. 

Small and uniform sites 

For small and uniform project sites with simple restoration objectives, vegetation inventory may 

consist of a walk over the area to record the distribution and relative abundance (e.g., common, 

less common, rare) of vascular plants present (tree seedlings, shrubs, ferns, herbaceous plants, 

and grasses) in the understorey. Mosses and lichens should also be recorded. Of course, special 

7-18 



attention should be paid to recording rare, desirable, keystone and invasive species. If the area 

occupied by these types of species is important, a GPS unit can be used to define the area’s 

perimeter. Observations on the distribution and abundance of dead trees and fallen limbs and 

logs, commonly referred to as coarse woody debris (CWD), should also be made as these elements 

are crucial habitat materials for many wildlife species. 

Also, in the small and uniform areas typical of some Garry Oak meadow plant communities 

(vernal pools for example), it is often possible to count, map, and measure all trees in the 

overstorey. All trees, including damaged and dead ones (snags), should be measured for their 

height, diameter at breast height (DBH), and crown diameter. Tree height is most easily measured 

by using a “tree measuring stick” or Biltmore stick or by using a clinometer, tape measure, and 

simple geometry. Tree diameter is measured at a standard height of 1.3 m (4.5 ft) from the ground 

(Diameter at Breast Height or DBH). This measurement can be made using a Biltmore stick or a 

diameter tape that measures diameters directly. Snags are measured using the same techniques. 

Crown diameter, or the width of the tree crown, is estimated by measuring the longest axis of the 

crown and then the longest axis at a right angle to the first axis, and taking the average of these 

two measurements. Note any signs of disease, such as scarring (and possible causes, e.g., fire, 

lightning, machinery), dead tops, broken off branches, bracket fungi, and discoloured foliage. 

Plant species, including mosses and lichens, growing on trees should not be overlooked: unknown 

species can be photographed and submitted afterwards to experts. Also, note any evidence of use 

by wildlife, such as browsing, cavities, and bark damage. Ages of trees can be obtained by using 

an increment borer to extract a core from the trunk at 1.3 m above ground level which can then be 

aged by counting annual rings. Taking an increment core from a Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) 

tree can be difficult as oak wood is very hard. Note that the age based on cores taken at 1.3 m is 

the age of a tree above that height, referred to as breast height age. To determine the actual age 

of the tree, the breast height age has to be corrected for the estimated number of years it takes 

trees to reach 1.3 m: unfortunately, this correction factor has not been developed for Garry Oak. 

Alternatively, age can sometimes be determined by counting annual rings in a section of a recently 

downed log. 

Regeneration surveys 

If the regeneration of Garry Oak is an important component of a restoration project, a 

regeneration survey can estimate the number of young oaks on a site. This information can then 

be used to determine if plantings are needed to meet a desired stocking level, i.e. a specified 

number of young oaks per hectare. A survey methodology for British Columbia’s Garry Oak 

ecosystems has not yet been developed, but a modification of the method described by Vesely and 

Tucker (2004) for Oregon could probably be used until an acceptable method is developed. These 

authors suggest distributing circular plots systematically over the area of interest, and counting 

seedlings (DBH


Comprehensive vegetation inventory 

Larger and ecologically more complex areas need a more comprehensive vegetation inventory 

than the simple surveys described above. For these inventories, some form of sampling is required 

because it is not possible or feasible to count everything. There are three important considerations 

in designing more detailed surveys: 

• plot size and shape (square, rectangle, circle, plotless) 

• plot distribution (representative, systematic, or random) 

• sample size (number of plots) 

Selecting the most suitable combination of these three variables can be determined by 

considering project objectives, available resources, and desired reliability of the resulting data 

Consult a biostatistician for advice. Fortunately, previous workers in Garry Oak ecosystems have 

developed several approaches that restoration practitioners can use. 

Provincially, the most commonly used method of vegetation inventory in forested ecosystems is 

described by BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and BC Ministry of Forests (1998). 

In this approach, 20 x 20 m plots (400 m 2 ) are located at sites judged by the investigator to be 

representative of the ecosystem unit under study. Thus, in the forest ecosystems of southern 

Vancouver Island, 400 m 2 plots are considered adequate. Note: for relatively uniform Garry Oak 

ecosystems, 100 m 2 may be an appropriate plot size (D. Polster, pers. comm. 2009). 

Larger sample plots 

Where the ecosystems being sampled are very heterogeneous, e.g., rocky slopes with pockets of 

deeper soil and ephemeral pools and seepage zones, a larger sample plot may be more suitable 

to represent the variability of the site. In these situations, instead of using the sample plot sizes 

described above, size can be determined using the minimal area concept described by Oosting 

(1956). Basically, this method entails establishing plots of increasing size, doubling the size of 

the plot each time, until no (or very few) new species are found. The plot size at this point is 

considered the minimal area (some ecologist then double this area for their surveys). For example, 

an initial plot of 0.5 m 2 might be used. The number of species recorded in that plot is totalled. 

The plot size is then doubled to 1 m 2 and the number of species is counted. The plot size is again 

doubled to 2 m 2 and the number of species is again recorded. If no more species were recorded in 

the 2 m 2 plot, then this would be the minimal plot size. 

Regardless of plot area and shape, vegetation is divided conventionally into four layers (Table 

7.2), and the cover of each species is estimated for each layer as a percentage of the surface area 

of the plot, to the nearest whole number. Defining layers and estimating percent cover takes a 

lot of practice, and training with an experienced surveyor is desirable. For specific information 

on defining layers and estimating cover, refer to Section 3 in the Field Manual for Describing 

Terrestrial Ecosystems (www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/docs/Lmh/Lmh25-2.htm). Note that some 

low-growing shrub species (e.g., Kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)) have been assigned to 

the herb layer. Consult Table 3.1 in the above Field Manual for a list of these species. Also, record 

species seen in the area but not recorded in the plot, as well noting species not seen but expected 

in the area. 

All trees in the overstorey, or A layer, are identified and measured for DBH, height, and crown 

area, using methods noted previously. 

7-20 



Table 7.2 Vegetation layers commonly used in inventory of Garry Oak ecosystems (after BC Ministry of Environment, 

Lands and Parks and BC Ministry of Forests (1998)) 

Layer 

A 

B1 

B2 

C 

D 

Vegetation 

Tree layer 

Tall shrubs 

Low shrubs 

Herbs 

Ground layer 

Description 

Includes all woody plants greater than 10 metres tall 

Includes all shrubs and regenerating trees between 2 and 10 m 

Includes all shrubs and regenerating trees less than 2 m tall 

Includes all non-woody plants such as ferns, grasses, grass-like plants, forbs, 

saprophytes, some low-growing, woody species, and species of “doubtful” 

life form 

Includes tree seedlings less than 2 years old and mosses, lichens, and 

liverworts 

Measuring coarse woody debris 

Coarse woody debris can be measured by using two 24 metre transects that are centered on the 

plot centre. The bearing of the first transect is randomly selected and the second transect is 

placed at right angles to the first. The following characteristics are measured for each piece of 

CWD intercepted by these transects: 

• diameter 

• decay class, based on the entire piece, by using the table of decay class indicators 

(in www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Lmh/Lmh25.htm) 

• tilt angle of each piece 

• length of each piece, measured or estimated 

Consult the following website for additional details: 

www.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/teecolo/fmdte/cwd.htm. 

Small plot surveys 

Instead of using one large plot, another approach involves using a set of small plots. In this 

method, plant cover is estimated for each understorey vegetation layer. Typically, the herb and 

ground layers (C and D in Table 7.2) are assessed using either 1 m 2 plots that are square, circular, 

or rectangular, or a 20- x 50 cm quadrat (Gayton 2003), called the Daubenmire frame after an 

American plant ecologist who pioneered this approach. The shrub layer (B) is assessed using a 

larger plot, usually 2 m 2 or 3 m 2 in size. Plots are either clustered together around a plot centre 

in a grid pattern, or spaced along one or more transects. For systematic layouts, sample plots 

are usually placed along transects that are oriented across the slope of the site to maximize 

the amount of variability within a transect. Note that an element of randomness is preferred if 

statistical inferences are planned, and a biostatistician can advise how best to do this. 

In these small plot surveys, plant cover is usually estimated visually for each plot, either to the 

nearest percent or by cover classes (see BC Ministry of Forests and Range and BC Ministry of 



7-21


Environment (2010) for a guide to cover classes). Estimating cover to the nearest percent may 

seem to be the best choice, but percent cover is difficult to estimate consistently among observers. 

Using cover classes helps overcome this problem. For example, individuals are more likely to agree 

on a cover class rating that spans 5–20% than they are to agree on a cover estimate of 15%. Two 

commonly used plant cover scales are the Daubenmire method, with six cover classes, and the 

Braun-Blanquet system which features ten cover classes (Mueller-Dombois and Ellenberg 1974). 

Point and line intercept methods 

Although visual estimation of plant cover in small plots is the most commonly used technique 

in Garry Oak ecosystems, some workers have used point and line intercept methods, e.g., on 

Anniversary and Eagle Islands in the Gulf Islands National Park Reserve (Gulf Islands National 

Park Reserve 2008a, 2008b). An example of the point intercept method was on Anniversary 

Island, where plant species occurring at 50 and 130 cm above the ground at 50 cm intervals along a 

transect (a tape measure stretched between two end points) were recorded. In a variation on this 

method, forb and grass intercepts were recorded on a 10 cm spaced grid in a 1 x 1 m quadrat. With 

line intercept, the length of the transect intercepted by each plant species is recorded. 

There is a group of methods that do not require laying out plots. Known as “plotless” methods, 

they rely on measuring distances between plot centres and individual plants and/or distances 

between individual plants. These methods do not appear to have been used in Garry Oak 

inventories, and so are not covered in this chapter. If readers wish more information on these 

methods, they should contact a plant ecologist or consult a plant ecology text. 

7.2.4.2 Soils, Landforms, and Surficial Geology 

Soil inventories can reveal potential management problems such as predisposition to erosion 

or compaction, and can help guide the selection of plant species for re-vegetation. Similar to 

vegetation inventory, soils can be inventoried at various levels of detail. Whatever level of detail is 

selected, it is useful to bear in mind that soils have three major components—physical, chemical, 

and biological—and that all soil information can be organized under these three headings. 

The first step for soils inventory is to collect information from existing soil survey reports for the 

site and the surrounding area. Consult Day et al. (1959), Jungen (1985), and Muller (1980) for soils 

information for southeastern Vancouver Island. This step provides a preliminary information 

base, but a field-based inventory is also needed to: a) relate soils of the study area to those 

described in the soils reports, and b) collect information specific to the area. 

The second step is to subdivide or stratify the project area into meaningful soil units. Usually, the 

restoration ecosystem units (REUs) defined in Chapter 2 serve this purpose, just as they do for 

vegetation. However, it is helpful to confirm this stratification with a soil scientist to ensure its 

accuracy. 

The third step is to characterize the soil in each REU polygon. This calls for digging several test 

holes (soil pits) in each major REU and at reference sites. Test holes should extend through the 

root zone, usually 50-60 cm deep, but may be shallower if the basic parent material is reached. 

Soil inventories should be conducted in June, when soils can be dug easily. This approach was 

used in surveying Garry Oak Restoration Project (GORP) sites in Saanich municipality (Giasson 

and Maxwell 2002). 

7-22 



TABLE 7.3 Methods used to sample vegetation in selected projects in Garry Oak ecosystems 

Source/ 

study area 

Sampling 

system and 

aim 

Sampling 

design 

Plot size and 

shape for 

layers sampled 

Layers 

sampled 

Sampling 

frequency 

Sampling 

intensity 

Anniversary 

Island – 

monitoring 

for 

Polygon B 

Line 

intercept 

for percent 

cover 

8 parallel 

transects, 

10 m apart, 

oriented 

perpendicular 

to the slope 

Species 

intercepted 

every 50 cm at 

50 cm and 130 

cm above 

ground 

Understorey 

and low 

shrub layers 

Anniversary 

Island – 

monitoring 

for 

Polygon A 

2 transects 

2m apart, 

oriented 

parallel to the 

long axis of 

the treatment 

area 

As for 

Polygon B 

Eagle Island 

effectiveness 

monitoring 

Point 

intercept 

Randomly 

distributed 

quadrats 

1 x 1 m, 

permanently 

marked with 

steel 

Forbs and 

grasses: 120 x 

120 cm frame 

with a nylon 

grid spaced 

every 10 cm – 

all species 

recorded as 

well as ground 

cover 

Shrub layer: 2 x 

2 m frames 

centred over 

the 1 x 1 m 

forb /grass 

plots–percent 

cover estimated 

for two vertical 

strata: low 

shrubs


The following properties can be gathered from soil test holes (Green and Klinka 1994): 

• general depth of soil, i.e., depth to the parent material 

• presence and average thickness of accumulated humus (Ah horizon) and other visible layers 

• proportion of coarse fragments (rocks > 2 mm) of soil volume 

• texture in the rooting zone. Texture is estimated in the field by a simple technique that 

indicates the relative proportions of sand, silt, and clay in the soil (see Appendix 4 in Green 

and Klinka (1994) or Steinfeld et al. (2007:52) 

• presence of mottling or gleying that indicates temporary or fluctuating water tables 

• humus form (see pages 15-16 in Soils section of BC Ministry of Forests and Range and BC 

Ministry of Environment (2010)) 

• root restricting layer, if present, and type of restriction, e.g., bedrock, cemented layer 

• surficial materials, e.g., lacustrine, glacial till, alluvium, colluvium. 

• description of organic material and thickness 

• presence of earthworms and other biota 

• relative moisture regime (see Appendix 5 in Green and Klinka (1994)) 

• relative nutrient regime (see Appendix 6 in Green and Klinka (1994)) 

In addition to these features, chemical attributes such as pH can be assessed using field kits, e.g., 

Hach kits or the LaMotte waterproof pH meter. 

All of these soil features can impact restoration treatments. For example, depth to an impervious 

layer, texture, extreme rockiness, proneness to compaction, erosion susceptibility, burning 

history, and drainage can all affect the selection of plants to be used for restoration. Soil samples 

should be collected and pictures taken of the soil profile if unusual situations are encountered, 

e.g., suspected contamination. 

In some situations, a more detailed level of soil inventory is required. This entails digging soil pits 

and describing a wide variety of soil attributes (e.g., colour, texture) for each soil layer or horizon. 

If even more complex analyses are warranted, e.g., if trace element deficiencies are suspected, soil 

samples can be sent to an analytical laboratory. Most soils laboratories specify the method for 

collecting soil samples for analyses. Usually, soil samples are collected from at least six sites to a 

depth of 15 cm, and then mixed thoroughly. Of course, if the project area has obviously different 

soils (e.g., a wet low-lying area versus an exposed shallow soil area) each type needs to be sampled 

separately. 

Detailed inventory of soil biota is best left to experts. Inventories and identification of soil 

organisms usually requires specialized knowledge and equipment. The need for this level of detail 

in a restoration project can be judged by referring to project objectives and by consulting a soil 

scientist. 

7-24 



7.2.4.3 Inventory and Monitoring of Animals 

General considerations 

Inventory and monitoring of animals faces many challenges. Animals are: 

• mobile (so it is often difficult to see them clearly and to know how much time they actually 

spend in an area) 

• cryptic (so they are difficult to see) 

• night-active (which makes detection difficult) 

• often silent for most of the year (so using auditory clues is not always possible) 

• widely variable in their behaviour and ecology, necessitating inventory methods that are 

“customized” to take advantage of their particular attributes. For example, some bat calls are 

beyond human hearing ability and so specialized equipment is needed for their detection. 

Thus, collecting animal data on an ecological unit basis can be tricky. Detected individuals may 

be from a broader area, and the animal may freely roam around many units. Observers may 

displace animals from their typical habitat, complicating an understanding of species-habitat 

relationships. 

Three types of vertebrate inventory are possible: present/not detected, relative abundance, 

and absolute abundance (Caughley 1977). The choice of type of inventory depends on project 

objectives, but estimates of absolute abundance are not often undertaken because they are 

expensive, time-consuming, and usually unnecessary. The basic level of inventory involves 

recording animal presence. Not seeing an animal is not conclusive proof that it is absent, even 

after many surveys. The most that can be said is that the species was not detected. Relative 

abundance involves using methods that detect changes in numbers, but do not yield the actual 

numbers of animals present nor the actual change in numbers. Absolute abundance uses methods 

that estimate the actual numbers of individuals present. This is almost always estimated by 

sampling as it is virtually impossible to make accurate direct total counts of animals. 

For all three types of inventory, many methods are available. The reader is advised to consult 

standard textbooks, such as Krebs (1999), for further information, or consult species experts. 

Another invaluable source of information for British Columbia is the provincial government’s 

Resource Inventory Standards Committee (RISC) website which contains standard methods for 

most vertebrate and some invertebrate species (http://archive.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/tebiodiv/ 

index.htm). 

Any inventory that involves handling or marking vertebrates requires permits as specified by 

legislation (e.g., Wildlife Act, Species At Risk Act), and by permitting policies of municipal, 

regional, provincial, and federal governments. All necessary permits must be obtained before field 

work begins. 

Special mention must be made for studies of amphibians, especially for surveys where several 

ponds are visited. It is essential to follow the Standard Operating Procedure: Hygiene Protocols 

for Amphibian Fieldwork. Also, consult the Amphibian Disease page on the BC Frogwatch 

Program’s website (www.naturewatch.ca/english/frogwatch/bc) to avoid spreading diseases such 

as the amphibian chytrid fungus (Bratrachochytrium dendrobatidis) and ranavirus. In short, 

thoroughly disinfect boats, boots, and equipment between survey sites. 



7-25


A useful first step in animal inventory is to create a list of species expected at the site. Such a list 

can be based on check lists, relevant references, and the expertise and experience of competent 

local biologists and naturalists. 

In the field, all species seen or heard should be recorded, noting the date, time of day, weather 

conditions, and the habitat(s) or REUs in which animals are sighted. For unknown animals, 

photographs and detailed notes (e.g., colour, size, prominent features) will aid in identification. 

Because many animals are difficult to find, signs such as tracks, scats, burrows, or dens are often 

the only evidence of a species’ presence. 

Amphibians 

Identification of amphibians found in Garry Oak ecosystems can be facilitated by field guides 

and the pamphlet published by BC Ministry of Environment (see BC Frogwatch Program). These 

sources help determine the species to be expected at study sites and also aid in the identification 

of adults, larvae, and egg masses of amphibians. Data collected on frogs can be entered in the 

BC Frogwatch Program website (www.naturewatch.ca/english/frogwatch/bc). Note that all frog 

species found in B.C.’s Garry Oak ecosystems are pond breeders. Of the six salamanders that occur 

here, three species do not require standing water. General information on inventory methods 

is presented below, and the reader is directed to the following website (http://archive.ilmb.gov. 

bc.ca/risc/pubs/tebiodiv/index.htm) for detailed descriptions of standard survey methods for 

pond-breeding amphibians and terrestrial salamanders. 

Present/not detected surveys 

Amphibian surveys are either aquatic or terrestrial, and involve searching for egg masses, 

larvae, and adults. 

One aquatic approach is to listen for vocal species that can be detected and recorded by call 

at the appropriate times of year during optimum weather conditions, such as warm calm 

evenings. Silent species and surveys at the wrong season or in sub-optimal weather conditions 

will yield incomplete information. For example, Pacific Chorus Frogs (Pseudacris regilla) 

call from late March to May; Northern Red-legged Frogs (Rana aurora) call under water in 

February and can only be heard using a hydrophone; Bullfrogs (Lithobastes castesbeianus) 

bellow their characteristic call in July. 

A second aquatic method is to search ponds for adult frogs, salamanders, and toads by sitting 

or walking quietly along pond edges, especially at the north-eastern corner of ponds where 

amphibians often aggregate. Binoculars and dip nets are two important pieces of equipment 

for these surveys. 

A third aquatic method focuses on larvae and egg masses. Tadpoles and salamander larvae 

can be captured using a dip net while wading along shallow parts of a wetland or from a boat, 

canoe, or kayak. Minnow traps work well, but traps must be partly in air as trapped animals 

must have access to air. Identification of tadpoles and larvae can be tricky, and is best done by 

an experienced herpetologist. 

Surveys for egg masses require exploration of pond edges by walking or by canoe, rowboat, 

or kayak. Egg masses are gelatinous blobs with dark centres, often attached to underwater 

vegetation or submerged branches. Detecting and identifying egg masses requires practice, so 

7-26 



field guides and local herpetologists are important resources. Because not all species lay their 

eggs at the same time, surveys must be conducted at the optimum time for the target species. 

Terrestrial surveys are also used to detect amphibians. Most amphibians found in Garry 

Oak ecosystems can be found in the terrestrial environment at some time during a year. 

Some of these species will travel a considerable distance from water, such as Rough-skinned 

Newt (Taricha granulosa) and Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas). Some of the salamanders 

found in Garry Oak ecosystems, such as Ensatina (Ensatina eschscholtzii), Western Redback 

Salamander (Plethodon vehiculum), and Wandering Salamander (Aneides vagrans), do not 

require standing water to breed and are found in the terrestrial environment all year round. 

The best way to locate these species in daylight is to look under woody debris, vegetation, 

and other cover objects where the animals hide (taking care not to destroy their habitat in the 

search!). During the spring, amphibians like colder and wetter weather, and might come out 

of hiding so they are more easily detected. During wet nights, amphibians can be detected on 

the forest floor or on the roads in the survey area. For night surveys, strong flashlights or flood 

lights are required and for safety reasons, work in teams of at least two people. The terrestrial 

salamanders are often easiest to find using cover boards (see the appropriate RISC manual 

for details). 

Relative abundance 

Relative abundance can be obtained by standardizing the above mentioned searches for 

amphibians. For example, the relative abundance for vocalizing frogs can be determined 

by listening for a set number of minutes at predetermined spots in wetlands. At each spot, 

estimate how many frogs can be heard and what species are calling. Sometimes it is not 

feasible to count individual frogs when many are calling, such as the Pacific Chorus Frog. In 

these situations, number categories (0, 1-5, 6-20, >20) or categories of relative calling intensity 

can be created, such as those recommended by Frogwatch (www.naturewatch.ca/english/ 

frogwatch/bc/steps.html). 

For example: 

T (trace) – no frogs or toads heard 

L (low) – individuals can be counted; calls not overlapping 

M (medium) – some individuals can be counted; other calls overlapping 

H (high) – full chorus; calls continuous and overlapping; individuals not distinguishable 

Aquatic spotting surveys can be standardized by establishing survey points, duration, time 

of day, and weather conditions, and repeating surveys under these conditions, as much as 

possible. Even with rigorous standardization, it is important to keep in mind that observer 

bias influences detection of adults and eggs masses. Since observers are likely to vary from 

survey to survey and year to year, it may be preferable to rely on trapping because it has the 

least observer bias. 

To obtain relative abundance of terrestrial salamanders, the best method is to conduct cover 

board surveys under standardized conditions. However, for some species, mark-recapture 

techniques can be used to establish relative abundance. The latest marking method uses 

coloured elastomers or passive interrogation tags (PIT): both methods require injecting 

the marker under the animal’s skin. To prevent injuring the animals, both of these methods 



7-27


require involvement by professionals with relevant experience in injecting markers. In lieu 

of professionals, proper training is essential and is likely to be a mandatory condition of a 

permit. 

Absolute abundance 

Short of draining a pond and counting what is present (not logistically feasible nor 

acceptable), the method of choice is mark-recapture. This technique is labour intensive and 

is usually not necessary unless changes in numbers of amphibians is a project objective. 

Moreover, there is currently no RISC manual available to determine absolute abundance of 

terrestrial salamanders. 

Reptiles 

Snakes and Lizards 

Four snake species and two lizard species occur in B.C.’s Garry Oak ecosystems. The most 

abundant snake is the Northwestern Garter Snake (Thamnophis ordinoides), and the two less 

common species are the Common Garter Snake (T. sirtalis) and the Western Terrestrial Garter 

Snake (T. elegans). The Endangered Sharp-tailed Snake (Contia tenuis) is the rarest species. The 

two lizard species are the native Northern Alligator Lizard (Elgaria coerulea principis), which is 

relatively common and widespread, and the introduced European Wall Lizard (Podacris muralis) 

which is mainly found in parts of the Capital Region District (Durrance Road, south of Brentwood 

Bay in Saanichton) and in Duncan (Bertram 2004). 

Identification of reptiles found in areas with Garry Oak ecosystems can be facilitated by field 

guides or the pamphlet published by the Ministry of Environment (see BC Frogwatch Program 

website). The BC Frogwatch Program website also allows data to be entered and helps determine 

what species occur in the area. 


Surveys for the presence of reptiles can entail sight surveys, trapping, or use of artificial cover 

objects (ACOs). The procedure for sight surveys calls for walking quietly around the study 

Herpetologist Christian 

Engelstoft creates a monitoring 

station by placing an asphalt 

cover object in potential Sharptailed 

Snake (Contia tenuis) 

habitat. This method avoids 

disturbance of natural habitat 

features like rotten logs, 

rock piles, and forest litter. 

Landowners contribute to the 

research by checking for snakes 

under the artificial cover objects. 

Photo: Todd Carnahan 

7-28 



area on warm sunny days in the spring, or along roads during summer nights, and searching 

for animals. 

A more intensive survey method involves trapping. Most snakes and lizards can be trapped 

in funnel traps outfitted with drift fences that lead the animals into the traps. The Sharptailed 

Snake is a special case and the best way to detect this species is by distributing up to 

20 ACOs (small pieces of asphalt roofing materials approximately 30 x 60 cm) every 5–10 

metres along meandering transects in suitable micro-habitat, i.e., south-facing rocky slopes 

with CWD or litter or duff. The ACOs are then checked approximately weekly to see if snakes 

are underneath. Because the Sharp-tailed Snake can be found in areas with rare plants it 

is important not to cover any of these plants with ACOs. As with amphibian inventory, it is 

critical to ensure that all applicable permits have been obtained before handling reptiles. 


As with amphibians, relative abundance can be assessed by standardizing presence surveys. 

Another approach is to use time-constrained, quadrat or transect searches (See RISC Manual 

38: www.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/tebiodiv/snakes/assets/snake.pdf) under standardized 

conditions. For example, search a defined area for 15 minutes in the summer under sunny and 

warm conditions. When the same area is to be searched several or more times, it is important 

to minimize damage to the habitat, for example by dividing an area into subunits and 

searching different subunits on different surveys. Weekly surveys of ACOs in spring and fall 

and bi-weekly in summer can be used, but these surveys are very labour-intensive and their 

effectiveness is untested. 


Direct counts for determining total numbers is not possible for reptiles, so some type of markrecapture 

study is necessary to estimate absolute abundance. Unless a restoration project is 

directed at the recovery of an endangered reptile, this level of intensity is not necessary. 

Turtles 

The two most common turtles found in B.C.’s Garry Oak ecosystems are the Endangered Western 

Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta belii) and the introduced Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta). 

Several other introduced species can be found throughout the region. 


Determining the presence of these species requires a land-based vantage point or a floating 

platform, such as rowboat, canoe, or kayak, from which the shoreline can be scanned. Surveys 

need to take place on sunny days in the spring (March, April, and May) when basking is at its 

peak. Up to 3–5 surveys may be necessary to confirm presence or likely absence of turtles. 


Relative abundance can be estimated by conducting visual surveys that are standardized 

either by time or survey locations or both. Relative abundance can also be obtained by mark 

and recapture methods, but before engaging in capturing and handling turtles, practitioners 

need to take training and obtain the appropriate permits, as both species are protected by the 

BC Wildlife Act. 



7-29


To capture turtles, basking traps and baited hoop traps are tried-and-true methods, and 

both might be needed as there appears to be seasonal variation in the success of these traps. 

From mark and recapture methods, population estimates can be derived if individual turtles 

can be identified. A marking method is described in RISC manual 37, and the shell notching 

approach is recommended as it is the least invasive method. There are no RISC methods to 

determine absolute population estimates of turtles. 

Birds 


The simplest method is to record all birds seen and heard in the area, preferably over the 

course of a year to pick up resident, breeding, and migrating species (Many field guides are 

available, e.g., Dunn and Alderfer (2006), and the novice can consider improving their bird 

identification skills by participating in birding field trips offered by local naturalist clubs.) 

Many birds are most likely to be detected at dawn during breeding season, but Gross (1995) 

conducted winter surveys. The presence of owls can be detected, especially during the 

breeding season, by listening, calling, or playing calls plugged into a loud speaker. As well, all 

signs of bird activity, such as tree cavities or old nests, should be recorded. If it is only possible 

to sample one time, then spring is best as it will most likely pick up birds breeding in the area, 

although migrants will be missed. Field data can often be augmented by reference to local bird 

checklists and by contacting local naturalists. 


Relative abundance can be estimated in a variety of ways, but whatever methods are used, 

surveys should be conducted within two hours either side of sunrise when birds are most 

active. One common and straightforward way to get a sense of estimating relative numbers 

is to use the subjective scale of abundance, often found in bird checklists. Most owls are an 

obvious exception 

to this method: owls are usually surveyed at night and the rate of calling under standard 

conditions can indicate approximate changes in abundance. 

More detailed information can be gathered by recording birds seen along transects. In this 

method, the observer walks along transects at a steady pace and records all birds seen or heard 

within a pre-determined strip centered on the transect, over a specified time period. One 

variation on this method is to record the distance and angle of birds seen from the transect. 

When transects are surveyed repeatedly, temporal patterns can be detected. 

The most detailed method for estimating relative abundance is spot counts. In this method, 

a series of stations are set out along transects that are distributed across the study area. The 

observer records all birds seen or heard at each station during a fixed time period, usually 

5–20 minutes. Transects and stations need to be placed far enough apart to minimize duplicate 

counting. 


As with other vertebrates, absolute abundance can be estimated with mark-recapture studies, 

but these require significant effort. 

7-30 



Mammals 


As with birds, record all mammals seen, plus all signs of activity, such as tracks, scats, and 

dens. 


Inventory methods for mammals vary according to the type of mammal being counted. Livetrapping 

is usually used to inventory small mammals like rodents because they are unlikely 

to be seen. Traps are baited and placed along transects that cover the entire study area. Pitfall 

traps have been used for shrews but they are problematic because the trapped animals often 

die. 

Columbian Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) are the most common large 

mammal found in Garry Oak ecosystems, and they are often a consideration in restoration 

because they can damage plantings. For most Garry Oak restoration projects, estimating 

the relative abundance of deer is the most practical type of inventory. Relative abundance is 

commonly based on pellet group counts, and for details on conducting pellet group surveys 

consult http://archive.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/tebiodiv/index.htm (Manual 33). 

A local example of a pellet group survey is that designed by Mercer (2006) for use in the Gulf 

Island National Park Reserve. Pellet counts involve regular counting and clearing of pellet 

groups in 10 m 2 circular plots that are spaced at 40 m intervals along sampling transects. 

The plot area is defined by placing the end loop of a 1.78 m plot cord over the centre point 

(e.g., nail) of the plot and extending the cord to its full length, to establish the plot radius. 

Moving the plot cord in a clockwise or counter-clockwise direction 360 o around the plot 

defines the full plot. Any pellet group that is 50% or more within the plot area and (a) 

consists of 10 or more pellets, 10 cm or more away from the next closest pellet group, or (b) is 

distinguishable (“newer” or “older”) from the next closest pellet group, is counted. After all 

groups are counted, the plot cord is rotated in the opposite direction and groups are counted 

a second time to verify the initial count. The plot is cleared of pellet groups when the count is 

completed to the satisfaction of the sampling team, so that subsequent sampling will detect 

pellet groups deposited since the previous sampling date. To detect seasonal changes, plots 

can be cleared and counted in the fall and thereafter in early spring and late fall. Additional 

surveys can be conducted in mid-summer (late June to early July). 

Results of pellet group surveys must be interpreted with caution. Increased pellet group 

densities could indicate an increase in numbers, but they could also indicate increased use of 

the survey area, or a combination of both. 


Determining absolute abundance for vertebrates is a costly and time-consuming enterprise, 

and should not be undertaken without the advice and guidance of a vertebrate ecologist. 

Normally, this level of measurement is not required in Garry Oak restoration, except for 

threatened and endangered species, in which case estimates of absolute numbers may be 

necessary. 



7-31


Invertebrates 


Certain large invertebrates, like butterflies, can be detected by searching for them 

systematically during appropriate times of day and weather conditions. All potential habitats 

should be searched. Time of year is important. In the case of butterflies, a site should be 

re-surveyed every two to three weeks from early spring through the summer to account for 

different flight seasons among the different species. 

Species that are under-represented in visual searches may be detected more easily with a 

variety of passive trapping approaches. For example, spiders are usually sampled using pitfall 

traps. Other groups may be better sampled using pan or malaise traps. These are generally 

lethal methods, but may be the best way to confirm the presence of certain taxa. Some groups 

may be sampled non-lethally using artificial cover objects. 


Relative abundance can be determined by using the same methods as for presence/ 

absence status but standardizing and repeating the sample. For example, the usual way to 

determine relative abundance in butterflies is to walk a fixed-width transect at a fixed rate of 

travel during standardized weather conditions and times of day (Pollard 1977). Only those 

butterflies that are seen within a certain distance from the observer are counted. 

In other parts of North America, native bees are being surveyed through timed observation 

of a single variety of sunflower (LeBuhn 2010). A similar approach could be developed using 

native flowers, or a site-specific plan could use a fixed transect where all flowers are checked at 

a fixed rate. 

In the case of species that are best detected using traps or artificial cover objects, relative 

abundance could be determined through repeat sampling of objects or traps that are set in 

fixed locations, representative of the whole site, and checked after set periods of time. 


Absolute abundance can really only be determined through mark/recapture studies. It is 

important to note that these studies can have significant negative impacts on invertebrates 

(Murphy 1988). Determining absolute abundance is of questionable value for invertebrates, 

especially for rare species. Many invertebrates have short life cycles (often one year) and 

population numbers are highly responsive to variables, such as weather conditions and 

relationships with predators and parasites. Absolute abundance is likely to vary greatly from 

one year to the next. With rare species or small populations, mark/recapture studies will 

result in estimates with very low certainty (Murphy 1988). Moreover, the population is the 

more meaningful conservation unit in these cases anyway, and relative abundance is likely to 

be a better tool for measuring changes. 

For butterflies, transects can be set up and then monitored regularly. It is important to be 

consistent and to account for factors such as weather (e.g., monitor only under optimal 

conditions for butterfly flight, which are generally warm, sunny weather during the warmer 

period of the day). 

7-32 



For other insects, regular observations can be made of pollinators. Transects can be set up to 

make regular observations of the presence and abundance of insects in foliage. 

Gastropods 

An emerging topic is the distribution and species composition of gastropods in Garry Oak 

ecosystems, partly because of the increasing number of listed species and the occurrence 

of invasive species. Examples are the Endangered Blue-grey Taildropper slug (Prophysaon 

coeruleum), the Red-listed Threaded Vertigo snail (Nearctula spp), the Blue-listed Pacific 

Sideband snail (Monadenia fidelis) and the Blue-listed Scarletback Taildropper slug (Prophysaon 

vanattae). Forsyth’s (2004) Land Snails of British Columbia is a helpful reference. 

For larger species in the study area, present/not detected surveys can be done by searching leaf 

litter, downed woody debris, tree trunks, vegetation, and similar objects. Placing and monitoring 

artificial cover objects made of corrugated cardboard (30 x 30 cm, 3 layers deep) is another 

approach often used to determine the presence of gastropods, e.g. Ovaska and Sopuck (2010). For 

smaller species (less than 5 mm), samples of the litter layer are dried and then sifted with three 

sifts, each with progressively smaller holes. 

Relative abundance can be determined by conducting searches that are limited in the size of the 

search area or in their duration (often referred to as time and/or area constrained searches) or by 

quadrat searches. Standardized searches of artificial cover objects can also be used to estimate 

relative abundance. Absolute abundance is not possible to determine with current methods. See 

Duncan et al. (2003) for a full discussion of survey methods for gastropods. 

7.2.4.4 Water (Hydrology) 

Inventory of water primarily involves observations of drainage patterns. Maps and field surveys in 

the wet season are needed to locate low lying areas, seeps, and vernal pools. Indicator plants (see 

Klinka et al. 1989) are often helpful in determining damp places. 

It is also important to assess adjacent areas for the risk of topographic alternations that could 

affect the restoration area’s hydrology. If there is funding, and the restoration area is large, then 

hiring a hydrologist for a day or two is helpful. However, this is probably not necessary for small 

projects unless there will be major construction or development adjacent to the site, with an 

increased potential for changes in water flow on the restoration site. 

Attention should be directed to investigating historical changes to hydrology. For example, a 

restoration site’s hydrology could have been altered already by underground drainage pipes and 

ditching or the redirection of drainage courses, as was carried out historically above the Garry Oak 

woodland at Government House in Victoria. Such historical impacts could change habitats for 

some rare plants (B. Costanzo, pers. comm. 2010). 

The location and extent of all streams, lakes, and wetlands need to be carefully delineated, as all 

activities in the adjacent riparian zones are regulated by the provincial government’s Riparian 

Areas Regulation (www.env.gov.bc.ca/habitat/fish_protection_act/riparian/riparian_areas.html). 

Note that ephemeral or winter streams are included in this regulation, so it is important to survey 

project areas in winter to identify these streams: they may not be apparent in the summer when 

they have dried up. 

A useful strategy is to visit a restoration site in the late winter after a heavy rainfall and note 



7-33


where there are pools of standing water and drainage trackways and what their limits are. Noting 

the elevation limits of high water in ponds and lakes at this time of the year helps define the 

hydrologic conditions in some Garry Oak stands. Common Rush (Juncus effusus) is a useful 

indicator of sites that are wet during the winter months. Mottled soils are also good indicators of 

poor drainage. 

7.2.4.5 Climate 

For most Garry Oak restoration projects, climate information is usually referenced as part of a 

general description of the study area. The usual parameters of interest are: 

• rainfall: average monthly and average annual amounts 

• temperature: monthly and annual means; average monthly and annual maxima and minima 

• frost-free period 

Typically, this information is taken from long-term Environment Canada climate stations, usually 

located at airports. Since most Garry Oak sites are not at airports, these data may not accurately 

reflect the local climate of a site. More local records may be available from the University of 

Victoria’s school-based weather system (www.victoriaweather.ca). More than 20 stations have 

been established in the Greater Victoria school districts, many of which are close to restoration 

sites. Stations have also been installed as far north as Campbell River, and these may provide 

local records for Garry Oak sites elsewhere on Vancouver Island. It is also possible to collect 

weather data inexpensively by using iButtons to measure temperature and relative humidity 

(www.maxim-ic.com/products/ibutton). 

Variation in site-specific climate (also referred to as micro-climate) is of most interest to 

restoration practitioners. These fine-scale variations are important for selecting plant species and 

for determining where and when particular species are planted. Noting where late season frost 

pockets occur is a useful observation when selecting plant species or scheduling planting. 

7.3 Monitoring: Assessing Success 

Monitoring is the act of making repeated measurements of a meaningful indicator. It involves 

answering the question: Is the baseline condition changing? Monitoring is an integral part 

of a restoration project, and corresponds to the seventh stage in the process of conducting a 

restoration project (see Chapter 5: Restoration Planning). Monitoring is a tool that measures 

progress in achieving restoration objectives, and identifies problems that might affect their 

achievement. If recovery of a damaged ecosystem is important enough to invest time and 

money, then it is equally important to assess whether or not restoration actions are effective. A 

monitoring program can identify deviations from the projected trajectory of ecosystem recovery, 

so that adjustments can be made. For example, if a project objective was to eradicate an exotic 

plant, and monitoring showed that the species was still present after a specified period of time, 

then an opportunity and need exist to use alternative removal methods before the species recovers 

to dominate the site again. 

This section addresses the following aspects of a successful monitoring program: 

7-34 



• What is monitoring and why is it important? 

• What sites should be monitored? 

• What should be measured? 

• What methods should be used? 

• When, how often, and for how long should monitoring be done? 

The material in this section is adapted with permission from Hebda (2010) and the Coastal 

Services Center, National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration’s website 

(www.csc.noaa.gov/coastal/management/management.htm). 

7.3.1 What is Monitoring and Why is it Important? 

There are three different types or purposes of monitoring: implementation monitoring 

(evaluation), effectiveness monitoring (assessment), and validation monitoring. The first type, 

evaluation, involves determining how well a restoration prescription or program was implemented 

compared to the plans. For example, were techniques applied properly and at the appropriate 

time, were the designated plant species used and planted according to directions? 

Assessment or effectiveness monitoring, involves determining whether or not the prescription 

had the intended result of restoring the ecosystems. Gaboury and Wong (1999) noted that 

effectiveness monitoring has at least five important benefits: 

• it results in more efficient allocation of effort 

• it provides measures of states of recovery 

• it identifies areas where research may be required 

• it offers technical feedback for refining restoration techniques and approaches, and 

• it provides opportunities for training in field methods and for fostering stewardship when 

local communities are involved 

Validation provides measures of the validity of the theories upon which restoration treatments are 

based. It is used by researchers to test hypotheses and techniques, and it often draws upon data 

from long-term restoration projects. As this type of monitoring is primarily a research endeavour, 

it will not be covered in this publication. 

Monitoring faces major challenges. Gayton (2003) pointed out the following monitoring 

challenges for British Columbian grasslands, but they apply equally well to Garry Oak ecosystems: 

• Ecosystems vary dramatically over time and space. The magnitude of seasonal and year-toyear 

variation is often greater than the progressive changes resulting from a treatment. 

• Locating areas that are comparable and large enough for reference sites is difficult. This is 

especially so in Garry Oak ecosystems because of the small natural size of patches and their 

historical fragmentation. 

• All sites have experienced some degree of human disturbance 

• Differences among observers and different applications of the same methods by different 

observers reduce the reliability of data 



7-35


• Some species are difficult to identify 

• Exclosures (fenced off areas) are key tools in measuring change, but are almost non-existent 

• Long-term monitoring has problems of staffing, funding, lost plots, missing data, and damage 

to sampling sites from repeated activity 

7.3.2 What Sites Should be Monitored? 

Although it may seem necessary to monitor all sites in a restoration area with equal effort, limited 

resources usually preclude this intensity of monitoring. In fact, such an even-handed approach 

wastes or misallocates resources because this level of monitoring is usually unnecessary. The 

challenge is to balance the availability of resources with a level of monitoring that reliably detects 

changes. 

Gaboury and Wong (1999) suggest three levels of monitoring that can be used to help allocate 

monitoring effort: 

• Routine: relatively low intensity that uses inexpensive and rapid, routine data collection, and 

relies more upon indices than direct measurements. Most sites would be monitored in this 

way. 

• Intensive: requires special study design with more expensive and time-consuming collection 

and analysis of data. Only a few sites would be monitored in this way. 

• Operational techniques refinement: focuses on machinery, techniques, or cost efficiency. As 

with the intensive level, only a few sites would be monitored in this way, and the focus would 

be on techniques rather than on the success of the restoration. 

This approach of dividing sites into different levels of monitoring effort can be used also if more 

Biologist Tracy Fleming conducts a vegetation survey at Somenos Garry Oak Protected Area. Use of standardized 

protocols reduces data variability from different observers. Photo: Dave Polster 

7-36 



than one restoration area is being monitored, e.g., all the Garry Oak restoration projects in a 

municipality. In this situation, perhaps all but one or two sites would receive routine monitoring, 

while the remaining representative sites would receive intensive scrutiny. 

7.3.3 What Should be Measured? 

A key step in monitoring is selecting what to measure. Most importantly, what is measured 

should relate to restoration objectives. For example, if an objective is to increase the cover of 

Deltoid Balsamroot (Balsamorhiza deltoidea) by 50%, then the monitoring protocol must include 

a technique for measuring its cover. On the other hand, if the goal is to increase the natural 

character and species diversity of site by removing invasive species, then a simple list of native 

plant species year to year might do the job. 

Selecting what to measure also involves the following considerations: 

• Attributes should be readily sensitive indicators of biological and physical changes that 

indicate whether or not restoration objectives are being met. Responsive measurables 

enable early detection of progress or failure and so enable prompt responses to problems. 

The indicator should not have a wide range of (year-to-year) variation, which would make 

detecting change difficult. 

• Attributes should be scientifically based so that they withstand scrutiny of peers, funding 

agencies, and management agencies. 

• Attributes should be easily measurable and unambiguously observable so that monitoring is 

reliable, yet kept within the bounds of time and money. 

• At least several parameters should be chosen because relying on only one parameter may 

result in insufficient information being collected, or it may be difficult to understand. 

• Attributes should include all major ecosystem components, i.e., soil, vegetation, animals, 

and water, as measuring only one component may overlook important changes in other 

components. 

7.3.4 What Methods Should be Used? 

Another key step in monitoring is selecting the methods that are appropriate to documenting the 

parameters used. Methods should be robust enough so that variation due to different observers 

(something that is almost inevitable!) is minimized or is measurable, so that correction factors 

can be used. The actual methods used will be determined largely by the level of inventory used. 

Thus, it is critical that the same methods used in inventory be used in monitoring so that data are 

comparable. 

Three basic questions should be asked when selecting methods for monitoring: 

1. Do the methods effectively provide accurate data on the parameters of interest? 

2. Are the methods repeatable? 

3. Are the methods feasible within time and cost constraints? 

As noted above, all sampling methods used should follow accepted and documented protocols. 





Table 7.4 Examples of qualitative and quantitative evaluation techniques used for Garry Oak ecosystems 

Qualitative measures 

Plan (vertical overhead) view map showing observation points 

and estimated vegetation coverage 

Vegetation (species list and qualitative abundance estimates) 

Fixed-point panoramic photographs 

Rainfall and water level data 

Wildlife use observations 

Invertebrate species list and qualitative abundance estimates 

Quantitative measures 

Scaled vegetation map quantifying 

coverage areas 

Vegetation density, cover, number of 

individuals of a species and biomass 

Elevation 

Water quality and soil properties data 

Wildlife counts 

Invertebrate density and distribution 

Many agencies have well-developed monitoring standards (e.g., RISC). Examples and sources of 

monitoring standards are provided throughout this section as well as in the References Cited at 

the end of this chapter. 

For reasons of economy and efficiency, sampling methods should be selected that allow data to be 

collected on more than one parameter. For example, a soil core sample can provide information on 

rhizome development, physical and chemical attributes, and invertebrate communities. As well, 

check for information collected by others, such as local universities and colleges, government 

agencies (local through to federal), consultants, environmental groups, and landowners. Many 

agencies and volunteer groups cooperate readily because they have common goals, but ensure 

permission is obtained before using information, and always acknowledge sources. 

Selecting “the best” methods for monitoring is often overwhelming, even for seasoned restoration 

practitioners. Consider the following three points when selecting monitoring methods: 

1. Let your objectives “drive” your selection of methods (and parameters). 

2. Use several methods. Since all methods have shortcomings, using several will likely 

strengthen confidence in conclusions. 

3. Decide if your methods should be qualitative or quantitative. Erwin (1990) suggested 

that quantitative methods should be used when there is uncertainty associated with the 

restoration technique or when success criteria are related to obtaining specific thresholds. 

Use qualitative evaluations in situations where success is more likely, and where performance 

is not tied to specific quantitative criteria. A combination of quantitative and qualitative 

methods can also be used effectively in the same monitoring program (Table 7.4). 

Photographs taken frequently (at least annually) are one of the easiest ways to monitor changes 

over time, especially vegetation. Each photo in the series should be taken from exactly the same 

point (establish a permanent marker or a reference point such as a rock knoll) and should be 

precisely framed to encompass the same area taken on previous occasions. Including a vertical, 

brightly-painted pole of a known length within the frame allows viewers to estimate heights of 

7-38 



ground vegetation layers. It is important to take each photo at the same time each year so that 

the series shows long-term vegetation trends, not seasonal changes in foliage. Taking good notes 

about the photo sessions is essential. Photo-point monitoring is widely used to document changes 

(See Hall (2002), Case Study 1, and Appendix 7.1 for further information). 

7.3.5 When, How Often, and for How Long Should Monitoring 

be Done? 

Successful monitoring programs are designed before conducting baseline studies, so that 

methods remain constant over the various phases of the project and costs are minimized. Timing, 

frequency, and duration of monitoring are influenced by the ecosystem type and its complexity, 

the uncertainty of restoration methods used, and study objectives. Sometimes controversial 

projects require a higher degree of scrutiny which increases the level of monitoring effort needed. 

Seasonality must also be taken into consideration. For example, if a particular plant species is 

conspicuous only during spring flowering, sampling must be conducted at that time. 

Successful monitoring programs also have a systematic timetable that includes a start date, the 

time of the year when field work will take place, the frequency of field work, and the end date for 

the program. 

Monitoring of restoration and associated reference sites can be performed in two ways: 1) by 

concentrating all tasks during a single site visit, or 2) by carrying out one task or a similar set 

of tasks at several sites in a single day. The second strategy is preferable, because it minimizes 

seasonal effects and variability in conditions from day-to-day. Repeating the same task on the 

same day may save time. However, it is not always practical if sampling sites are far apart or 

difficult to access. Sampling of specific parameters in reference areas should be done at the same 

time of year as sampling in restored areas. 

Frequency of sampling can vary within years as well as among years. In general, new ecosystems 

Table 7.5 Monitoring plans for selected Garry Oak restoration projects 

Study area 

Monitoring 

frequency 

Monitoring 

indicators 

Sources and notes 

Anniversary Island 

(polygon B) 

Annually for four 

years 

Changes in cover of 

native vascular plants 

Parks Canada Western and 

Northern Service Centre (2008a) 

Eagle Island 

Twice annually (April, 

September) for four 

years 

Parks Canada Western and 

Northern Service Centre (2008b) 

Somenos Garry Oak 

Protected Area 

Annually for both 

general vegetation 

and rare species 

Rare species number 

of individuals and 

changes in vegetation 

Roemer (2004) 

Mill Hill Regional Park 

Annually 

Changes in the 

number of plant 

species and their 

abundance 

Maslovat (2009) 



7-39


change rapidly and should be monitored more often than older ones. This is especially true for 

ecosystems for which success is highly uncertain. By sampling more often, deviations from the 

expected stages of development may be corrected more easily than those allowed to progress 

further. As the system becomes established, it is generally less vulnerable to disturbances, and 

monitoring can be done less frequently. 

Determining the duration of the monitoring program is a challenging issue. In general, 

monitoring should extend beyond the period of most rapid change and into the period of 

stabilization. Monitoring over this time period will enable the success (or failure) of the 

restoration plan to be assessed. New, constructed ecosystems that start with no vegetation take 

a longer time to develop than systems in which only minor adjustments of existing habitats are 

necessary. 

Beyond the initial period of rapid development, sampling frequency can change from once or 

more per year to once every few years. The timing of this adjustment depends on the response 

of the ecosystem to restoration and the degree of impact restoration activities have on the site. 

Less frequent sampling (once every several years) is appropriate if the ecosystem response is 

considered appropriate and stabilizing, but more frequent sampling (every year or several times 

each year) is appropriate when ecosystems depart from expected pathways or significant changes 

continue to occur annually. Table 7.5 provides examples of monitoring plans. 

Garry Oak ecosystems are the result of disturbance regimes, therefore monitoring must address 

changes resulting from either re-establishment of the disturbance regime or some surrogate, or 

provide corrections to account for the lack of historical disturbance regimes. Low-intensity fire 

is considered the dominant disturbance regime of Garry Oak ecosystems so where fire is not 

re-introduced, some means of accounting for the lack of fire needs to be incorporated with the 

monitoring program. 

SOME FINAL POINTS TO REMEMBER: 

• Make sure you have enough money or committed human resources 

• Make sure the monitoring stage is explicit in the plan 

• Include a compulsory monitoring report that includes evaluation and assessment and 

makes recommendations 

7-40 




BC Ministry of Forests and Range and BC Ministry of Environment. 2010. Field manual for 

describing terrestrial ecosystems, 2nd ed. Land Management Handbook Number 25. Crown 

Publications, Victoria, B.C. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/docs/Lmh/Lmh25-2.htm. (Accessed 

2010). 

BC Ministry of Forests and Range. 2007. Vegetation resources inventory ground sampling 

procedures v 4.7. Crown Publications, Victoria, B.C. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/library/ 

documents/bib46612_2007.pdf. (Accessed 2010). 

Bertram, N. A. 2004. Ecology of the introduced European Wall Lizard, Podarcis muralis, near 

Victoria, British Columbia. M. Sc. Thesis, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

Blackwell, B.A. 2007. Parks Canada southern Gulf Islands terrestrial ecosystem mapping (in 

draft). B.A. Blackwell and Associates Ltd., North Vancouver, B.C. 

Brayshaw, T. C. 1996. Plant collecting for the amateur. Royal BC Museum, Victoria, B.C. 

Beckwith, B. R. 2002. Restoration management plan for the Garry Oak restoration project sites, 

plus site action plans for nine sites. Reports prepared for the Municipality of Saanich, B.C. 

Capital Regional District Parks, 2002. Mill Hill Regional Park restoration plan. Unpublished 

report, August 2002, Victoria, B.C. 

Capital Regional District Parks, 2003. Thetis Lake, Francis/King, and Mill Hill Regional Park draft 

management plan. Unpublished report, March 2003, Victoria, B.C. 

Carere, D., K. Harding, E. Rafuse, and R. Underhill. 2010. 2010 annual report for restoration at Fort 

Rodd Hill National Historic Site. Parks Canada Agency, Government of Canada, Victoria, B.C. 

Caughley, G. 1977. Analysis of vertebrate populations. Wiley, New York. 

Coastal Services Center, National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration. www.csc.noaa.gov/ 

coastal/management/management.htm. (Accessed March 12, 2011). 

Costanzo, B. 2010. Personal Communication. Senior Vegetation Specialist, Ecosystems Branch, BC 

Ministry of Environment, Victoria, B.C. 

Day, J.H., L. Farstad, and D. G. Laird. 1959. Soil survey of southeast Vancouver Island and Gulf 

Islands, British Columbia. B.C. Soil Survey, Rept. No. 6, Can. Dept. Agric. 

Delesalle, B.P., B.J. Coupe, B.M. Wikeem, S.J. Wikeem. 2009. Grasslands monitoring manual for 

British Columbia: a tool for ranchers. Grasslands Conservation Council of British Columbia. 

Demarchi D.A. 1995. Ecoregions of British Columbia, 4th ed. British Columbia Wildlife Branch, 

Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria BC. Map (1:2,000,000). 

Douglas G.W., J. Penny, and R. E. Maxwell. 2002. Composition, phenology, stand structure and 

soils of a Quercus garryana (Garry Oak) woodland at Quamichan Lake, Vancouver Island, 

British Columbia. British Columbia Conservation Data Centre. Ministry of Sustainable 

Resource Management. Victoria, B.C. 

Duncan, N., Burke, T., Dowland, S., and P. Hohenlohe. 2003. Survey protocol for survey and 

manage terrestrial mollusk species from the Northwest Forest Plan. Version 3.0. Bureau of 

Land Management, U.S. Department of Interior and U.S. Forest Service. 



7-41


Dunn, J. L., and J. Alderfer, (editors). 2006. Field guide to the birds of North America. National 

Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 

Erickson, W.R., and D.V. Meidinger. 2007. Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) plant communities 


Branch. Victoria, B.C. Technical Report 040. 

Forsyth, R. G. 2004. Land snails of British Columbia. Royal British Columbia Museum. 


Gayton, D. V. 2003. British Columbia grasslands: monitoring vegetation change. FORREX-Forest 

Research Extension Partnership, Kamloops, B.C., Canada. FORREX Series 7. 

Gaboury, M. and R. Wong. 1999. A framework for conducting effectiveness evaluations of 

watershed restoration projects. Watershed Restoration Technical Circular 12. B. C. Ministry of 

Environment, Lands and Parks, and Ministry of Forests, Victoria, B.C. 

Giasson, M. and R. E. Maxwell. 2002. Soil mapping for the Garry Oak restoration project. Report 

prepared for the Municipality of Saanich, Saanich, B.C. 

Green, R.N. and K. Klinka. 1994. A field guide for site identification and interpretation for the 

Vancouver Forest Region. B.C. Ministry of Forests Land Management Handbook No. 28, 

Victoria, B.C. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Lmh/Lmh28.htm. (Accessed 2010). 

Groos, W. E. 1995. Winter bird assemblages in urban fragments of Garry Oak (Quercus 

garryana) ecosystems. B.Sc. Honours thesis, Department of Biology, University of Victoria, 


Hall, F. C. 2002. Photo point monitoring handbook. Forest Service, US Dept. Agriculture. 

www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/3255. (Accessed 2010). 

Harcombe, A. 2009. Personal Communication. Terrestrial Ecologist, Nature Conservancy of 

Canada, B.C. Region. 

Hebda, R.J. 2010. Course Guide and Course Manual ER 311. Principles and concepts of ecological 

restoration. Division of Continuing Studies, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

Hobbs, R. J., E. Higgs and J.A. Harris. 2009. Novel ecosystems: implications for conservation and 

restoration. Trends in Ecol. and Evol. 24(11):599–605. 

Hobbs, R.J., S. Arico, J. Aronson, J.S. Baron, P. Bridgewater, V.A. Cramer, P.R. Epstein, J.J. Ewel, C. 

A. Klink, A.E. Lugo, D. Norton, D. Ojima, D.M. Richardson, E. W. Sanderson, F. Valladares, M. 

Vila, R. Zamora and M. Zobel. 2006. Novel ecosystems: theoretical and management aspects 

of the new ecological world order. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 15:1–7. 

Johnson, B. L. 1999. The role of adaptive management as an operational approach for resource 

management agencies. Conservation Ecology 3(2):8. www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/art8. 


Jungen, J.R. 1985. Soils of southern Vancouver Island. Victoria: Ministry of Environment Technical 

Report 17, Victoria, B.C. 

Krebs, C.J. 1999. Ecological methodology, 2nd ed. Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, Inc. 

University of California Press 

LeBuhn, G. 2010. The great sunflower project. Wings 33(1): 25–28. 

7-42 



LTABC The Land Trust Alliance of BC. 2006. LTABC guide to baseline inventories. 

http://landtrustalliance.bc.ca/docs/LTABC_Guide_to_Baseline_Inventories_2006.pdf 


Luttmerding, H.A., D.A. Demarchi, E.C. Lea, D.V. Meidinger and T. Vold. 1990. Describing 

ecosystems in the field, 2nd ed. MOE Manual 11. Ministry of Environment. Victoria, B.C. 

Maslovat, C. 2008. Analysis of old and new permanent vegetation monitoring (PVM) plots, 

Mill Hill Regional Park. Unpublished report prepared for Capital Regional District Parks, 

Victoria, B.C., October 2008. 

Maslovat, C. 2010. Personal Communication. Biologist, Salt Spring Island, B.C. 

Meidinger, D. and J. Pojar (eds.), 1991. Ecosystems of British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of 

Forests, Special Report Series 6. Victoria, B.C. 

Mercer, G. 2006. Deer pellet count monitoring protocol, Gulf Islands National Park 

Reserve. Unpublished report prepared for Parks Canada Agency, Government of Canada, 

Sidney, B.C. 

Murphy, D. D. 1988. Are we studying our endangered butterflies to death? The Journal of Research 

on the Lepidoptera 26:236–239. 

Muller, J.E. 1980. Geology Victoria Map 1553A. Ottawa: Geological Survey of Canada. 

Mueller-Dombois, D. and H. Ellenberg. 1974. Aims and methods of vegetation ecology. John Wiley 

& Sons, Toronto. 

Oosting, H. J. 1956. The study of plant communities: an introduction to plant ecology, 2nd ed. W. 

H. Freeman, San Francisco, California. 

Ovaska, K. and L. Sopuck. 2010. Surveys for the blue-grey taildropper and other gastropods at risk 

with focus on Capital Regional District Parks. Fall 2010. Prepared for Habitat Acquisition Trust, 


Parks Canada Western and Northern Service Centre. 2008a. Restoration plan for Anniversary 

Island in Gulf Islands National Park Reserve. Prepared for Parks Canada Agency, Government 

of Canada. 

Parks Canada Western and Northern Service Centre. 2008b. Restoration plan for Eagle Island in 

Gulf Islands National Park Reserve. Prepared for Parks Canada Agency, Government of Canada. 

Pollard, E. 1977. A method for assessing changes in the abundance of butterflies. Biological 

Conservation 12:115–134. 

Polster, D. 2009, 2010. Personal Communication. Restoration ecologist, Duncan, B.C. 

Resources Inventory Committee (RIC). 1998. Standard for terrestrial ecosystem mapping in British 

Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Resources Inventory Committee, 


Roemer, H. 2003. Baseline description of permanent vegetation monitoring plots at Mill Hill 

Regional Park. Unpublished report prepared for Capital Regional District Parks. September 

2003. Victoria, B.C. 

Roemer, H. 2004. The 2004 survey of red and blue listed plants of the Somenos Garry Oak 

Protected Area. Report prepared for the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team. Victoria, B.C. 



7-43


Roemer, H. 2006. 2006 analysis of permanent vegetation monitoring plots, Mill Hill Regional 

Park. Unpublished report prepared for Capital Regional District Parks. October 2006. Victoria, 

B.C. 

Steinfeld, D. E., Riley, S. A., Wilkinson, K. M., Landis, T. D., and L. E. Riley. 2007. Roadside 

vegetation: an integrated approach to establishing native plants. Technology Deployment 

Program, Western Federal Lands Highway Division, Federal Highway Administration, 

Vancouver, Washington, USA. 

Thien, S. 1979. A flow diagram for teaching texture-by-feel analysis. Journal of Agronomic 

Education 8:54–55. 

Vesely, D., and G. Tucker. 2004. A landowner’s guide for restoring and managing Oregon White 

Oak habitats. United States Bureau of Land Management, Salem District, Oregon. www.blm. 

gov/or/districts/salem/files/white_oak_guide.pdf (Accessed March 30, 2010). 

Water, Land and Air Protection. 2003. Garry Oak ecosystem mapping for the Somenos Garry Oak 

Park. Mapsheets 092B.083, 092B.073. March 2003. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, 

Environmental Stewardship, Vancouver Island Region. 

Zar, J. H. 2009. Biostatistical analysis, 5th ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA. 

7-44 



Appendix 7.1 

Photo-point Monitoring Protocols and Analysis Methods Used in 

Restoration Monitoring at Fort Rodd Hill National Historic Site 

The following protocols have been adapted from the 2010 annual report for restoration at Fort 

Rodd Hill National Historic Site (Carere et al. 2010). 

Camera Calibration and Photo Monitoring Instructions 

Camera Information 

Camera: Canon 30D 

Lens = 24 mm fixed lens 

ISO = How sensitive the sensor is to light (range of 100–1600) 

Generally we want a low ISO (range of 200–800) 

Aperture = the size of the hole letting light through 

A higher aperture # = smaller aperture (hole size) 

The higher aperture # the more the image is in focus 

Generally, below 3 is not good (hole too wide) 

Shutter Speed: 60 (1/60th of a second) is standard 

A faster shutter speed will be needed to take a sharp photo on windy days. 

A lower shutter speed should be avoided, but may be neccesary when under dense canopy 

Auto Exposure Bracket (AEB): 

Used to capture the image with 3 exposure levels to minimize the loss of data or need to 

retake photos due to overexposed or under exposed shots 

Camera Settings 

• Focus set to 10 metres (done by rotating the lens) 

• Mode is on “P” for program 

• Set bracketing to automatically take 3 different exposures 

• Menu button: select AEB (auto exposure bracket), adjust until 3 exposures 

(–1, 0, +1 ) are underlined, push enter and exit Menu (this needs to be redone every time the 

camera is turned off). 

• Take images as RAW + Large JPG files (RAW files are used for high quality editing/analysis 

though large JPG files have been typically used for photo analysis) 

Setting Up The Tripod and Lining Up The Photograph 

• Centre the tripod according to the description and/or marker in photo-point binder 



7-45


• Measure the appropriate lens height and level the tripod. New photo points should be set up 

with the lens at a standard 1 m height, but older photo points had a variable height which must 

be used for consistency. 

• Check that all views can be lined up from the tripod position before pictures are taken. If 

photos are not lining up check that tripod is located accurately. 

• Measure 10 m from tripod centre to scale pole, place the pole according to previous photos and 

ensuring that the pole is not leaning: this is important for analysis of the photos 

• Make sure the scale pole’s tripod does not obscure the camera’s view of the coloured 25 cm 

increments (i.e., make sure you can see the edges of all the red paint marks) 

• Align the left side and top of view through camera with previous photos (the focus length is 

slightly different with the new camera so the entire photo won’t line up properly) 

• Record the date, site, and view on chalkboard and place in lower left hand corner of photo. 

Date format: year-month-day (e.g., 2007-04-30) 

• Take three photos (one at each exposure) for each view 

Uploading and Archiving Photos 

Uploading and archiving of the photos should be done soon after photo-monitoring is complete in 

case any sites are missed or need to be redone. 

Photo-point Analysis Directions Using the Photo Editor GIMP 2.6.1 

The basic idea is that a photo-point picture is opened with GNU Image Manipulation Program 

(GIMP) and a grid overlaid on the photo. Next grid intercepts which overlap a species of interest 

are marked with coloured dots and dots are automatically counted using the GIMP’s built in tools. 

This method provides a relatively quick and easy relative abundance measure, and avoids laborious 

manual counting. What follows is a detailed account of how to implement this method using the 

free GIMP software. The analysis is based on Scotch Broom and Camassia spp. but can be adapted 

to any species which is readily identifiable at a distance in a photograph. 

First you need the GIMP. It is available for a variety of operating systems including Microsoft 

Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. Source code and binaries for the latest version can be found at 

www.gimp.org; however, most people will probably want the ready to install windows version 

which can be found here www.gimp.org/windows. Once you have the GIMP installed you can 

follow the directions below to analyze monitoring photos. Note that these instructions are based 

on a particular version of the software and while the process should be similar for newer versions, 

specific steps may be different. It should also be noted that these directions are base on a windows 

operating system. There is lots of help for the GIMP on-line, so if you need additional help, check 

your favorite search engine. 

Below are step-by-step guidelines for effectively preparing and analyzing the photo-point pictures: 

for analysis you will be using only spring photos because these show the flowering Camassia spp. 

and Scotch Broom. You can use late-summer photos to help you determine what is or isn’t broom, 

but note that late-summer photos have been taken after most of the plants have been removed, 

so they do not always show where the plants were. Next, decide which of the three exposures best 

shows the blooming broom and camas. Some photos may be too bright, blurry or washed out, so 

find the photo that will be easiest to analyze. Make note of the photo number, e.g., IMG_ 1334. In 

the following step you will need to know the image resolution. In Windows XP (and possibly later 

7-46 



versions) you should be able to obtain this information by viewing the image properties from 

Windows Explorer or My Computer (right click on the image file, select Properties, and click the 

Summary tab). Make note of the photo width and height in pixels (e.g., a pixel dimension of 2048 

x 1536). Alternatively this information can be obtained from most image editing software: the 

GIMP displays the pixel dimensions (along with other information) in the title bar of each image’s 

window. 

• Starting GIMP: When the GIMP is running, three windows will pop up: a GNU Image 

Manipulation screen and a Toolbox and Layers screen. In The GIMP dialogue box “GNU 

Image Manipulation Program”, click File–New. A box will pop up in which you must check the 

pixel width and height of the photo you chose. If GIMP shows different values, change them 

to 

what the initial photo values are. Press Enter. A blank working space, “Untitled–1.0 (RGB, 1 

layer) 3504 x 2336 – GIMP” will pop up in the main dialogue area. 

• Opening a File as a Layer: When you open a file as a layer a new box will pop up in which 

you will search the drive for the file you chose in step 1. Once you find that file, double click on 

it or click Open and it will show in the Untitled–1.0 box. Note that at the bottom of the screen 

you can set the photo to various pixel magnifications. Manipulating screen size will make it 

easier for you to find the broom and camas 

• Saving: In the Untitled project dialogue box, click File–Save As. Re-name the file in this 

format: 2011 10–1-1 (this is the year followed by the image identification number). Use the drop 

down menus to select for file type .xcf and save the file. Saving the file to .xcf format means 

that all the working layers are saved. Essentially all your work will be saved in this format. 

• Editing Brightness: Once the photo is open you can now play with the light levels to get the 

photo at the right lighting. GIMP has many tools that allow you to do this. The Levels tool is 

commonly used and is located in the Colours menu at the top of the screen. You’ll see a bell 

curve that has three little black triangles at the base that you manipulate. Move the far left 

triangle so that it is directly under the base where the bell curve hits the horizontal. The other 

triangles can also be manipulated. The only other tool normally used is the Sharpen tool, 

which is located under Filters / Enhance / Sharpen. Remember, if you want to edit the photo 

in any way you must first highlight that layer in the layers dialogue box. This is described 

below. 

• The Layers, Channels, Paths Window: When creating a new .xcf file or opening an existing 

file a window should be displayed that is titled “Layers, Channels, Paths, Undo”. From this 

window one can select between multiple layers and create new layers. In an existing .xcf file 

the layers that will appear will most likely be a photo layer (of the photo to be analyzed), a 

white background layer, an outline layer (on which the dots are placed), and several text layers 

that provide pertinent information. 

Layers can be renamed by double-clicking on the name (the name is to the right of the ‘eye’ 

icon). Typically photos are named to correspond to their year and season e.g., “2010 Spring.” If 

you cannot find the layers dialogue box, use the shortcut Crtl–L and it will appear. The layers 

can be arranged so that you can see the photograph with the grid with colour dots overlaid. 



7-47


The layers will be saved in the end so that you can always go back and re-work a photo 

without losing information. 

• Adding New Layers: At the bottom of the Layers dialogue box you will see a series of icons. 

Click on the first one (looks like a tiny piece of paper) at the bottom left-hand corner—it will 

allow you to add a new layer to your project. In order to create a new “Outline” layer name 

the new layer “Outline” and set it to “Transparency”. Click OK. Make sure the Outline layer 

is always above the photo layer in the dialogue box. You can drag layers to whatever location 

within this box. Similarly, to create a background layer create a new layer title ‘Background’ 

and set it to white. You can toggle between layers; whichever layer is highlighted is the one 

that your edits will be on. You can turn layers on or off by clicking the eye icon to the left of 

each layer. Make sure that all edits are made on the Outline layer. If, by accident, you paint 

on the photo layer itself and then find that you made a mistake and must erase your work, 

you may run into problems. Either you will end up erasing a part of the photo or you will be 

clicking the back button to undo your work. 

• Setting the Grid: With the photo layer turned on, go to the bottom of the screen and 

increase the magnification of the photo to 200%. Navigate to the height pole in the photo and 

go to where you can clearly see a red increment—you are going to measure this increment 

in pixels (NB in this project the scale pole is 200 cm long and painted in alternating 25 cm 

increments). Go to the Toolbox and click the Measure tool. Move the tool over the base of 

where a red increment begins. Click, hold and drag the measure tool up to where the cross 

hairs meet the top of the red increment. You can sway the measure line with your mouse 

while looking at the base of the photo and watching when the degrees reach 90 o . Depress the 

mouse when at 90 o . The number to the left of the degrees is the number of pixels in one scale 

pole increment, e.g., 97.0 pixels. When setting the grid aim to have two grid squares per red 

increment. Divide the pixel number by 2. In this case the value becomes 48.5 or 48 pixels. 

Now click on Image/Configure Grid. Under Spacing Width, type in 48. Click in the Height area 

and it will automatically change to reflect the width. Click ‘OK’. Go to View/Show Grid and 

turn that on. While you are there also turn on the Snap to Grid. The latter causes all pencil 

dots to snap directly to grid intercepts. The photo should now be covered with a calibrated 

fine grid overlay. You can turn the grid on and off from the main menu when needed. Reset 

the photo magnification to 100% or to whichever magnification allows you to determine 

where the Scotch Broom or Camassia spp. are located. 

• Tracing the Scale Pole: Trace the height pole as a reference in the final map. To do this, 

make sure that the Outline layer is turned on. You might want to magnify the photo first. Use 

the pencil tool at brush size 01 set to black and with Fade Out turned off in order to outline 

the height pole and its increments. Do not trace the tripod. To make a straight line, first click 

at the top of the pole and release the mouse button; remember to turn off the Snap to Grid 

setting to ensure smooth tracing. Click and hold the Shift key while moving the mouse to the 

base of the pole. Click the mouse and let go of the shift button. You may need to move the 

line back and forth somewhat in order to get a straight line before you make the final click. 

Repeat this procedure to complete the pole and its increments. Use the Bucket Fill Tool set at 

red to fill in the increments. 

7-48 



Figure A7.1. Example of final analysis map. Purple dots indicate grid intercepts with Camassia spp., and yellow dots 

indicate grid intercepts with Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius). 

• Selecting and Calibrating the Pencil Tool for Dots: Go to Tools and click on the Pencil 

Tool. You will see two colour boxes. Change the top box to the appropriate colour: yellow for 

Scotch Broom and purple for Camassia spp. Once you have set the colour, it is available to 

you in the colour chart throughout the session. Under Pencil Opacity, leave the value at 100.0. 

You will have to experiment to find a suitable brush size for your photos. Brush sizes used for 

analyzing the Fort Rodd Hill photos are as follows: when analyzing photos from 2003 to 2006, 

use brush size 11 (pixel size 109). When analyzing photos from 2007 onward, use brush size 

17 (pixel size 241). Click on Fade Out. Turn on the Outline layer. It is very important for the 

next steps that all your coloured dots are the same size. 

• Adding Coloured Dots: Make sure the grid is turned on and the Snap to Grid option is 

selected. Search the photo for any instance where a grid intercept is crossed by Scotch Broom 

or Camassia spp. Make sure the Pencil Tool is turned on and calibrated and that the Outline 

layer is activated. Create a dot on the intercept to mark where the plant crosses; flowers, 

stalks, and leaves can be counted when they cross an intercept. Make sure the dot snaps to the 

intercept (grid crossing). Remember, sometimes you have to increase the magnification or 

play with the lighting in order to more clearly see where the plants are located. Scotch Broom 

tends to have a characteristic shape and green shade and is typically distinguishable from 

other plants. 

TIP: Load the different exposures of the same photo-point photograph as layers. In some cases 

you might find it useful to add a photo from another season as a layer for reference. 



7-49


• Counting Pixels: Once you have placed all the yellow and purple dots at corresponding 

intercepts, they can be counted. The program uses a histogram function that counts pixel 

colours. This saves you eye strain and time. The Pencil Tool makes it so that the dot you are 

using has a solid outline. This means that only pure yellow and purple dots are counted. Make 

sure you know the number of pixels within one dot of your chosen brush size. To do this 

you can use the Fuzzy Select Tool. Under the attributes of this tool change the Threshold to 

0. Select one of the colour dots; the dot will be outlined. Go to the main menu and click on 

Windows/Dockable Dialogue/Histogram. To unselect dots go to the main menu Select/None. 

For example: Brush Size 11 (2003–2006) = 109 Pixels Brush Size 17 (2007–present) = 241 Pixels. 

If you already have all the dots placed and you know the pixel number per dot, then use 

the Select by Colour Tool located in the toolbox. Under the attributes make sure that the 

threshold is set to zero. Click one dot on the photo and all the dots of that colour will be 

highlighted. Go to Dockable Dialogue/Histogram again and note the number of pixels e.g. 

3615 for a size 17 brush (241 pixels). Divide the total number of pixels by 241 and the final value 

is your relative abundance count for Scotch Broom or Camassia spp. for that photo. In this 

case, the count is 15. You can record these relative abundance counts in your spreadsheet and 

perform further analysis. 

• Final Touches: You should now have an outline layer that shows all the Scotch Broom or 

Camassia spp. intercepts and the traced height pole with red increments. Create new text 

layers that specify the photo title (ex. 2011 10-1-4) as well as the intercept count number 

for Scotch Broom or Camassia spp. Make the ‘photo’ layer invisible. Make sure all text and 

number layers, as well as the outline layer, are turned on before you save this file. All layers 

will be saved in the program layer dialogue box so that you can go back and re-analyze later if 

needed. Save the file as a .xcf file in this format: 2011 10-1-4. You can also save it as an exported 

jpg. Figure A7.1 shows an example of what the final map should look like. Make sure all final 

maps are well organized in the file directory. 

A common source of error: foreground vs background plant counts 

One obvious issue is that plants in the foreground of the picture will increase the intercept counts 

more so than those in the background, even if those in the background may be larger and/or more 

abundant. Due to the fact that we are analyzing a three dimensional representation as if it had 

only two dimensions issues will arise as varying depths of field and natural obstructions hinder 

the ability to accurately state the relative abundance of these plants. This is the primary downfall 

of this technique; however, when comparing individual photo-point views over multiple years this 

issue appears to be less influential as the obstructions in the individual views generally remain 

constant. 

References 

LTABC The Land Trust Alliance of BC. 2006. LTABC guide to baseline inventories. 

http://landtrustalliance.bc.ca/docs/LTABC_Guide_to_Baseline_Inventories_2006.pdf 


7-50 







Chapter 8 

Restoration Strategies 

Contents 

8.1 Introduction ...............................................................................3 

8.1.1 Holistic Ecological Restoration...........................................3 

8.1.2 Role of Social and Cultural Attributes of 

Garry Oak Ecosystems.................................................................4 

8.1.3 Structure of Chapter 8........................................................4 

8.2 Selection of Reference Ecosystems..........................................5 

8.2.1 Deep Soil, Average Moisture Garry Oak Communities 

(REU #1)........................................................................................6 

8.2.2 Deep Soil, Wetter Garry Oak Communities (REU #2)........7 

8.2.3 Shallow Soil Garry Oak Communities (REU #3).................7 

8.2.4 Shallow Soil Seepage Communities (REU #4)...................7 

Part IV Implementing Restoration 


8-1


8.2.5 Maritime Meadow Communities (REU #5)........................8 

8.2.6 Vernal Pool Communities (REU #6)...................................8 

8.2.7 Coastal Bluff Communities REU #7)...................................8 

8.2.8 Douglas-fir Communities (REU #8)....................................9 

8.3 Constraints to Restoration...................................................... 10 

8.3.1 Invasive Species................................................................ 10 

Case Study 1. Restoration of Garry Oak Ecosystems Degraded 

by Invasive Grasses and Ungulates on Salt Spring Island............ 13 

8.3.2 Urban Settings.................................................................. 15 

Case Study 2. Prescribed Fire at the Nature Conservancy 

of Canada’s Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve................................... 18 

8.3.3 Social and Cultural Constraints........................................ 23 

8.4 Re-stitching the Fabric of the Ecosystem...............................24 

8.4.1 Selection of Suitable Species............................................24 

8.4.2 Propagation ..................................................................... 27 

8.4.3 Establishment Procedures............................................... 27 

8.5 Re-establishing Disturbance Elements...................................28 

8.6 Development of Monitoring Programs..................................28 

8.7 References...............................................................................28 

8-2 



Chapter 8 

Restoration Strategies 

by Dave Polster 

Community groups can remove large quantities of Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) from invaded Garry Oak sites, 

allowing the herbaceous layer to recover. Here a team is removing broom from Beacon Hill Park. Photo: Dave Polster 


8.1.1 Holistic Ecological Restoration 

Ecological restoration is defined by the Society for Ecological Restoration International as “the 

process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged or destroyed” 

(SERI 2004). Restoration therefore consists initially of identification and remediation of those 

elements that are causing the degradation. Although in some cases this may be all that is needed 

to re-establish the successional trajectory that provides a pathway to recovery (Walker et al. 2007), 

with Garry Oak ecosystems, degrading processes are complex and the degradation that has been 

caused is equally complex (See Chapter 3: Natural Processes and Disturbance, and 



8-3


Holistic ecological 

restoration 

includes the social 

and cultural values 

that are essential 

for the recovery of 

a site. 

Chapter 9: Alien Invasive Species). This chapter explores the various physical 

and biological attributes of Garry Oak ecosystems that have been degraded 

and the measures that are being used to address these issues. 

Holistic ecological restoration has been described by Clewell and Aronson 

(2007) as including the social and cultural values that are essential for the 

recovery of the site. With Garry Oak ecosystems there are historical social 

and cultural values (Chapter 2: Distribution and Description) as well as 

contemporary values (Chapter 6: Outreach and Public Involvement) that 

influence restoration of these ecosystems. In addition, there are spiritual 

values (not religious, but spiritual sensu Henry David Thoreau or Aldo 

Leopold) that connect many people with Garry Oak ecosystems. Although social and cultural 

values are discussed in greater detail elsewhere in this publication, mention of them is made here 

to help provide the framework for the discussion of restoration strategies. 

8.1.2 Role of Social and Cultural Attributes of Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Garry Oak ecosystems were maintained by the activities of First Nations prior to the arrival 

of Europeans (Chapter 2: Distribution and Description and Chapter 3: Natural Processes 

and Disturbance). Complex social and cultural practices were responsible for creation of the 

ecosystems that greeted the European settlers. Although it is unlikely that these practices can be 

re-established on a landscape level, within specific sites knowledge of the historical practices can 

assist in creating the conditions of ecological disturbance (or suitable alternative processes carried 

out on the site) that maintained the pre-contact flora and fauna of these ecosystems. 

Contemporary social and cultural values influence the ecological conditions of Garry Oak 

ecosystems. Although most (95%) of the pre-contact Garry Oak ecosystems have been lost to 

urban and suburban growth and agriculture, those that remain are treasured parts of the local 

landscape. Many local parks and ecological reserves protect fragments of former Garry Oak 

ecosystems. Most of these have been degraded to the point where restoration is essential if 

the values (spring flowers, species at risk, open landscapes, etc.) that comprise these favoured 

landscapes are to be retained. 

The social and cultural aspects of Garry Oak ecosystems, both historical and contemporary, are 

important contributors to the development of ecosystem restoration strategies. Re-establishment 

of disturbance regimes (Chapter 3: Natural Processes and Disturbance) and the constraints that 

current ecosystem use places on restoration activities must be incorporated into strategies for 

restoration. Similarly, the pressures that society places on these ecosystems need to become part 

of the fabric of the ecosystem restoration designs. Therefore, the social and cultural aspects of 

Garry Oak ecosystems are interwoven with the ecological aspects in the discussions of restoration 

strategies presented below. 

8.1.3 Structure of Chapter 8 

Effective restoration strategies are founded on an understanding of the ecosystem in which 

the restoration is to occur. For this reason, the following section on the selection of reference 

ecosystems, and the Restoration Ecosystem Units that have been described in Chapter 2, play a 

pivotal role in the design of restoration strategies (see Section 8.2 below). Similarly, the features 

8-4 



that constrain the recovery of the ecosystem must be addressed for effective restoration. These 

constraints are therefore discussed in Section 8.3. Section 8.4 describes strategies that have been 

applied to the restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems using the analogy of re-stitching the fabric 

of the ecosystem. This analogy provides a useful framework to understand how these complex 

ecosystems can be re-built, as well as the disturbance regimes that sustain them. The importance 

of disturbance elements is reflected in the fact that a specific section of this chapter (8.5) is 

devoted to discussing how the disturbance elements described in Chapter 3 can be incorporated 

into restoration strategies. Finally, as recognition of the complexity of the tasks associated with 

restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems grows, the need to measure where we are along the path 

becomes apparent. Section 8.6 provides a brief overview of monitoring systems that can be 

employed. This topic is more fully discussed in Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring. 

8.2 Selection of Reference Ecosystems 

Understanding how ecosystems are put together allows us to fashion strategies for restoration 

when the ecosystems become damaged. Reference ecosystems provide a roadmap that shows 

how the ecosystem is put together. Unfortunately, there are few Garry Oak ecosystems that have 

not suffered some form of degradation, from fire management to invasive species establishment 

(see Chapter 3: Natural Processes and Disturbance). The reference ecosystems for Garry Oak 

restoration therefore must be composed of a composite description (SERI 2004) derived from a 

wide variety of sources. 

Historical photographs can be used to give us a “picture” of how Garry Oak ecosystems once 

looked. Similarly, historical mapping of the extent of Garry Oak ecosystems (Lea 2006) can 

be used to show the relationships of Garry Oak ecosystems to other landscape elements. 

Archaeological and ethnobotanical studies (Turner 1995, 1998; Beckwith 2005) can help us 

Historical photos, such as 

this one taken in Beacon 

Hill Park circa 1890, can be 

used to help determine 

what Garry Oak ecosystems 

looked like in the past, or 

to help define restoration 

goals. Image G-01564 

courtesy of Royal BC 

Museum, BC Archives 



8-5


understand the context in which Garry Oak ecosystems existed and the management elements 

that maintained them. These historical sources can help in the formation of a composite 

description of Garry Oak ecosystems for restoration purposes. 

Ecosystem classifications (see Chapter 2: Distribution and Description) can be valuable as models 

of how the various Garry Oak ecosystems align themselves on the landscape. Eight Restoration 

Ecosystem Units (REUs) have been defined (Table 2.2 in Chapter 2). The processes that sustain 

these ecosystems differ, therefore restoration strategies differ among them. These different 

processes and strategies are discussed in the following sections along with examples of reference 

ecosystems. 

8.2.1 Deep Soil, Average Moisture Garry Oak Communities (REU #1) 

There are no ideal examples of mesic, deep soil Garry Oak ecosystems that we can use as reference 

ecosystems. However, historical photos, as well as some sites where alterations were relatively 

minor, can serve as references for these ecosystems. In some cases, native Garry Oak species may 

start to re-appear once grazing has been halted. In other cases, cultivation of these ecosystems has 

significantly altered the soils and replaced any native vegetation with agronomic hay and pasture 

species. Some of our most troubling invasive grasses (see Chapter 9: Alien Invasive Species) 

were introduced to “improve” deep soil Garry Oak ecosystems. There may have been sites where 

historical cultural practices created camas (Camassia sp.) gardens with limited inclusions of other 

species. 

The structure of the vegetation in some of the deep soil Garry Oak ecosystems has shifted 

dramatically from an open grassy savannah to a shrub-dominated cover with Common Snowberry 

(Symphocarpos albus) in mesic areas and Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana), Indian-plum (Oemleria 

cerasiformis) and Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) in wetter areas. These alternative more stable 

A patchwork of 

vegetation conditions 

from open meadows 

to shrubby woodlands 

often characterizes 

deep soil Garry Oak 

ecosystems, like the 

ones that exist at the 

Cowichan Garry Oak 

Preserve’s lower camas 

meadow. Photo: Dave 

Polster 

8-6 



states can be challenging to deal with (Hobbs and Suding 2009) as species compositional changes 

may have led to shifts in the soil mychorrizal conditions 1 that would be required for the historical 

ecosystem to re-establish. In some cases, historical management is thought to have created a 

patchwork of open savannahs coupled with sites where shrubby vegetation dominated. Although 

the assumed patchwork of deep soil Garry Oak sites may be largely conjectural, several existing 

sites show this patchy pattern of open meadows and shrubby woodlands, and it may be that reestablishment 

of patchy burning would allow this condition to be established. 

8.2.2 Deep Soil, Wetter Garry Oak Communities (REU #2) 

The deep soil, wetter (subhygric to hygric) Garry Oak sites become very shrubby in the absence of 

fire or other management treatments. Dense stands of Nootka Rose, Common Snowberry, Indianplum 

and Oceanspray can form in these areas. Understorey species can include extensive stands 

of White Fawn Lily (Erythronium oregonum), Chocolate Lilies (Fritillaria affinis), Blue Wildrye 

(Elymus glaucus), and California Brome (Bromus carinatus). These sites will readily revert to very 

productive Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) sites where fire or other management techniques 

have been excluded. Historically, they would have been the very productive camas meadows 

cultivated by local First Nations. These stands tend to occur in areas adjacent to streams and 

water-ways where transportation would allow effective camas harvest. In some cases, such as 

at the Somenos Garry Oak Protected Area in the Cowichan Valley, this vegetation type can be 

flooded in the winter. 

8.2.3 Shallow Soil Garry Oak Communities (REU #3) 

Shallow soil Garry Oak ecosystems comprise the largest area of Garry Oak ecosystems at present 

due in no small part to the fact that they were not suitable for agriculture. In addition, because 

this type of ecosystem can occur in obscure locations such as the tops of mountains and on steep 

mountain slopes, some of the shallow soil, rocky Garry Oak ecosystems are relatively pristine. 

It is fortunate that these ecosystems are relatively more common than their deep soil counterparts 

as the shallow soil sites are very complex with species compositional changes occurring over 

very small distances in relation to moisture gradients associated with the near-surface bedrock. 

This ecosystem complexity creates issues for restoration and in the formulation of reference 

ecosystems as the ecological processes that underlie the complexity may be equally complex. For 

instance, nutrient transfer and/or export would be expected to be complex where moisture flow 

patterns are complex. Issues associated with changes in nutrient status of Garry Oak ecosystems 

are discussed below. 

8.2.4 Shallow Soil Seepage Communities (REU #4) 

The seepage zones on rock outcrop sites have developed a unique flora of annual species such as 

Small-flowered Blue-eyed Mary (Collinsia parviflora) and Chickweed Monkey-flower (Mimulus 

alsinoides) that germinate and grow over the winter and early spring, setting seed prior to 

1 Soil mycorrhizae are networks of underground fungi that have been shown to promote plant growth and soil health in 

many ecosystems. 



8-7


The relatively pristine 

Eagle Heights 

grasslands are 

representative of 

the shallow soil, rock 

outcrop ecosystems. 

Unlike most rocky Garry 

Oak sites in more urban 

areas, this site has 

never been invaded by 

Scotch Broom. Photo: 

Dave Polster 

summer drying, or species such as Common Camas (Camassia quamash), Fool’s Onion (Triteleia 

hyacinthina), and Harvest Brodiaea (Brodiaea coronaria) that retreat to bulbs during the later 

summer dry period. These sites are found in close proximity to the rock outcrop sites and 

restoration treatments that are good for one are suitable to the other, such as removal of invasive 

species. Care should be taken to ensure that seepage zones are maintained; the water that feeds 

the groundwater system from slopes above these plant communities should not be diverted. 

8.2.5 Maritime Meadow Communities (REU #5) 

The maritime meadow communities and the coastal bluff communities (Section 8.2.7) share 

many of the same features although the maritime meadow communities are generally flat or 

gently sloping, while the coastal bluff communities are located on steep slopes. Both occur along 

the coastline and are influenced by saline sprays during winter storms. Species such as Tufted 

Hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa) that are salt-tolerant can be an important part of the fabric of 

these ecosystems which feature Common Camas, Barestem Desert-parsley (Lomatium nudicaule), 

and Woolly Sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum) as common herbaceous species. 

8.2.6 Vernal Pool Communities (REU #6) 

Vernal pools can be important contributors to the rare species flora of Garry Oak ecosystems. 

Although these communities have no trees or shrubs, the presence of standing water during 

the winter and into the spring can be an important habitat in the life-cycle of a variety of plants 

and animals. One of the major threats to vernal pool communities is blasting for new home 

construction in adjacent areas that opens drains, reducing the water-holding ability of the pools. 

8.2.7 Coastal Bluff Communities REU #7) 

Coastal bluff communities are strongly influenced by their ocean-side location. They are similar 

to the maritime meadows communities but are found on steep either rocky or till slopes. The 

8-8 



Blasting adjacent to the 

Mount Tzuhalem Ecological 

Reserve may allow seepage 

water to drain more quickly 

than prior to the excavation, 

thus changing the ecological 

conditions of ephemeral 

pools in upslope areas. 

Application of bentonitic clay 

slurry can help to seal such 

sites although the ability 

of vernal pools to dry up 

later in the summer can be 

important. Re-establishing 

pre-disturbance hydrologic 

conditions may be very 

difficult. Photo: Dave Polster 

active nature of these communities, due to winter storms, has resulted in a variety of rare species 

(see Chapter 4: Species and Ecosystems at Risk) occurring on these sites. The harsh physical 

conditions of the sites and fear of excessive erosion have prompted some well-meaning civic site 

managers to introduce invasive species such as Gorse (Ulex europaeus) and Tree Lupine (Lupinus 

arboreus) (see Chapter 9: Alien Invasive Species) to some of these sites. Recognition that it is 

the erosion that actually preserves the conditions required for the rare species may allow future 

acceptance of this natural process. 

8.2.8 Douglas-fir Communities (REU #8) 

In the absence of fire or other active management treatments (mowing or cattle grazing), deep soil 

Garry Oak sites can shift to become Douglas-fir forests. The Coastal Douglas-fir Biogeoclimatic 

Zone (CDF) is the smallest zone in British Columbia and is threatened by many of the same 

factors as the Garry Oak ecosystems. Restoration of CDF forests, however, is easier than Garry 

Oak ecosystems because successional processes can be used to restore CDF forests. If pioneering 

species such as Red Alder (Alnus rubra) and Bigleaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum) are planted in 

Garry Oak ecosystems, the Garry Oak stage of succession will be missed and the ecosystems will 

move directly to CDF forests. Natural successional models can provide an effective framework 

for the treatment of degraded CDF forests. Many of the alien invasive species that are a problem 

in Garry Oak ecosystems (broom, blackberry, Gorse, etc.) are not shade tolerant and will be 

immediately lost if a dense cover of pioneering Red Alder and/or maple (Acer spp.) is established. 

Similarly, although CDF forests can eventually move towards a later successional stage of Western 

Redcedar (Thuja plicata) and Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) in the absence of fire, this 

process takes many hundreds of years. By contrast, in a few decades many deep soil Garry Oak 

ecosystems will become CDF forests. 



8-9


One of the 

most important 

components in 

the development 


strategies is 

to identify the 

constraints 

preventing 

recovery. 

Removal of Scotch Broom in Mount Tzuhalem Ecological Reserve has allowed recovery of these 

beautiful flower meadows. Sites that have been heavily invaded by introduced species may have passed 

a threshold where recovery without significant interventions is improbable (Hobbs and Suding 2009). 

In these cases, restoration may take on the characteristics of agriculture using native Garry Oak species. 

This section reviews the common filters that limit the unassisted recovery of Garry Oak ecosystems. 


8.3 Constraints to Restoration 

One of the most important components in the development of restoration strategies is to identify 

the constraints preventing recovery (Clewell and Aronson 2007). In some cases, the constraints 

act as ecological filters 2. Where degradation is limited, removal of filters such as invasive species 

can allow Garry Oak ecosystems to recover most, if not all, of the features and functions of 

unimpaired reference ecosystems (see photo of Mt. Tzuhalem Ecological Reserve, above). 

8.3.1 Invasive Species 

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN, www.iucn.org) has concluded 

that invasive species are the second most common cause of ecological degradation after habitat 

alienation. Within Garry Oak ecosystems, dealing with invasive species is commonly the major 

restoration activity. Chapter 9 provides details of invasive species management strategies for Garry 

Oak ecosystems. The following sections present considerations for dealing with invasive species, 

both native and introduced, within the context of restoration. 

2 The term “filter” in ecological restoration is used to describe how ecological conditions allow certain species to thrive 

while filtering out others. 

8-10 



Native Invaders 

The cessation of burning, both cultural burning and natural fires, has allowed 

a variety of native species to establish (see Chapter 3: Natural Processes and 

Disturbance). Similarly, pasturing of livestock on Garry Oak ecosystem sites 

can result in an increase in the cover provided by the native shrub snowberry. 

Where Garry Oak ecosystems have included a component of Douglas-fir, the 

cessation of burning allows the Douglas-fir to fill in the open areas and to 

choke out the Garry Oaks as well as to eliminate understorey species. Although 

removal of the Douglas-fir is a relatively simple procedure, cutting trees in 

protected areas can cause concern with local residents and natural history 

clubs (see Chapter 6: Outreach and Public Involvement). Also, large quantities 

of biomass must be disposed of if significant in-growth by Douglas-fir has 

been allowed to occur. Girdling the trees is an alternative to cutting them down 

(see photo below). 

Alien Invasive Species 

Where Garry 

Oak ecosystems 

have included 

a component 

of Douglas-fir, 

the cessation of 

burning allows the 

Douglas-fir to fill 

in the open areas 

and to choke out 

the Garry Oaks as 

well as to eliminate 

understorey 

species. 

Alien invasive species can create significant obstacles to effective restoration. 

Chapter 9 provides a detailed discussion of alien invasive species; however, 

it is useful to consider this filter here in the context of restoration strategies. Changes in stand 

structure associated with the establishment of evergreen alien invasive shrubs such as Scotch 

Broom (Cytisus scoparius) may change ecological processes, such as spring soil warming, that 

influence native species germination and growth. Similarly, changes in nutrient status associated 

with broom growth can influence the species composition of Garry Oak ecosystems (Shaben 

and Myers 2009). Phytotoxins associated with Scotch Broom can also influence the species 

composition in areas where broom has established. These changes can make it difficult to restore 

sites that have been heavily invaded by broom. 

The absence of fire in 

Garry Oak ecosystems 

is allowing Douglasfir 

to establish to 

the exclusion of the 

ecosystems. Removal 

of the encroaching 

trees is the first step in 

reversing the degrading 

element. The photo 

shows girdled Douglasfir 

trunks in Mt. 

Tzuhalem Ecological 

Reserve. Photo: Carolyn 

Masson 



8-11


Introduced species such as Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) can create significant 

ecological changes by providing habitat for invasive animals, such as introduced Eastern Cottontail 

rabbits (Sylvilagus floridanus) and native Columbian Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus hemionus 

columbianus) (Gonzales and Clements 2010). These herbivores are protected from predation by the 

invasive shrubs while at the same time they reduce populations of native plants (e.g., spring forbs) 

through grazing. Similar problems can arise with snowberry and other native shrubs that have 

established in response to grazing and changes in fire frequency. 

Alien invasive grasses can be the most perplexing invasive species to deal with in Garry Oak 

ecosystems. On rock outcrop sites, species such as Silver Hairgrass (Aira caryophyllea) and Early 

Hairgrass (Aira praecox) can germinate and occupy sites in the winter, thus precluding native 

winter annuals like Sea Blush (Plectritis congesta) or Small-flowered Blue-eyed Mary. Similarly, on 

slightly deeper soil pockets, invasive grass species such as Hedgehog Dogtail (Cynosurus echinatus) 

or Sweet Vernalgrass (Anthoxanthum odoratum) can compete with a wide variety of native Garry 

Oak ecosystem plants. In deep soil areas, Common Velvet-grass (Holcus lanatus), bluegrasses 

(Poa pratensis and Poa compressa), Red Fescue 3 (Festuca rubra), and Orchard-grass (Dactylis 

glomerata) can replace native grasses and forbs. The sod-forming bluegrasses and Red Fescue can 

create a dense turf that precludes growth of most other species. In addition to the physical space 

occupied by invasive grasses, changes in thatch accumulation can have a significant impact on the 

characteristics of fires (e.g., fires that burn faster and hotter) should these be re-introduced. 

Management of Invasive Species 

Management of invasive species may be one of the major restoration activities undertaken in 

Garry Oak ecosystems. Additional details on management strategies that can be applied to specific 

species within specific ecosystems are provided in Chapter 9: Invasive Alien Species. Within the 

context of restoration, the primary consideration is to deal with the invasive species without 

changing the ecological processes that are the focus of the restoration efforts. Opportunities 

to change the successional status 4 of the degraded ecosystem and thus avoid the conditions 

favouring invasive species are limited in Garry Oak ecosystems. Where burning is used to create 

early succession communities of camas and other spring flowers, successional distancing (Polster 

1994) can be an effective management strategy. Successional distancing is the process of creating 

an early seral community such as a burned Garry Oak meadow, right next to a later successional 

community such as a Douglas-fir forest where there is no ecological space for the invasive species. 

In these situations, care must be taken to ensure that there are appropriate native species that 

can occupy the space opened by the burning, otherwise invasive species will re-occupy the sites 

(MacDougall 2002). Although species replacement (replacing the invasive species with appropriate 

native species) is critical to the success of any invasive species management efforts, the other 

key element for success is persistence. Plans should be developed for management efforts to be 

continued over many years. 

3 There are both native and exotic forms of Red Fescue. 

4 Successional status is an important factor to evaluate in ecological restoration; early successional communities tend to 

be dominated by pioneer plant species, often annuals or plants with rapid growth rates, that colonize an area immediately 

after disturbance or prefer regularly disturbed habitats, while later successional communities feature plants that grow more 

slowly and tend to be perennials. 

8-12 



Case Study 1. Restoration of Garry Oak Ecosystems Degraded 

by Invasive Grasses and Ungulates on Salt Spring Island 

by David R. Clements 

CASE STUDY 

The 30 ha Crow’s Nest Ecological Research Area (CNERA) on Salt Spring Island includes 

extensive shallow soil Garry Oak meadows. The meadows feature a diverse community 

of typical Garry Oak forbs such as Hooker’s Onion (Allium 

acuminatum), Harvest Brodiaea (Brodiaea coronaria), Small-flowered 

Blue-eyed Mary (Collinsia parviflora), Common Camas (Camassia 

quamash), Chocolate Lily (Fritillaria affinis), Yellow Monkey-flower 

(Mimulus guttatus), Sea Blush (Plectritis congesta), and Fool’s Onion 

(Triteleia hyacinthina). The Propertius Duskywing (Erynnis propertius), a 

butterfly that is Blue-listed in British Columbia, is also present. 

However, the meadow forbs are sparsely distributed within abundant 

non-native grasses, particularly Sweet Vernalgrass (Anthoxanthum 

odoratum), Hedgehog Dogtail (Cynosurus echinatus), and Orchardgrass 

(Dactylis glomerata). Furthermore, selective grazing pressure by 

Columbian Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) and feral 

sheep promotes dominance by these grasses (Gonzales and Clements 

2010). 

In 2003, a 5-year study was initiated at CNERA to examine three 

restoration techniques: grazing exclusion, mowing, and planting of 

native species. Fifty-six 1 m x 1 m plots were set up in the meadows, with 

half of them (28) enclosed to prevent grazing. The exclosures consisted of 

aluminum frames fitted with fishnet mesh that prevented grazing by ungulates 

but did not exclude light or small mammals. Half of the plots in each category 

were mowed to complete a two-factor factorial design. Plots were moved in the 

beginning (October/November) and end (July/August) of the growing season 

each year, with this timing designed to minimize disturbance to native plants, 

many of which are perennials that emerge from bulbs in the spring. 

Four native plant species were planted in each of the 56 plots in 2003 (Gonzales 

and Arcese 2008): Garry Oak (Quercus garryana), Arbutus (Arbutus menziesii), 

Common Camas, and Sea Blush. Biomass of these and other plant species found 

in the plots was evaluated after three years along with other measures to 

evaluate responses to the treatments. 

Feral sheep. Painting by 

Briony Penn 

Ecologists have often theorized that competition by invasive species is the chief 

driver of habitat degradation in invaded habitats. From this presumption, a 

restoration prescription of mowing alone should provide substantial restoration 

benefits in Garry Oak ecosystems, by removing invasive grass biomass. Yet recent 

evidence, drawn chiefly from Garry Oak ecosystems, suggests that invasive species are not 

the drivers of degradation, but rather the passengers (MacDougall and Turkington 2005). 

Within the context 

of restoration, 

the primary 

consideration is 

to deal with the 


without changing 

the ecological 

processes that are 

the focus of the 

restoration efforts. 



8-13


Indeed, results of the research at CNERA showed that herbivory was more limiting than competition 

on early and established native plants in invaded Garry Oak meadows (Gonzales and Arcese 2008). 

Thus, in this case mowing twice yearly over several years had some impact on the invasive grasses, 

but exclosing grazers had much more impact. The recommendation is therefore that the two 

restoration techniques be combined for maximum impact (Gonzales and Clements 2010). Just as 

mowing on its own did not produce the desired result for restoration, fencing alone also increased 

proportional biomass of non-native perennial grasses. 

CASE STUDY 

The third restoration technique attempted in this case study at CNERA on Salt Spring Island also 

provided promising results. Although the Garry Oak and Arbutus seedlings that were planted 

largely perished due to a drought year, Common Camas and Sea Blush responded favourably to the 

combination of mowing and fencing. Sea Blush densities increased greatly over three years within 

exclosed plots, reaching the highest densities where mowing also occurred. Common Camas bulb 

mass also increased in exclosed plots, in both mowed and unmowed exclosures. 

The evident impact of grazing on Sea Blush and Common Camas substantiates the claim that deer 

and sheep selectively forage on Garry Oak meadow forbs, potentially reducing the diversity of the 

plant community. We further tested this selectivity by looking at herbivore forage preferences in 16 

0.5 m x 0.5 m plots via stem counts (Gonzales and Clements 2010). Out of 9,307 stems counted, 12% 

were browsed. Relative to availability, native perennial forbs were more frequently browsed than 

any other plant group, with Harvest Brodiaea and Fool’s Onion topping the list. 

We also looked at the seasonal activity of ungulates in the meadows through a pellet census, and 

found that March was a peak period of pellet deposition, with more than twice as many pellets 

counted than in the other 4 months surveyed (November, February, July, and August). Most of the 

key meadow species flower in March-April, so they are particularly vulnerable to browsing during the 

time of peak activity by ungulates (Gonzales and Clements 2010). 

On many of the islands where Garry Oak ecosystems occur, there is an absence of carnivores such 

as wolves, bears, and cougars that once regulated ungulate populations. Even though Columbian 

Black-tailed Deer are a native species, they may have a large impact on Garry Oak plant communities 

on islands where deer are extremely abundant. As this case study on Salt Spring Island has shown, 

restoration measures to exclude ungulates, at least seasonally (e.g., in spring) may represent a key 

component of restoration strategies. If populations of native forbs are relatively sparse, propagation 

of native species may also be a crucial element in diversifying plant communities dominated by 

invasive grasses (see Chapter 10: Species Propagation and Supply). 

References 

Gonzales, E.K. and P. Arcese. 2008. Herbivory more limiting than competition on early and 

established native plants in an invaded meadow. Ecology 89:3282-3289. 

Gonzales, E.K. and D.R. Clements. 2010. Plant community biomass shifts in response to mowing and 

fencing in invaded oak meadows with abundant ungulates. Restor. Ecol. 18:753-761. 

MacDougall, A.S. and R. Turkington. 2005. Are invasive species the drivers or passengers of change 

in degraded ecosystems? Ecology 86:42-55. 

David Clements is Professor of Biology & Environmental Studies at Trinity Western University, 

Langley, B.C. 

8-14 



Dogs walking along the 

edge of this coastal bluff 

ecosystem in Macaulay 

Park have created a 

worn trail, causing 

excessive erosion 

and opening the area 

to invasion by alien 

species. Photo: Dave 

Polster 

8.3.2 Urban Settings 

The fact that 95% of Garry Oak ecosystems in Canada have been lost to urban expansion and 

habitat alienation 5 creates various stresses on the remaining Garry Oak sites that largely exist 

within urban settings. This section presents some of the common constraints to recovery of these 

ecosystems as well as some strategies that can be applied to address them. 

The fact that most Garry Oak sites are located in urban areas provides an opportunity for local 

stewardship groups to be involved in protection and restoration of these special areas (see 

Chapter 6: Outreach and Public Involvement). Inclusion of the local community in stewardship of 

the ecosystems is an important part of holistic ecological restoration (Clewell and Aronson 2007). 

Human and Dog Use 

Garry Oak ecosystems are often favourite places for people to walk with their dogs, leading to 

the potential for substantial ecological degradation. Degradation occurs because of physical 

trampling and, in the case of dog excrement, nutrient enrichment. Although many of the Garry 

Oak sites are protected from development as parks, ecological reserves, and in other ways, they 

may be subjected to inadvertent degradation by people, some of whom walk their dogs in these 

areas. Protection from development is no assurance that the flora and fauna will be un-impacted 

by visitors (Primack et al. 2009). Specifically, rare species (see Chapter 4: Species and Ecosystems 

at Risk) can be lost in protected areas through the degradation associated with human use of 

these areas (including dog walking); for example, increased use can cause an increase in the 

introduction of alien invasive species (Primack et al. 2009). 

Management of human use of Garry Oak ecosystems is a complex issue. Garry Oak ecosystems are 

favoured habitats and people want to be able to visit these sites, often with their pets. Where these 

5 Habitat alienation is a shift from, for instance, a Garry Oak ecosystem to a shopping mall: complete and irreversible loss. 



8-15


This split rail fence 

in Macaulay Park is a 

simple way to restrict 

the movement of 

humans and their 

dogs into ecologically 

sensitive areas. Photo: 

Dave Polster 

ecosystems are located on private land or on military reserves, access control is possible and these 

sites can be protected from degrading human influences. However, many of the remaining Garry 

Oak sites are on land that is open to the public, either officially as parks or unofficially as vacant 

Crown land, and therefore other solutions to human degradation of Garry Oak ecosystems must 

be sought. 

Opportunities to protect Garry Oak ecosystems from the degrading effects of humans and their 

pets fall into two general types: sites can be fenced or otherwise blocked off to protect sensitive 

areas, or sites can be closed during sensitive times of the year (see Chapter 3: Natural Processes 

and Disturbance, Section 3.3.3 Herbivory). Both of these treatments have their advantages and 

disadvantages so care must be taken to ensure adequate monitoring (see Chapter 7: Inventory and 

Monitoring) accompanies any management efforts. This monitoring allows the implications of the 

management treatment to be identified early in the process, with opportunities for modification. 

Fencing off sensitive areas can be an effective way of limiting the adverse effects of human access. 

Some fence types, for example cedar snake fences, can be relatively unobtrusive, although it 

should be recognized that fencing may not always prevent access. Logs along the edges of trails 

can be used to encourage people and dogs to stay on the trail. Where the impetus for off-trail 

traffic is access to a desired site such as a beach or a watercourse, construction of “official” access 

points with guiding fences will help relieve the pressure on other areas. In some cases, access 

can be re-routed so that access is still provided to certain areas, but the pressure on the sensitive 

habitats is reduced. 

Timing Considerations 

Many of the sensitive and unique Garry Oak ecosystem plant species are winter annuals (e.g., 

Dense-flowered Lupine (Lupinus densiflorus). In addition, most of the native Garry Oak 

ecosystem species complete their life cycle (flowering and seed set) before the ecosystems dry out 

in the mid- to late summer. Establishing access timing restrictions can protect these vulnerable 

8-16 



species while allowing access at other times of year when the ecosystems are more robust. Timing 

considerations must also be addressed during restoration work so it is beneficial to understand 

the life cycles (phenology) of the species of interest. 

Limitations on Use of Fire 

Fire is an integral part of deep soil Garry Oak ecosystems and an occasional 

part of shallow soil rocky ecosystems (Chapter 3: Natural Processes and 

Disturbance). However, the urban location of almost all deep soil Garry 

Oak ecosystems can cause serious restrictions on the re-introduction of fire. 

Concerns about fire control, smoke, and seasonal burning restrictions in most 

areas limit the use of fire as a restoration tool. Efforts to change attitudes on 

ecosystem burning have gained some headway since the 2003 uncontrolled 

wildfires burned Kelowna, B.C., as people are recognizing that in some 

ecosystems frequent, low-intensity fires play a role in actually reducing the fire 

hazard (Taylor and Carroll 2003). Any use of fire in the restoration of Garry Oak 

ecosystems would need to be developed in conjunction with local fire control 

organizations. 

People are 

recognizing that in 

some ecosystems 

frequent, lowintensity 

fires play 

a role in actually 

reducing the fire 

hazard. 

Endangered Dense-flowered Lupine is a sensitive species at risk that occurs on coastal 

bluffs as a winter annual. Photo: Dave Polster 



8-17


Case Study 2. Prescribed Fire at the Nature Conservancy 

of Canada’s Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve 

by Irvin Banman and Thomas Munson 

All photos taken during prescribed burns at the Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve (CGOP), Nature Conservancy of 

Canada, July 2010. All photos: City of Victoria 

CASE STUDY 

The Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve (CGOP) near Duncan, B.C. is an 18 ha remnant of the highly 

fragmented Garry Oak ecosystem of southeastern Vancouver Island. The property is owned 

and managed by the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC). This site has an overstorey of 

Garry Oak (Quercus garryana), occurring at varying densities from sporadic to closed canopy. 

The most abundant native flora in the understorey include Common Camas (Camassia quamash), 

Great Camas (Camassia leichtlinii), Broad-leaved Shootingstar (Dodecatheon hendersonii), Spring 

Gold (Lomatium utriculatum), and Western Buttercup (Ranunculus occidentalis). However, the 

open meadows are dominated by invasive grasses, mainly Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensis) and 

Orchard-grass (Dactylis glomerata) (MacDougall 2002). 

A series of disturbance treatments was initiated at the CGOP in the year 2000, to determine the 

ecological relationship between invasive and native species on the site. One of these treatments 

involved re-introduction of fire to the ecosystem, on both spring and fall burn plots. One of the 

main objectives in re-introducing prescribed fire was to determine its impacts on introduced 

Photo 1: Wetting down 

the fire guard. 

Photo 2: Lighting the prescribed 

fire with a propane drip torch. 

8-18 



invasive grasses, which have come to dominate oak habitat. In addition, it was hoped that fire 

would have an adverse affect on other introduced species such as Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) 

while increasing native species biodiversity and abundance (MacDougall 2002, 2005). 

Restoration Treatments at Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve (CGOP) 

Disturbance treatments which began in 2000 and have continued for 10 years include: 

CASE STUDY 

• Summer control, burning, mowing, and selective removal of invasive species 

• Fall control, burning, mowing and selective invasive plant removal 

All early treatments (2000–2002) were carried out on 1 m 2 plots. Above ground (50 cm) 

temperatures of these low-intensity, small-scale grass fires ranged from 133°C to 408°C. Ground 

level temperatures ran between 74°C and 213°C. No temperature increases were detected 5 cm 

below ground (MacDougall 2002). 

In the last two seasons (2009, 2010), larger-scale experimental burns have been conducted 

involving burn plots of sizes ranging from 10 to 30 m 2 . In preparation for burns on this scale, fire 

guards of mowed grass strips were cut around the burn plots and the fire guards wetted down 

immediately prior to burning (Photo 1). NCC staff and volunteers set the prescribed fire using 

propane drip torches (Photo 2), patrolled the burn plot with fire hoses during the burn, and 

wetted down any fire “hot spots” after the surface burn had been conducted (Photo 3). Fire 

results were sporadic, depending on micro-site conditions of species cover and moisture content 

(Photo 4). 

Photo 3: Wetting down 

hot spots. 

Photo 4: Variable fire effects 

on post-burn fire plot. 



8-19


The preliminary results of burning in 2000-2002 showed that perennial grass cover and litter 

biomass dropped significantly in all plots over the first season. The removal of the dense grass 

thatch and exposure of bare soil stimulated native forb cover to increase significantly in species 

rich plots. Burning had a positive effect on seedling survival, especially when native seed was added 

after the burn. Native species added were Roemer’s Fescue (Festuca roemeri), Poverty Oatgrass 

(Danthonia spicata), or California Oatgrass (Danthonia californica), Common Yarrow (Achillea 

millefolium), Woolly Sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum), Spring Gold, Barestem Desert-parsley, also 

known as Indian consumption plant (Lomatium nudicaule), Sea Blush (Plectritis congesta), and 

Western Buttercup. Although non-native species were substantially reduced, native plants did not 

increase uniformly; the best gains were seen in sites with higher initial diversity of native species. 

CASE STUDY 

However, an increase in Scotch Broom and Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) germination was 

also evident. Exotic annuals also tended to increase sharply in germination after burning. 

Cryptogramatic mosses typically declined after burning. With fire, areas of low species diversity 

become illuminated with large areas of exposed mineral soil, facilitating invasion of shrubs and 

exotic forbs that otherwise may have difficulty establishing (MacDougall and Turkington 2004, 

MacDougall 2005). 

Discussion 

Fire suppression in Garry Oak ecosystems has been prevalent since the late 1800s, and these 

ecosystems have now evolved in the absence of fire. The result has been an increase in shrub 

cover and encroachment of Garry Oak seedlings and conifers (mainly Douglas-fir and Grand Fir 

(Abies grandis)) into formerly open Garry Oak woodlands (Smith 2007). The introduction of many 

European grasses for livestock forage in the 1800s has led to mostly exotic grasses dominating 

the few remnant Garry Oak habitat sites (MacDougall et al. 2004). Native plant species at risk in 

this ecosystem are limited in expansion by lack of bare soil, ground-level light, and available soil 

nitrogen. Many of these species at risk are small annuals and perennial forbs of short stature that 

perform poorly in dense thatch swards of exotic grasses and in the absence of disturbance to 

create sites for germination. Periodic surface fires would have eliminated grass litter and opened 

up possible recruitment sites for these subordinate native species at risk; the elimination of fire has 

likely contributed to their present-day displacement to mostly shallow-soil locations, where nonnative 

grasses and shrubs form less densely (MacDougall et al. 2004). 

One obvious step in restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems is the re-introduction of fire. However, 

fire re-introduction may have unwanted consequences if the timing of the burns is not carefully 

matched to the phenology of the native species and if native species are not added to the site 

following burning. Repeated burning in a particular season will select against those species that 

flower or set seed at that time. In Garry Oak ecosystems, most native species formerly escaped 

the effects of fire because their growing season (March–July) did not coincide with the timing of 

peak fuel combustibility (August–October). Combined with the knowledge that some of the most 

dominant invasive species are “summer species” (Kentucky Bluegrass, Orchard-grass), this implies 

that late summer or fall burning will benefit Garry Oak ecosystem restoration. However, not all 

Garry Oak ecosystem flora complete their annual life cycle by midsummer, or are, by implication, 

fire tolerant. This includes many species from the family Asteraceae. This reinforces the conjecture 

that former fire impacts probably varied across the landscape as a result of combinations of 

topography, soil depth, and cultural management practices. Present-day land managers using 

prescribed fire on small Garry Oak remnants must account for native species on site, particularly 

8-20 



species at risk that are sensitive to fire, and must monitor the impacts of fire on invasive species 

that may flourish in its presence (MacDougall et al. 2004). 

Research on fire and its impacts on non-native invasive species in Canada has been limited, with 

few studies covering more than one year after fire re-introduction. However, prescribed fire reintroduction 

has been practiced on a rotational basis on Garry Oak woodlands and prairies at Fort 

Lewis, Washington since 1978. Both spring and fall burns have been used, on plots ranging in size 

from 1 m 2 to 10 x 20 m. A review of results in 1999 (Tveten and Fonda 1999) found that prescribed 

fire had significantly reduced overstorey cover of Scotch Broom and Douglas-fir seedlings, and topkilled 

Garry Oak seedlings and saplings in open prairies. Invasive understorey grasses, forbs and 

Scotch Broom seedlings were not significantly reduced with one fire cycle—a fire rotation period of 

3–5 years was most beneficial in managing invasive species. Supplemental seeding and planting of 

native species may also be needed to increase density of native vs. non-native species. 

CASE STUDY 

Fire researchers recommend that fire managers give priority to: 

• controlling non-native species known to be invasive post-fire in the area burned and adjacent 

areas 

• preventing new invasions through early detection and rapid eradication of likely invasive species 

• long-term monitoring and adaptive management after fire on the burn areas to control or 

reduce invasive species (USDA Forest Service 2009) 

Pacific Northwest Garry Oak meadows are severely seed limited. Planting native species is essential 

to increase abundance and diversity of desirable vegetation. Planting on bare soil following 

prescribed burning will allow the native species to compete against the dominant non-native 

invaders. As shown at the CGOP, without the experimental introduction of native seed on the 

burn plots, native plant recruitment was sometimes close to nil. Conversely, when native seed was 

added to burned and unburned plots dominated by invasive grasses, germination and initial native 

plant establishment levels were high (MacDougall 2002). Experimental treatments such as postburn 

grazing with sheep or post-burn application of herbicides have also been used at the CGOP to 

further inhibit regeneration of the dominant invasive grasses. 

Additional constraints on the use of fire in Garry Oak ecosystems are smoke and fire control 

concerns. Many oak woodlands are now part of, or adjacent to, urban and semi-rural environments. 

Although smoke is ephemeral, it is still a significant concern for traffic and local, smoke-sensitive 

citizens. The threat of damage to adjacent properties from a prescribed burn which is blown out of 

control can potentially shut down future controlled burn plans. It is incumbent on land managers 

to have smoke management plans and prescribed burn plans in place, and to inform and work 

cooperatively with local fire departments to conduct successful prescribed burns. 

The use of fire as a restoration tool in Canada is in its infancy. For Garry Oak ecosystems, much can 

be learned from work being done in oak woodlands in eastern Canada (Toronto and Windsor) and 

for prescribed fires in other ecosystems, from researchers such as Stephen Barrett and Steve Arno 

in Montana, Henry Lewis and C.W. White in Alberta, Dana Lepofsky and Ken Lertzman in British 

Columbia, and Stephen Pyne (2007). In addition, experimental restoration incorporating fire in 

our area will provide valuable insights into timing, effects on species at risk, and effects on native 

species germination and invasive species. 



8-21


References 

MacDougall, A.S. 2002. Invasive perennial grasses in Quercus garryana meadows of southwestern 

British Columbia: prospects for restoration. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PSW-GTR-184:159-168. 

MacDougall, A.S. and R. Turkington. 2004. Relative importance of suppression-based and tolerancebased 

competition in an invaded oak savanna. Journal of Ecology 92:422-434. 

CASE STUDY 

MacDougall, A.S., B.R. Beckwith and C.Y. Maslovat. 2004. Defining conservation strategies with 


Biology 18(2):455-465. 

MacDougall, A.S. 2005. Responses of diversity and invisibility to burning in a northern oak savanna. 

Ecology 86(12):3354-3363. 

Pyne, S.J. 2007. Awful splendour: a fire history of Canada. University of British Columbia Press, 

Vancouver, B.C. 

Smith, S.J. 2007. Garry Oak savannah stand history and change in coastal southern British Columbia. 

Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis. University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario. 

Tveten, R.K. and R.W. Fonda. Fire effects on prairies and oak woodlands on Fort Lewis, Washington. 

Northwest Science 73(3):145-158. 

USDA Forest Service. 2009. Fire and non-native invasive plants: a state-of-knowledge synthesis. 

USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 

Irvin Banman is the Site Manager and Restoration Technician at Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve, Nature 

Conservancy of Canada. 

Thomas Munson is the Natural Areas Field Technician for City of Victoria Parks. 

8-22 



8.3.3 Social and Cultural Constraints 

The position of many Garry Oak sites within the urban sphere creates a variety of social and 

cultural constraints to restoration. Tree removal in protected areas can raise concerns with local 

citizens and natural history clubs. Similarly, any change in the condition of a site that people 

have become used to, such as a shift from a shrub-dominated understorey to an open grass/forb 

understorey, can generate concern. It is essential to incorporate effective communication systems 

including information signs and pamphlets dropped in the mailboxes of local residents, to avoid 

delays and misunderstandings. 

Where Garry Oak sites have significant cultural connections, inclusion of First Nations input in 

the restoration designs will be important. There may be opportunities to invite local First Nations 

to be part of the restoration or the ongoing management of the restored ecosystem. Fire and 

camas harvest have historically been part of the disturbance regimes associated with deep soil 

Garry Oak ecosystems (see Chapter 3: Natural Processes and Disturbance). Re-establishment 

of these disturbance elements is expected to be an important part of successful restoration of 

these ecosystems. Ideally, this re-establishment would happen with the involvement of local First 

Nations. 

Somenos HistoricAL Village Site (Yey’um’nuts) 

The Somenos Garry Oak area has a long history of human use. A gentle southwest-facing slope 

parallels Somenos Creek downstream of Somenos Lake to the confluence with the Cowichan 

River. Large specimen Garry Oak trees are found throughout this area, although the Garry 

Oak ecosystems mostly have been lost to housing developments. Continued expansion of the 

TimberCrest development in 1992 unearthed human remains and the development was halted. 

A detailed archaeological survey was conducted and additional burials were found along with 

evidence of a village site with occupation dating back 3750 years before present. It is clear 

from the scattered large old oak trees and the deep rich soil that this area has been cultivated 

for camas for many centuries. 

Archaeological dig next 

to Somenos Garry Oak 

Protected Area. Remains 

were found at this site that 

date back almost 4,000 

years. Photo: Dave Polster 



8-23


The author next to one of 

the large Garry Oak trees 

in the Somenos area. 

Photo: Hans Roemer 

8.4 Re-stitching the Fabric of the Ecosystem 

Restoration of Garry Oak ecosystems generally entails removal of invasive species, replacement 

with appropriate native species, and the re-establishment of natural disturbance regimes. 

Removal of invasive species has been discussed above and is presented in greater detail in Chapter 

9: Alien Invasive Species. Establishment of native species is discussed below while the recovery of 

historical disturbance patterns is presented in the following section. If invasion by alien species 

and the disruption of natural disturbance regimes are what have caused the degradation of Garry 

Oak ecosystems, then species and disturbance regime re-establishment are viewed as parts of restitching 

the fabric of the ecosystem. The assumption is that by re-establishing the appropriate 

species and disturbance elements, the natural processes of nutrient cycling and soil building 

will come along as well. If the ecological degradation has been extreme, then some form of soil 

amelioration through the use of appropriate mychorrizal inoculation may be required. 

8.4.1 Selection of Suitable Species 

Study of reference 

Selection of suitable species requires knowledge of the characteristics of 

ecosystems 

the site in which the plants are to be established and the autecology of 

provides ecological the plants to be planted. Study of reference ecosystems (discussed below) 

understandings 

provides ecological understandings that will allow selection of appropriate 

that will allow 

species for similar sites. Sometimes selection of species can be based on 

selection of 

remnant plants that have survived on the disturbed site, although care 

appropriate species must be taken not to base species selection entirely on remnant plants as 

for similar sites. 

these may represent the species that were able to persist in the face of the 

degrading element, while other species might have been selectively lost. 

Camas is known to have been selectively grazed by cattle to the point where 

once-dense stands have been eliminated, while snowberry was released by cattle grazing to the 

point that when snowberry occurs extensively in Garry Oak ecosystems it can be a sign of former 

8-24 



Reference ecosystems 

such as the grasslands 

of Eagle Heights can be 

used to illustrate the 

distribution of species 

across the ecological 

gradients that occur in 



heavy grazing. Knowledge of the ecology of the site being treated, including the successional 

status and trajectory (discussed in Successional Trajectories as follows), and the potential species 

that would be used for treatment, is essential for effective species selection. 

Reference Ecosystems 

Reference ecosystems (see Section 8.2 above) can be used to define the ecological conditions 

under which specific species grow. In addition, the relationships between species can be 

determined through careful study of reference ecosystems. Although we may not know why plants 

assort themselves the way that they do, repeating patterns found in reference ecosystems on the 

restoration sites will help to ensure that the appropriate species are planted together. Reference 

ecosystems also provide information on the way species arrange themselves along ecological 

gradients 6 so that, for example, species that are found in moist seepage areas are planted in 

seepage sites on the restoration area, and species that are found on dry rocky knobs are planted on 

the drier parts of the restoration area. 

Unfortunately, there are few Garry Oak ecosystems that have not been impacted by something, 

even if only the absence of landscape burning. Therefore, selecting reference ecosystems for the 

purposes of determining species selection and planting locations should be based on a number 

of different sites. Visiting a variety of Garry Oak sites at various stages of recovery with an eye 

towards the species that are found on these sites and the arrangement of those species to each 

other and their environment can assist in selection of species for restoration. Looking at the 

relationships between species and the habitats in which they occur, as well as the relationships 

among various habitat types and the species that occupy the transition areas between habitats, 

will help in determining species for re-planting on degraded ecosystems. 

6 Such as from dry to moist or nutrient poor to nutrient rich. 



8-25


Hobbs et al. (2006) suggest that as species and ecosystems assort themselves under the conditions 

of changing climates, there may be situations where novel arrangements arise. The range of 

Garry Oak ecosystems may expand substantially and sites that were formerly mesic may end up 

being drier while wet sites may become wetter during periods of intense winter rains. Since our 

knowledge of how these novel ecosystems are put together will be imperfect it may be prudent 

to incorporate a range of species in restoration projects (Hobbs and Cramer 2008). Although the 

Garry Oak ecosystems of the future may be different than they are now, it is useful to have a good 

understanding of the ecology of our current ecosystems so that we may knowledgeably assist in 

their restoration as they change under a changing climate. 

Successional Trajectories 

Garry Oak ecosystems in their pre-contact state can be considered as edaphically controlled disclimax 

ecosystems 7 (shallow soil rocky sites) or culturally maintained dis-climax ecosystems (deep 

soil sites). Since successional theory has undergone a substantial shift and the ideas of climax 

ecosystems have been displaced (Walker and del Moral 2003), it may be better to think of the 

successional status of Garry Oak ecosystems as one that in the absence of management or fire 

would shift towards a Douglas-fir dominated ecosystem, although on dry rock outcrops this may 

be a very slow process. Deep soil Garry Oak sites will be replaced in short order by Douglas-fir 

stands as is evident on many of the remaining sites. 

Recognizing the transient nature of Garry Oak ecosystems requires that restoration activities 

remain active with interventions required to maintain these ecosystems in the face of ongoing 

successional changes. On deep soil sites, the re-establishment of camas harvest and regular 

burning will be needed to keep the Douglas-fir at bay. On shallow rocky sites, Douglas-fir 

encroachment was historically controlled by wildfires that would occur at 300 to 500 year intervals 

(Roemer 1972). Since landscape burning that maintained the Coastal Douglas-fir zone ecosystems 

(of which Garry Oak ecosystems are a part) are not expected to be re-established in the future, 

manual clearing of encroaching Douglas-fir will be required. 

Some of the species that are currently found in Garry Oak and related ecosystems can be 

considered early seral 8 . Alaska Brome (Bromus sitchensis) has been identified as one such species 

(C. Maslovat, pers. comm. 2010). Other species associated with Garry Oak ecosystems might also 

be considered early seral as these ecosystems have been established with disturbance as a major 

ecological element. Species that produce large quantities of seed and establish easily, such as 

camas, make ideal candidates for restoration. Many early seral species possess such attributes. 

Incorporation of early seral species into repair of drastically disturbed sites has been cited as an 

effective strategy for restoration of these sites (Polster 1989). 

7 Dis-climax refers to a plant community that is maintained at some earlier successional state by some external factor. 

In this case, Garry Oak ecosystems would become Douglas-fir forests except for the dry conditions associated with rock 

outcrop areas and the fires associated with aboriginal burning of deep soil sites. 

8 Early seral means the plants and communities that show up early in a successional sequence. 

8-26 



8.4.2 Propagation 

Many of the species used in Garry Oak ecosystem restoration are easily propagated. Garry Oak 

grasses, Long-stoloned Sedge (Carex inops), and various lilies can be readily grown from seed. 

Species that are easy to grow can form the foundation for rebuilding species diversity in restored 

Garry Oak ecosystems. Standard nursery procedures using conventionally-sized containers have 

been shown to be effective for most species, although some tricks have been found for growing 

certain species. Chapter 10: Species Propagation and Supply and the Native Plant Propagation 

Guidelines prepared by the Native Plant Propagation Steering Committee of GOERT provide 

details for propagation of Garry Oak ecosystem species (see www.goert.ca/propagation). 

8.4.3 Establishment Procedures 

Most Garry Oak ecosystem species can be easily established by planting plugs using standard tree 

planting methods. In most cases where the aim is to re-build the fabric of the ecosystem, dense 

plantings are used. Grass plugs can be planted at 20 to 30 cm spacing to create a dense stand of 

native grasses that resists invasion by introduced species. Where the aim of the planting is to reestablish 

complexities of ecosystem structure, larger shrubs can be planted. 

Although Garry Oak ecosystem species are adapted to growing in a climate with summer 

droughts, it may be prudent to provide some level of irrigation during the first year. Care should 

be taken to avoid over-watering as this can encourage establishment of alien invasive grasses. 

Fertilizer is generally not needed for Garry Oak ecosystem species when they are planted in 

reasonably intact ecosystems, as the mychorrizal and microbial communities will be in place to 

help provide nutrients to the newly-established species. On sites where degradation has been 

substantial, watering the plugs with a slurry of soil collected from intact ecosystems may help 

establish the appropriate soil flora and fauna. 

Re-stitching the fabric of Garry Oak ecosystems may entail planting native grasses as well as 

the showier forbs. Photo: Dave Polster 



8-27


8.5 Re-establishing Disturbance Elements 

Garry Oak ecosystems rely on disturbance to perpetuate the species assemblages that make 

these ecosystems so special. On deep soil sites in the absence of fire, Douglas-fir trees will cover 

the oaks and the site will turn into a Douglas-fir forest. Encroachment can also happen on rock 

outcrop sites, but much more slowly. Re-establishment of disturbance elements can be difficult 

and in many cases surrogates such as mowing are used. Chapter 3 provides details of the natural 

processes and disturbance regimes associated with Garry Oak ecosystems. 

8.6 Development of Monitoring Programs 

Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring provides details of monitoring programs that can be applied 

to Garry Oak ecosystem restoration projects. Specifics of the monitoring program will depend on 

the site and treatments being monitored. In general, the ability to observe changes in the species 

composition and ecological conditions over extended periods of time should be included in all 

monitoring programs. 


Beckwith, B.R. 2005. The queen root of this clime: ethnoecological investigations of Blue Camas 

(Camassia leichtlinii (Baker) Wats., C. quamash (Pursh) Greene; Liliaceae) and its landscapes 

on southern Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Biology, 

University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

Clewell, A.F. and J. Aronson. 2007. Ecological restoration principles, values, and structure of an 

emerging profession. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 

Gonzales, E.K. and D.R. Clements. 2010. Plant community biomass shifts in response to mowing 

and fencing in invaded oak meadows with abundant ungulates. Restor. Ecol 18:753-761. 

Hobbs, R.J., S. Arico, J. Aronson, J.S. Baron, P. Bridgewater, V.A. Cramer, P.R. Epstein, J.J. Ewel, 

C.A. Klink, A.E. Lugo, D. Norton, D. Ojima, D.M. Richardson, E.W. Sanderson, F. Valladares, 

M. Vila, R. Zamora, and M. Zobel. 2006. Novel ecosystems: theoretical and management 

aspects of the new ecological world order. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 15:1-7. 

Hobbs, R.J. and V.A. Cramer. 2008. Restoration ecology: interventionist approaches for restoring 

and maintaining ecosystem function in the face of rapid environmental change. Ann. Rev. 

Environ. Resour. 33:39-61. 

Hobbs, R.J. and K.N. Suding (editors). 2009. New models for ecosystem dynamics and restoration. 

Island Press,Washington, D.C. 



Maslovat, C. 2010. Personal Communication. Biologist, Salt Spring Island, B.C. 

MacDougall, A. 2002. Invasive perennial grasses in Quercus garryana meadows of southwestern 

British Columbia: prospects for restoration. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Report PSW- 

GTR-184. 

8-28 



Polster, D.F. 1989. Successional reclamation in Western Canada: new light on an old subject. Paper 

presented at the Canadian Land Reclamation Association and American Society for Surface 

Mining and Reclamation conference, Calgary, Alberta, August 27-31, 1989. 

Polster, D.F. 1994. Alternative methods of vegetation management: an ecological approach 

to vegetation management. Unpublished paper presented at the Integrated Vegetation 

Management Association seminar in Bellingham, WA., February 15, 1994. 

Primack, R.B., A.J. Miller-Rushing, and K.Dharaneeswaran. 2009. Changes in the flora of 

Thoreau’s Concord. Biol. Conserv. 142:500-508. 


Ph.D. Thesis. University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

SERI, 2004. The SER primer on ecological restoration. Version 2. October, 2004. Science and 

Policy Working Group, October, 2004. Society for Ecological Restoration International. 

Tucson AZ. www.ser.org/content/ecological_restoration_primer.asp (accessed January 28, 

2009). 

Shaben J and J. Myers. 2009. Relationships between Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius), soil 

nutrients and plant diversity in the Garry oak savannah ecosystem. Plant Ecol. 207:81-91. 

Taylor, S.W. and A.L. Carroll. 2003. Disturbance, forest age, and Mountain Pine Beetle outbreak 

dynamics in BC: A Historical Perspective. Mountain Pine Beetle Symposium: Challenges and 

Solutions. October 30-31, 2003. Kelowna, B.C.. T.L. Shore, J.E. Brooks, and J.E. Stone (editors). 

Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre. Information 

Report BC-X-399, Victoria, B.C. 

Turner, N.J. 1995. Food plants of coastal First Peoples. Royal British Columbia Museum 

Handbook. UBC Press. Vancouver, B.C. 

Turner, N.J. 1998. Plant technology of First Peoples of British Columbia. UBC Press and Royal 

British Columbia Museum. Vancouver and Victoria, B.C. 

Walker, L.W. and R. del Moral. 2003. Primary succession and ecosystem rehabilitation. Cambridge 

Univ. Press. Cambridge, U.K. 

Walker, L.W., J. Walker and R.J. Hobbs. 2007. Linking restoration and ecological succession. 

Springer. New York, N.Y. 



8-29


8-30 







Chapter 9 


Contents 

9.1 Introduction to Alien Invasive Species......................................3 

9.1.1 What Are Alien Invasive Species?........................................4 

9.1.2 Indigenous Species that Become Invasive.........................4 

9.1.3 How Do Alien Invasive Species Harm Ecosystems?...........4 

9.1.4 Invasive Species of Garry Oak and Related Ecosystems...5 

9.1.5 Chapter Overview...............................................................6 

9.2 Preventing the Introduction of Alien Invasive Species............6 

9.2.1 Closing the Pathways of Introduction – Legislation..........6 

9.2.2 Closing the Pathways of Introduction – Regulation.........7 

9.3 Early Detection and Rapid Response........................................9 

Case Study 1. Early Detection, Rapid Response in the Case of 

Carpet Burweed (Soliva sessilis)..................................................... 11 



9-1


9.3.1 Emergency Response Plans.............................................. 13 

9.3.2 Risk Communication, Education, and Public Awareness.13 

9.4 Management of Established Alien Invasive Species ............. 14 

9.4.1 Adaptive Management..................................................... 15 

9.4.2 Site Management ............................................................ 15 

9.4.3 Management Plan............................................................ 16 

Case Study 2. Alien Invasive Species Management on 

Anniversary Island, Gulf Islands National Park Reserve................17 

9.4.4 Disposal............................................................................. 22 

9.5 Alien Invasive Species Control Methods................................. 23 

9.5.1 Seasonal Considerations .................................................. 23 

9.5.2 Competition and Shading................................................. 23 

9.5.3 Biological Control............................................................. 23 

9.5.4 Mowing............................................................................. 25 

9.5.5 Tilling.................................................................................26 

9.5.6 Thermal.............................................................................26 

9.5.7 Management of Hydrology.............................................. 27 

9.5.8 Prescribed Burning........................................................... 27 

9.5.9 Chemical............................................................................ 27 

9.5.10 Physical............................................................................28 

9.5.11 Grazing.............................................................................29 

9.6 Summary..................................................................................29 

9.7 References...............................................................................30 

Appendix 9.1 .................................................................................. 32 

Alien Species Listed by Restoration Ecosystem Unit............... 32 

Appendix 9.2 ................................................................................37 

Regulatory Responsibilities of Agencies with Respect 

to Alien Species.........................................................................37 

9-2 



Chapter 9 


by Michelle Gorman, in collaboration with Aimée Pelletier, Dave Polster, and Raj Prasad 

photo needed 

Dave Polster demonstrates cutting invasive Spurge-laurel (Daphne laureola) below ground. Photo: Chris Junck 

9.1 Introduction to Alien Invasive Species 

After habitat destruction, conservation biologists have ranked alien invasive species as the second 

most serious threat to species at risk globally. About a quarter of Canada’s species at risk are 

adversely affected in some way by alien species. Alien species introductions are one of the most 

important threats to Red-listed plants and animals in B.C. (BC MLAP 2004). 

The management of alien invasive species in Garry Oak ecosystems (or other ecosystems) is 

frequently a significant activity that requires extensive resources and can have a sizeable impact 

on the landscape. It is important to have a solid understanding of the restoration objectives 

of the area before undertaking invasive species management. This chapter aims to provide the 



9-3


practitioner with a good basis on which to begin dealing with alien invasive species in restoration 

situations. 

9.1.1 What Are Alien Invasive Species? 

Indigenous (or native) species are species that occur naturally in an area. Alien or exotic species 

are those that have been moved outside of their natural home range (i.e., non-indigenous 

species). Introduced species have been brought intentionally or unintentionally from another 

geographic area. Many invasive species reproduce rapidly, dominating habitats to the detriment of 

other species. Good definitions, examples of alien invasive species, and their threats to Canadian 

ecosystems can be found on the Garry Oak Ecosystem Recovery Team (GOERT) website (www. 

goert.ca/about_invasive_species.php) and the Environment Canada website (www.ec.gc.ca/eeeias/default.asp?lang=En&n=986EC44D-1). 

Alien or exotic 

species are those 

that have been 

moved outside 

of their natural 

home range (nonindigenous 

species). 

Alien invasive species are those harmful alien species whose introduction 

or spread threatens the environment, the economy, or society; the harm to 

society includes harm to human health (United States National Invasive 

Species Council 2001). 

9.1.2 Indigenous Species that Become Invasive 

Through the absence of predation and through natural successional 

processes that occur in the absence of fire, native species such as Columbian 

Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) and Douglas-fir 

(Pseudotsuga mensiesii) can become very abundant and take on invasive 

characteristics in Garry Oak ecosystems. Restoration strategies for managing such native invaders 

are discussed in Chapter 8: Restoration Strategies. 

9.1.3 How Do Alien Invasive Species Harm Ecosystems? 

Invasive species, including plants, animals, and micro-organisms, pose a significant threat to 

native ecosystems (Vitousek 1990). After habitat conversion caused by urban development and 

agriculture, invasive species pose the second greatest threat to native ecosystems (Murray and 

Pinkham 2002). The impacts of alien invasive species vary in scale and scope and may include one 

or more of the following: 

• hybridization with native species, potentially causing reduced genetic integrity and diversity 

• parasitism, predation, grazing, and/or browsing of native species 

• competition with native species for limited resources 

• carrying parasites and diseases 

• degradation of habitat by altering vegetation structure and/or ecosystem processes such as 

fire and nutrient cycling 

• alteration of ecosystems in such a way that further invasion by other invasive species is 

promoted 

9-4 



9.1.4 Invasive Species of Garry Oak and Related Ecosystems 

All Garry Oak ecosystems have been invaded to some extent by alien invasive species, and the 

ecosystems continue to be at risk of further invasions. Alien invasive species can produce major 

ecological effects on Garry Oak ecosystems through habitat change, competition, predation, 

disease, and hybridization. These species may have multiple effects and may interact to amplify 

these effects, which may worsen through time and other factors of change. It may be difficult to 

determine if an alien species is invasive prior to its introduction to new locations and ecosystems. 

While only a minority of alien species become invasive, it is not currently possible to effectively 

predict all of the species that will have substantial adverse effects (BC MLAP 2004). 

At least 174 alien species (not including invertebrates or micro-organisms) have been identified 

in Garry Oak ecosystems, including 4 tree, 14 shrub, 142 herb, 1 reptile, 6 bird, and 7 mammal 

species (GOERT 2003). Many of these alien species have become invasive in Garry Oak and 

associated ecosystems; there is a list of exotic invaders on the GOERT website, along with a 

field manual on invasive species of greatest concern titled, Invasive Species in Garry Oak and 

Associated Ecosystems in BC (www.goert.ca/pubs_invasive.php#Field_Manual). 

Lists of alien invasive species found in an ecosystem are useful when determining what to look for 

on-site, but the alien invasive species present on site need to be considered dynamic and subject 

to change over time. The GOERT (2003) list of exotic and potentially invasive species represents 

only a snapshot of a collection of alien species known to exist in Garry Oak ecosystems at the time 

of compilation of this publication. 

Dense English Ivy (Hedera helix) 

and other species carpeting the 

forest floor and climbing trees at 

Pemberton Park, Victoria, B.C. Alien 

invasive species pose significant 

threats to native ecosystems. English 

Ivy is an aggressive invader in our 

area, and can carpet natural areas, 

blocking sunlight and crowding out 

low-growing plants. It can weaken 

and even kill trees. Land managers 

face a serious long-term challenge 

in developing and conducting 

effective programs to deal with 

existing populations of alien invasive 

species. Preventing introduction and 

controlling spread once introduced 

saves substantial investment in 

resources and funds in the long run. 




9-5


The consequences of invasions can be particularly severe for species at risk. See Chapter 4: Species 

and Ecosystems at Risk and Appendix 9.1 for more information regarding species and ecosystems 

at risk. 

9.1.5 Chapter Overview 

The objectives of strategies that address alien invasive species focus on prevention of the species’ 

entering an area and becoming established, early detection of newly introduced alien invasive 

species and rapid response to eliminate the species, and management of those species that 

do establish. In this chapter, we discuss the prevention of alien invasive species introductions 

(Section 9.2), early detection and rapid response (Section 9.3), and management of established 

alien invasive species (Section 9.4). We also discuss a full range of control measures for alien 

invasive species (Section 9.5), and conclude by discussing management of alien invasive species in 

the context of restoration (Section 9.6). 

Prevention is the 

most efficient 

and economical 

approach to 

reducing the 

introduction, 

establishment, 

and spread of alien 

invasive species. 

9.2 Preventing the Introduction of Alien 

Invasive Species 

Prevention is the most efficient and economical approach to reducing 

the introduction, establishment, and spread of alien invasive species. As 

an alien invasive species becomes established and begins to spread, there 

are progressive increases in financial and environmental losses due to the 

invasion, and corresponding increases in the cost to eradicate, contain, and 

control it. Prevention should be a high priority in any strategy that addresses 

alien invasive species. The ways in which alien invasive species are introduced 

or spread are called pathways. The many pathways of introduction include 

ballast water, recreational boating, aquarium trade, pet trade, horticulture 

trade, hitchhikers on commodities, stowaways in various modes of transportation, and diseases 

in wildlife. These introductions can be intentional (purposeful) or unintentional (accidental), 

and they can be authorized or unauthorized (illegal) (Environment Canada 2004). Increased 

international trade and travel has brought a corresponding increase in the number of alien 

invasive pests intercepted in North America (CFIA 2004). Although legislation (Section 9.2.1) 

and regulations (Section 9.2.2) exist, anyone working in Garry Oak ecosystems should be diligent 

about not allowing potential new invasive species to gain a foothold. 

The ways in which 


species are 

introduced or 

spread are called 

pathways. 

9.2.1 Closing the Pathways of Introduction – Legislation 

International Context 

The introduction of plants and plant pests from one geographical area 

to another is a worldwide concern and is governed principally by the 

International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). The purpose of this treaty 

is to protect plants (including natural flora) and plant products from the 

introduction of invasive plants or plant pests and to promote appropriate 

measures for their control. Canada has been a signatory since 1951, and 

its plant quarantine programs are consistent with the convention and its 

9-6 



standards. Canada also signed the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1992, a global 

agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity with a Memorandum of 

Cooperation between the CBD and the IPPC. 

Federal Context 

Many departments and agencies from various jurisdictions in Canada have a mandate to protect 

agriculture, forestry, and natural environments, and already undertake activities related to alien 

invasive species, either directly or indirectly (Environment Canada 2005). 

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has a mandate to protect Canada’s plant 

resources by preventing the entry or establishment of plant pests that are not already present 

in Canada, or pests that are present and of limited distribution. The Plant Health Program of 

the CFIA includes activities such as pest risk analysis and policy setting, surveillance and 

monitoring, pest detection, and pest eradication or management. The list of pests regulated by 

Canada includes insects, mites, mollusks, nematodes, fungi, bacteria, viruses, phytoplasmas, and 

plants. This list can be found on the CFIA website (www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/protect/ 

listpespare.shtml). 

Observations of any of the pests on this list should be reported to the CFIA at 1-800-442-2342. 

You may be directed to the nearest office to make your report or submit a sample of the suspicious 

insect, plant, or plant pest. 

Samples of suspected alien species can also be brought or sent to the local BC Ministry of 

Agriculture and Lands (BCMAL) office. The office will forward any suspicious samples to selected 

experts to determine if they are alien species. The BCMAL Plant Diagnostic Lab will accept 

suspect alien species samples free of charge. 

Many other federal, provincial, and local government agencies have regulatory responsibilities for 

helping to close the pathways of alien invasive species entry. A summary of some of these agencies 

and their area of expertise is provided in Appendix 9.2. 

9.2.2 Closing the Pathways of Introduction – Regulation 

An integrated legislative framework is required to facilitate the comprehensive regulation of 

alien invasive plants and plant pests in Canada. The Plant Protection Act (1990) administered 

by the CFIA is a key legal tool in the regulation of the importation and domestic movement of 

plants, plant products, and plant pests (CFIA 2004). Other federal acts and regulations such as 

the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (1999), the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and 

Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (1992), and others contribute to the 

protection of plants and habitats in Canada. The CFIA responsibility is aligned with that of the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. The CFIA can: 

• restrict entry of “economically harmful” species through quarantine/inspections for 

“Regulated species” (222 species listed in Canada), 

• eradicate or suppress introduced species to prevent establishment, and 

• limit movement of exotic species between counties or provinces to prevent the spread. 

Regulatory control actions such as quarantine or restricted movement of commodities are 

preceded by a risk analysis and assessment process. 



9-7


Table 9.1 Pathways of invasion (from CFIA 2004) 

Alien Species 

Aquatic Invasive Species 

Invasive Animals and 

Animal Pests 

Intentional Introductions 1 

• Live food fish 

• Aquarium and horticultural pond 

trade 

• Live bait fish 

• Authorized stocking 

• Unauthorized transfer or stocking 

• Wildlife/pet trade 

• Game or fur farming/ranching of 

livestock, poultry, apiculture 

• Research and development 

• Zoos 

• Malicious introductions 

Unintentional Introductions 

• Commercial shipping (ballast water 

management, hull fouling) 

• Recreation/tourism—boating, float 

planes 

• Garbage 

• Water diversions, canals, and dams 

• Natural transboundary spread 

• Animal products (meat, dairy, eggs, 

pet food) 

• Packing/packaging materials 

(containers, etc.) 

• Commercial transport—containers, 

airplanes, boats, trains, trucks, cars 

• Recreation/tourism (baggage) 

• Natural transboundary spread 

1 Intentional introduced species can also be associated with unintentional introduced species (pests/hitchhiker). Intentional introductions may 

be both authorized and unauthorized. 

Pest Risk Assessment of Potential Invaders 

Risk assessment of potential invaders is a key tool for preventing the introduction of harmful 

species to British Columbia. The CFIA conducts risk assessments for alien invasive species in the 

context of animal and plant health and is highly regarded by the global community for its risk 

assessment approach. In fact, in order to regulate for a potential alien invasive species, the CFIA 

must conduct the pest risk assessment. 

Pathways analysis involves identifying the main pathways that facilitate 

a pest’s movement and dispersal (Table 9.1). Literature on invasive plants 

introduced in Canada documents the intentional introduction of plants 

for agricultural, ornamental, or medicinal uses as potential sources of alien 

invasive species (CFIA 2004). Pathways analysis is the tool used to identify and 

assess the different means by which species may be introduced to new areas 

and the relative likelihood of successful establishment occurring. This allows 

subsequent pest risk assessments, research, and policy development to focus 

on priority high-risk pathways. 

Pest risk assessment is the process of evaluating the relative risks posed by 

particular pests or alien invasive species. International standards for pest risk 

assessments have been established by the IPPC and provide the framework 

in which the CFIA conducts pest risk assessments. The IPPC standards for 

pest risk assessment include commodity-based pest risk assessments and pest-specific pest 

risk assessments. Commodity-based pest risk assessments focus on a particular commodity, 

and identify all potential pests that may be associated with that pathway. Pest-specific pest risk 

assessments provide more detailed information on particular pest species, and assign them risk 

Risk assessment 

is the process by 

which potential 


plants and plant 

pests are identified 

and evaluated. It 

includes pathways 

analysis and pest 

risk assessment. 

9-8 



ratings based on their likelihood of introduction and potential impacts. Pest risk assessments 

are based on the best scientific information available. An example of a pest risk assessment can 

be found on the California Oak Mortality Task Force website: www.suddenoakdeath.org/pdf/ 

RevisedPRA.8.03.pdf (Kliejunas 2003). 

Potential Invasive Species Risk Communication and Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Identifying and making note of alien species that are potentially detrimental to Garry Oak 

ecosystems prior to their entry should be done by those familiar with the ecosystems and the risk 

of new species to harm them. Those experts should communicate the risk to those government 

organizations charged with assessing risk and regulating their entry. 

In order to expedite the regulation of a potential alien species from entering Canada or British 

Columbia, a pest risk assessment of the species should be conducted according to the IPPC 

standards. While the CFIA and the Canada Border Services Agency have principal roles in the 

prevention of new introductions of alien invasive plants and plant pests, departments with land 

management responsibilities, such as Environment Canada, Agriculture and 

Agri-Food Canada, Natural Resources Canada-Canadian Forest Service, and 

Parks Canada have critical functions in the management of alien invasive 

species within their land management responsibilities. Environment Canada, 

for example, contributes to the development of legislation, policies, and 

programs to protect biodiversity from alien invasive plants and other pests. A 

risk assessment conducted to the IPPC standards by a not-for-profit society 

such as GOERT could flag a potential alien invasive species for consideration 

by Environment Canada, which may then be passed up to the CFIA to create 

regulation to tighten the pathways of entry. The consideration of commodities, 

pathways, and vectors responsible for the introduction of alien invasive species 

is vital for designing an effective prevention plan. 

9.3 Early Detection and Rapid Response 

When alien invasive species circumvent prevention measures and enter Canada, it is essential to 

detect and identify them before or immediately after they become established. Early identification 

of alien invasive species, followed by a rapid response to eradicate or contain the pest, saves 

substantial investment in resources and funds in the long run (Figure 9.1). 

It is essential to respond to new introductions rapidly before they establish or spread and cause 

serious harm to the environment. 

Steps involved in an early detection rapid response program: 

• Identifying the introduced pest 

• Conducting a risk assessment, including a pathway assessment 

• Conducting site mapping of the pests in the area 

• Providing containment of the area 

• Evaluating successful management techniques used for the species in other areas 

• Identifying and mapping species at risk in the area (continued on next page) 

Early identification 

of alien invasive 

species, followed 

by a rapid response 

to eradicate or 

contain the pest, 

saves substantial 

investment in 

resources and 

funds in the long 

run. 



9-9


Cost 

Time 

Figure 9.1 Typical invasion sequence for alien invasive species (after Hobbs and Humphries 1995). 

• Communicating the program elements to stakeholders and other land managers 

• Implementing management techniques 

• Evaluating the success of the management response program 

• Revising the program to increase subsequent success 

In 2006, the Invasive Plant Council of BC developed an Early Detection Rapid Response Plan 

(www.invasiveplantcouncilbc.ca/publications/EDRR%20for%20Review.pdf) to respond rapidly to 

invasive plant species. Many of the steps of an Early Detection Rapid Response Plan were followed 

in an attempt to contain or eradicate Carpet Burweed (Soliva sessilis), a weed that potentially 

impacts Garry Oak ecosystems (see Case Study 1). 

9-10 



Case Study 1. Early Detection, Rapid Response in the Case 

of Carpet Burweed (Soliva sessilis) 

by Dave Polster 

CASE STUDY 

Awareness of the Alien Invasive Species 

• First introduction to Ruckle Park , Salt Spring Island, B.C. in 1996 

• By 2005 found in 3 other provincial parks, 1 municipal park and 1 

federal park 

• Two forums held by Invasive Plant Council of British Columbia 

(IPC) to communicate the findings and concern lead to an initial 

economic assessment 

• Alien invasive species pest risk potential leads to funding aimed at 

the eradication of Carpet Burweed in B.C. 

Spotting, Identifying, and Locating the New Introductions 

• Two botanists were hired to search for the plant at likely locations on southern Vancouver 

Island and the associated Gulf Islands 

• An additional search crew was hired to visit all of the private campgrounds and recreational 

vehicle parks on southern Vancouver Island 

• Carpet Burweed was found at 23 of the over 175 sites searched 

Communications to Stakeholders 

Carpet Burweed (Soliva sessilis). 


• The IPC was founded in 2003 to provide coordination of invasive plant issues in the province 

• IPC coordinated the stakeholder communications and eradication efforts 

• Two workshops held with affected stakeholders 

• Coastal Invasive Plant Council (CIPC) added Carpet Burweed to their priority invasive species list 

and completed a fact sheet about it: www.coastalinvasiveplants.com/carpet-burweed 

• Follow-up presentations regarding Carpet Burweed status made at IPC AGM 

• Site crews conducted information sessions prior to offering/conducting eradication measures 

Incursion Management—Management Tools, Pooling of Resources, Rapid 

Response Management Team 

• Organized by the IPC ground efforts and consisted of two phases: 1) searching for sites with 

Carpet Burweed present; and 2) treating the populations that were found 

• Management methods used by the Rapid Management Team: 

-Site manager or owner was notified and treatment was arranged 

-At some sites, the infested areas were fenced to prevent movement of Carpet Burweed seeds 

to other areas from plants that had been missed in the burning 



9-11


CASE STUDY 

Left: Searching for Carpet Burweed. Right: Burning with a torch. Photos: City of Victoria 

-2006 treatments consisted of hand-pulling if plants were few or burning patches with more 

than a few plants using propane fired hand torches 

-Small pin flags were used to identify locations of patches in larger lawn areas. This allowed one 

person to search for Carpet Burweed while another person followed with the torch 

-A total infested area of slightly over 8 ha was treated 

Monitoring the Outcome—Success in Some Areas, Not Others 

• Analysis of the data collected during the study suggested pathways of spread and estimated 

success of Carpet Burweed eradication 

• Continued annual monitoring and treatment was encouraged 

• In areas where resources were applied to do so, such as at Beacon Hill Park, results have shown 

continued reduction over the last 4 years; the remaining burweed population is less than 5% of 

the original population size 

• Areas such as Ruckle Park where treatment is reduced to hand-picking in a sizable area due 

to the presence of a species at risk, Macoun’s Meadowfoam (Limnanthes macounii), makes 

eradication unlikely but management possible 

Prevention (Ongoing) 

• Entails reviewing the pathways of spread of this alien invasive plant (on hiking boots, shoes, 

tent pads, dogs’ paws), reducing the impact where possible, and monitoring the most likely 

sites of introduction 

• Continued education and awareness for land managers and other stakeholders 

• Avoiding contamination from a known infested area to a non-infested area where possible 

through exclusion/containment measures 

Reference 

Polster, D.F. 2007. Eradicating Carpet Burweed (Soliva sessilis Ruiz & Pavón) in Canada. Topics in 

Canadian Weed Science. Canadian Weed Science Society 5:71-81. 

Dave Polster is a consulting plant ecologist with more than 30 years of experience in vegetation 

studies, reclamation and invasive species management. 

9-12 



Even if an alien invasive species is already established in a given region, it may be treated as a new 

invader in more outlying areas. For example, Spurge-laurel (Daphne laureola) is well-established 

at Fort Rodd Hill but is considered to be a new invader in Victoria. In Victoria, this species has 

been treated as an early detection invasive and given a high priority for removal in order to try to 

eradicate it and save valuable management resources in the long-term. 

9.3.1 Emergency Response Plans 

An emergency response plan provides guidance on actions that should be taken and how 

decisions are made following the declaration that a new alien invasive species incursion has taken 

place. In cases where invasions of insects, such as the Asian Longhorned Beetle (Anoplophora 

glabripennis), would represent an emergency in urban and natural forests, a government body 

may be able to provide the landowner with an emergency response plan. An example of such 

a plan is coordinated through the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (www.uvm.edu/albeetle/management/actionplans.html). 

9.3.2 Risk Communication, Education, and Public Awareness 

The public plays a large role in addressing the problem of alien invasive species. Public awareness 

and understanding of the risk and pathways of spread of potential or newly introduced alien 

invasive species is the cornerstone to controlling such species and preventing their introduction. 

Figure 9.2 Carpet Burweed public 

alert sign (City of Victoria). Public 

awareness is a key component 

of successful invasive species 

management, particularly in 

controlling pathways and preventing 

spread to new sites. 



9-13


Raising public awareness is key to the successful management of alien invasive species, 

particularly those that are newly introduced to a site. For example, Carpet Burweed management 

signs have been posted in containment areas to alert the public to the presence of the alien 

invasive species, its potential harm, and risk of spread (Figure 9.2). 

Chapter 6: Outreach and Public Involvement discusses many innovative ways of working with the 

public in Garry Oak restoration. 

9.4 Management of Established Alien Invasive Species 

Land managers face a serious long-term challenge in developing and conducting effective 

programs to deal with existing populations of alien invasive species. The first steps in managing 

an invasive species include recognizing the species, mapping the extent of its introduction, and 

learning about its biology in order to understand how best to manage it. 

The prevalence of alien invasive plants in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems in British 

Columbia has been documented in a number of studies. In the 1960s, Roemer (1972) found 

that 25% of the species within the core of the Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) range in British 

Columbia were introductions from the Mediterranean and other parts of Europe. McCune (2010) 

re-monitored a portion of Roemer’s plots in 2009. She found that while many Garry Oak plots 

had had no exotics 30 years earlier, they all had exotic plants when re-monitored in 2009. In the 

Coastal Douglas-fir plots, 76 out of 114 plots had no exotic plants in the 1960s but only 3 out of 114 

had no exotic plants by 2009 (McCune 2010). 

The first steps 

in managing an 


include recognizing 

the species, 

mapping the extent 

of its introduction, 

and learning about 

its biology in order 

to understand how 

best to manage it. 

Not all of these non-native plant species established in Garry Oak and 

associated ecosystems are invasive, but many are, including shrubs such as 

Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius), Spurge-laurel, Gorse (Ulex europaeus), 

and Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus); grasses such as Kentucky 

Bluegrass (Poa pratensis), Colonial Bentgrass (Agrostis capillaries), and 

Creeping Bentgrass (A. stolonifera); and forbs such as Tiny Vetch (Vicia 

hirsuta), Common Vetch (V. sativa), and Hairy Cat’s-ear (Hypochaeris 

radicata). A list of invasive, non-native species of Garry Oak ecosystems can 

be found in Appendix 9.1. 

In a 2009 butterfly and moth survey of four City of Victoria parks that contain 

Garry Oak and associated ecosystems, the most abundant butterflies and 

moths were non-native species. Fifty-two percent of the butterflies observed 

were exotic, and consisted of the Cabbage White (Pieris rapae) and the 

European Skipper (Thymelicus lineola); 56% of the macromoths captured, 

Large Yellow Underwing (Noctua pronuba) and Lesser Yellow Underwing 

(N. comes), were non-native (Page et al. 2009). The Large Yellow Underwing and Lesser Yellow 

Underwing moths were recently introduced to B.C. and are considered to be pest species (Copley 

and Cannings 2005). Other alien insects that have become invasive in Garry Oak ecosystems 

include the Jumping Gall Wasp (Neuroterous saltitrius), Oak Leaf Phyloxera (Phylloxera glabra), 

and Winter Moth (Operophtera brumata) (GOERT 2009). 

9-14 



Alien species are regularly intercepted upon entry into B.C. by the federal government (CFIA); 

however, with the vast movement of people and products, introductions still occur and some 

result in established populations. 

In dealing with established alien invasive species, land managers must be prepared for a longterm 

investment of resources and develop goals for removing the invasive species in a context of 

restoration management. 

The Invasive Plant Council of BC has developed a number of tools to assist with invasive plant 

management in this province. One such tool has been developed in collaboration with the B.C. 

Ministry of Forests and Range: Invasive Alien Plant Program (IAPP). The IAPP is “a web-based 

database that stores information on comprehensive invasive plant data in B.C.” (Invasive Plant 

Council of BC). Regional committees across B.C. have offered 1-day IAPP workshops that have 

featured the new IAPP Version 1.6 and include training on the “Report-A-Weed” functionality. 

Information on IAPP training is available on the B.C. Ministry of Forests and Range website 

(www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/Plants/IAPPtraining.htm). 

9.4.1 Adaptive Management 

Adaptive management is a problem-solving approach to environmental management which takes 

existing knowledge, explores alternatives, makes predictions of their outcomes, selects one or 

more actions to implement, and monitors to determine if the outcomes match the predictions. 

Results obtained from this management practice are then used as a learning exercise and a basis 

to adjust future management plans and policy. See the GOERT website for a description of how an 

adaptive management strategy works (www.goert.ca/documents/goe_dst_ams.pdf). 

Our understanding of how these dynamic and complex ecosystems work and respond to 

disturbances is limited. This makes ecosystem management and restoration challenging, but 

an adaptive management approach is useful for proceeding with restoration activities in the 

face of uncertainties. See Chapter 8: Restoration Strategies for more information on adaptive 

management, and Chapter 3: Natural Processes and Disturbance for a discussion of what is known 

about disturbance in these ecosystems. 

9.4.2 Site Management 

It is important to investigate the ecosystem and the conditions on site that have encouraged 

the establishment of alien invasive species. For example, it is important to ask what species at 

risk occur on site (see Table 4.1), find their locations, and measure their populations (e.g., map 

and set up a way to monitor these species, see Section 5.2.2 in Chapter 5: Restoration Planning, 

Inspection and Inventory, and Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring). It is also critical to identify 

the particular invasive species concerns on site, the locations of such species, and the extent of 

infestation (e.g., map and set up a way to monitor the site). More information on site management 

is available on the GOERT website: General Decision Process for Managing Invasive Plant Species 

in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems (GOEs) (www.goert.ca/documents/General_Decision_ 

Process_revised.pdf) (GOERT 2007). 



9-15


9.4.3 Management Plan 

Management plans should reflect the goals for the site and consider the management of targeted 

alien invasive species while preserving the native species on site (see GOERT resources: 

www.goert.ca/invasive) such as best practices documents and a field manual on invasive species). 

Management plans should also consider the biology of targeted alien invasive species, their 

known impacts on Garry Oak ecosystems, and management techniques for the species. Decisions 

need to be made about which alien invasive species are of the highest priority on the site given the 

resources available for management. The GOERT website has resources to help in the decision 

process (www.goert.ca/documents/General_Decision_Process_revised.pdf) of developing such 

priorities (GOERT 2007). 

Likewise, plans should consider the biology of plants at risk (refer to GOERT’s field manual: 

Species at Risk in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems in B.C.: www.goert.ca/pubs_at_risk.php). 

An excellent example of a management plan that contains these elements is Parks Canada (2008), 

in their Anniversary Island restoration plan (see Case Study 2 following, and Appendix 5.1 in 

Chapter 5: Restoration Planning). 

(continued on page 9-22) 

9-16 



Case Study 2. Alien Invasive Species Management on 

Anniversary Island, Gulf Islands National Park Reserve 

by Aimée Pelletier 

CASE STUDY 

Established Alien Invasive Species Being Managed 

a. Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) 

b. Bur Chervil (Anthriscus caucalis) 

c. Bull Thistle (Cirsium vulgare) 

d. Agronomic grasses, including: 

-Common Velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus) 

-Sweet Vernal-grass (Anthoxantham odoratum) 

-Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensis) 

-Orchard-grass (Dactylis glomerata) 

Groups Involved 

Parks Canada Agency staff, co-op students, and volunteers 

Planting Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus) 

plugs. Photo: Nicole Kroeker, Parks 

Canada 

Location of Restoration/Management Project 

Anniversary Island is a 1.8 hectare islet located in Gulf Islands National Park Reserve about one 

kilometre northwest of Saturna Island, within the Belle Chain Islets, in the Strait of Georgia. It is 

primarily a coastal bluff ecosystem dominated by dense shrubby Garry Oak (Quercus garryana), 

Common Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana), and mature Seaside 

Juniper (Juniperus maritima) (Blackwell 2007). Coastal bluff ecosystems are naturally rare 

throughout eastern Vancouver Island and the southern Gulf Islands. These ecosystems are of 

increasing conservation concern due to development pressure, increased recreational use, and 

alien invasive species infestations. Anniversary Island is designated as Zone 1 (Special Preservation), 

meaning that only authorized access is permitted to afford protection to its rare and sensitive 

ecosystems. 

Restoration Goals and Objectives 

The overall restoration goal for this project is to improve the ecological integrity of Anniversary 

Island. At the beginning of the restoration project, native plant communities were estimated 

through informal survey to comprise at least 75% of the total cover (C. Webb, pers. comm. 

2008); however, advancing infestations of agronomic invasive grasses and Himalayan Blackberry 

were threatening the native communities and establishing a new steady state in the vegetation 

(Polster 2007). Achieving the restoration goal therefore involves removing the key threats to 

ecological integrity so that existing native plant communities can persist with a minimum of human 

intervention. To provide project direction and guidance, a restoration plan was written for the 

island that outlines the objectives, targets, methods, and monitoring protocols (see Appendix 5.1 

in Chapter 5 for the full restoration plan). The approach adopted is not to modify all of the island’s 

ecosystems. Rather, activities are focused on repairing specific degraded areas using an integrated 



9-17


pest management approach and methods that are sensitive to the presence of native flora and 

fauna, and cultural features. The restoration plan has three objectives: 

a. Replace infestations of agronomic grasses in specific treatment polygons with native shrubs 

b. Permanently remove large Himalayan Blackberry thickets 

c. Permanently remove smaller Himalayan Blackberry occurrences and other priority alien invasive 

species (AIS) that occur incidentally throughout the island 

CASE STUDY 

The restoration plan for Anniversary Island follows an ecosystem-based adaptive management 

approach (sensu Johnson 1999). Adaptations to the plan are made as we apply treatments, monitor 

using ecologically sound methods, and learn. 

Management Methods Used Prior to AIS Removal 

a. Site inventory for species at risk as well as the AIS 

A site inventory was conducted at the beginning of the restoration project to identify species 

at risk as well as all alien invasive plant species on Anniversary Island. Each year the island is 

resurveyed to detect any new occurrences of alien invasive plant species. 

b. Prioritization of AIS for removal 

Not all alien plant species demonstrate invasive tendencies in all situations. This makes it 

neither necessary nor effective to treat all alien species equally. Prioritizing which species to 

treat and when facilitates effective treatment and allocation of resources. Species identified as 

top priority for treatment were selected based on each species’ degree of infestation, relative 

ease of treatment, and significance of impact on the ecosystem, using past experience and 

the General Decision Process for Managing Invasive Plant Species in Garry Oak and Associated 

Ecosystems (GOERT 2007) as guides. This list is revised as new data are collected and 

treatments applied. 

Left: Planting a 

snowberry plug. 

Right: Planting 

shrubs and grasses 

on Anniversary 

Island. Photos: Aimée 

Pelletier, Parks 

Canada 

9-18 



Management Methods Used to Remove AIS and Restore Native Plant Communities 

a. Seasonal Consideration 

The advice developed by GOERT on the best months to remove alien invasive species in this 

region is followed in deciding when to remove each AIS. Priority is placed on removing AIS 

prior to seed set such that further dispersal and spread can be avoided. 

CASE STUDY 

b. Protection of Species at Risk 

Species at risk in the vicinity of the treatment areas are clearly flagged (e.g., flagging tape, pins) 

prior to AIS removals in order to avoid disturbance. 

c. Agronomic Grass Control 

Although Common Velvet grass, Sweet Vernal-grass and Orchard-grass are identified as top 

priority species in the restoration plan for the island, their predominance and the difficulty in 

controlling them precludes them from being treated outside the treatment polygons. Within 

specific treatment areas, grasses are repeatedly cut to deplete their energy reserves, mulched, 

and left to decay in situ to suppress re-infestation until native shrub cuttings and live stakes are 

planted to out-compete them, as recommended by Polster (2007). A variety of removal tools 

are employed, including hand shears, carpet knives and a gas-powered weed whip. The first 

cutting occurs at the time of anthesis 1 (typically early June depending on seasonal weather). A 

second cutting occurs in mid-late summer at the time of maximum re-growth. 

d. Woody Shrub Control 

Himalayan Blackberry is the main woody shrub of concern on Anniversary Island. Between 

2003 and 2006, volunteers removed patches of Himalayan Blackberry by hand-cutting using 

loppers and root ball removal. With the removal of the Himalayan Blackberry infestations, 

agronomic grasses that were present around and among the blackberry expanded to dominate 

the areas where blackberry was removed. In addition, these physical control methods did 

not prevent the blackberry thickets from re-growing and continuing to expand. In 2008 and 

2009, blackberry thickets were first cut with a gas-powered brush saw, or manually with hand 

loppers and then spot-treated with a selective herbicide (Garlon). After two years of herbicide 

treatment, the blackberry infestations appear to be shrinking, but the method has not proved 

100% effective in killing the canes. Monitoring of the blackberry treatment areas in early 

December 2009 detected re-sprouting canes in all of the treatment areas. Re-application of 

herbicide was therefore planned for 2010. Due to the difficult and dangerous access, Himalayan 

Blackberry growing on the island’s steep cliff faces has not yet been treated. As long as these 

patches remain, they can continue to act as a source of seed for new infestations on the island. 

Consideration is being given to training staff in the use of ropes and harnesses in order to 

remove these patches. 

e. Forb Control 

Infestations of priority alien invasive forbs are removed by hand, by either cutting or careful 

hand-pulling. Attention is given to the timing of removal. Bur Chervil (Anthriscus caucalis) must 

be hand-pulled in early spring before seeds mature (10–12 weeks after flowering). Bull Thistle 

1 The period during which a flower is fully open and functional. 



9-19


(Cirsium vulgare) is another target species that is present on Anniversary Island. Once plants 

bolt but before they flower, they are pulled if possible to get the taproot, or cut ~ 3 cm below 

the soil surface to prevent the plant from re-sprouting. Small rosettes are carefully dug up and 

the tap-root removed if possible without significantly disturbing the soil. 

f. Re-vegetation of Treatment Areas 

As described above, removal of Himalayan Blackberry infestations enabled agronomic grasses 

that were present around and among the blackberry to expand and dominate the treatment 

area. One problem alien invasive species was replaced with another! Where the bare patches 

left by alien invasive species removal are relatively small (e.g., ≤20 cm x 20 cm), native shrubs or 

forbs from adjacent habitat can be expected to expand and naturally re-vegetate the area. For 

larger bare patches, and those where agronomic grasses now dominate, a restoration strategy 

was developed to expedite succession to a native plant community through re-vegetation with 

native species that can outcompete the agronomic grasses. 

CASE STUDY 

The choice of species used to re-vegetate the treatment areas depends on the native plant 

community present. Treatment areas located in areas naturally dominated by shrubs (e.g., 

Snowberry association, Juniper-Oak association) are re-vegetated with native shrubs, 

while treatment areas located in more open meadow plant communities (e.g., camas-herb 

association) are re-vegetated with native grasses and forbs. 

Because Common Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) and Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana) tend to 

form dense layers beneath which agronomic grasses do not dominate, and because they are 

most easily propagated from cuttings, these species are used for re-vegetation of treatment 

areas located in shrub habitat. In June 2008, several hundred snowberry and rose cuttings 

were collected from Anniversary Island and sent to a professional nursery for propagation into 

plugs. These cuttings were to be the primary source of re-vegetation material, but yielded far 

fewer viable plants than anticipated. For this reason, and so that we do not rely on only one 

method, a combination of native shrub plugs, live stakes, and layering is used to re-vegetate 

the treatment areas. 

In January 2009, layering of snowberry and live staking of rose and snowberry was tested for 

effectiveness in some of the treatment areas. Given the apparent success of these methods 

(~75% survival rate), as well as their cost-effectiveness and efficiency, a larger effort will 

be undertaken in January 2010. In December 2009, approximately 400 snowberry and 100 

rose plugs were planted into two of the treatment areas. The success of these plugs will 

be monitored and compared to the success of the live staking and layering trials in order to 

determine the most efficient and cost-effective re-vegetation strategy. In order to reduce 

competition of the agronomic grasses with the newly planted plugs, live stakes, and layered 

shrubs, grass cutting will continue in the treatment areas. Cutting will be done by hand, 

however, to avoid damage to the shrubs. 

For treatment areas located in open meadow communities, fast-growing/early seral stage 

native forbs such as Sea Blush (Plectritis congesta) and native grass species such as Blue Wildrye 

(Elymus glaucus) are preferred. In December 2008, Blue Wildrye plugs propagated from seed 

collected on the island were used to re-vegetate one of the treatment areas. Additional Blue 

Wildrye plugs are currently being propagated to re-vegetate additional treatment areas and will 

be planted in early 2010. Collection of seed for propagating a greater diversity of native forbs 

and grasses was planned for 2010. 

9-20 



Live staking of rose 

and snowberry on 

Anniversary Island. 

Photo: Nicole Kroeker, 

Parks Canada 

CASE STUDY 

Monitoring 

Island-wide systematic surveys for target alien invasive species are carried out annually in May 

and October to search for and remove alien invasive species. Formal monitoring of the restoration 

efforts on Anniversary Island focus on the treatment polygons. The extent of any Himalayan 

Blackberry infestation is determined annually by defining the boundary using a GPS unit, whereas 

a crude estimate of percent cover is recorded to determine intensity. Photos are captured before 

and after treatments as a qualitative record of change in each treatment polygon over time. Belt 

transects through the polygons are used to assess percent cover of native species. The general 

health and survival of plugs, live stakes, and layered stems is monitored in the re-vegetation areas. 

A survival rate ≥ 75% is considered a success. 

References 

Blackwell, B.A. 2007. Parks Canada southern Gulf Islands terrestrial ecosystem mapping (in draft) 

B.A. Blackwell and Associates Ltd. North Vancouver, B.C. 

GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team). 2007. General decision process for managing 

invasive plant species in Garry Oak and associated ecosystems. Report published for Garry Oak 

Ecosystems Recovery Team, Victoria, B.C. 

Johnson, B. L. 1999. The role of adaptive management as an operational approach for resource 

management agencies. Conservation Ecology 3(2): 8. www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/art8. 


Polster, D. 2007. Restoration concepts: Eagle and Anniversary Islands, Gulf Islands National Park, 

Sidney, B.C. Polster Environmental Services Ltd. Unpublished report prepared for Parks Canada 

Agency. 

Aimée Pelletier is an Ecosystem Scientist with Parks Canada Agency—Coastal BC Field Unit, Fort Rodd 

Hill National Historic Site of Canada. 



9-21


Left: English Ivy prior to removal in Pemberton Park. Right: English Ivy removal in Summit Park. When invasive species 

occupy large areas, a targeted management approach is best. In the case of English Ivy, targeted management focuses 

on immediately reducing its spread by removing the climbing stage (ivy on trees), thus eliminating seed production. An 

understanding of the biology of the species involved is important in determining the best management strategies. Photos: 

City of Victoria 

Where Should Action be Taken on Targeted Invasive Species? 

In many cases it is hard to know where to begin if the invasive species occupies large areas of the 

site. An example of this is a site with English Ivy (Hedera helix), which can occupy many hectares 

(photo above). With invasive species such as this, a targeted approach works well. Because ivy 

produces seeds when it reaches a climbing stage, removing it from the trees will immediately 

reduce its spread. The ivy can be cut at 1 metre above the ground all the way around the tree, and 

the upper vines can be left to decay on the tree. After cutting the ivy on the trees, a manageable 

area can be chosen to hand pull the vines on the ground (e.g., based on what volunteers and staff 

could remove in less than a day). The ivy can be removed by using hand trowels to pry the root 

system up and roll it back like a carpet, followed by appropriate disposal. 

9.4.4 Disposal 

Garden waste can be dropped off at municipal public works yards. Check the website of the 

municipality to find out the rules for proper garden waste drop off. City of Victoria guidelines 

can be found at www.victoria.ca/cityhall/departments_engcivicwaste.shtml#garden. The Capital 

Regional District lists yard waste options and rules to follow when disposing of yard wastes 

9-22 



including invasive species (CRD: www.crd.bc.ca/waste/organics/yardwasteoptions.htm). A 

current option is to place all plant parts in garbage bags labelled “invasive species”, and take them 

to Hartland Landfill in Victoria, B.C. 

9.5 Alien Invasive Species Control Methods 

9.5.1 Seasonal Considerations 

Alien invasive species should be removed at a time of year when native species would be least 

affected. Because seasons differ from one location to another within regions, removal timetables 

will vary. Sample timetables are included here for reference. Practitioners should keep in mind 

that seasonal patterns vary annually, even within the same area of larger sites. 

Example 1. Timing of invasive species removal developed for volunteers of Government House 

by Pat Boyle (available on the GOERT website: www.goert.ca/documents/best_time_to_remove_ 

invasive_species.pdf). 

Example 2. Best Management Practices for invasive species removal from sensitive ecosystems 

(Table 9.2), compiled by Nathalie Dechaine with the intention of educating community 

volunteers about the environmental and social sensitivities associated with invasive plant removal 

(drafted November 2008). 

9.5.2 Competition and Shading 

Alien invasive species are often shade intolerant, and this attribute can be used against them in 

various ways. For example, a Scotch Broom control program can use shade to prevent re-sprouting 

of this shade-intolerant plant. Young broom plants (the width of a pencil or smaller) may be 

pulled without causing much soil disturbance. Removal of larger, older plants in the same way 

would cause significant soil disturbance on-site and would bring up seeds from the soil bank, 

which would cause more harm than good. However, older broom plants can be cut low when the 

plant is stressed (after flower production, when starch reserves are low in the plant, and prior to 

seed release) and then covered over with mulch or leaf litter to mimic shading, which reduces the 

amount of re-sprouting from the stalk. 

All ecosystems have successional stages, and the early stages tend to be most susceptible to 

weedy species that are programmed to occupy bare ground, when competition and shade are at 

their lowest. Some weeds of prairies and grasslands, such as Russian Thistle (Salsola kali), can 

be reduced or eliminated by the establishment of a healthy cover of native perennial grasses and 

forbs, which outcompete and shade out the weedy species (Polster et al. 2006). 

9.5.3 Biological Control 

Biological control uses a wide variety of organisms, including grazing animals, fungi, 

microbes, and insects to control targeted alien invasive species. Biological control agents are 

selected based on their ability to manage targeted invasive species without impacting natural 

ecosystems. The Winter Moth, for example, native to northern Europe and northern Asia, was 

introduced to Vancouver Island in the 1970s without the natural checks and balances that keep 



9-23


Table 9.2 Best management practices for invasive species removal in sensitive ecosystems. These timeframes mimic 

typical seasonal timeframes. Some years may vary; therefore, removal should be in accordance with actual events 

(e.g., the onset of fall rains) as opposed to the calendar (from Dechaine 2008; used with permission). 

Species* 

Form 

Jan 

Feb 

Mar 

Apr 

May 

Jun 

Jul 

Aug 

Sept 

Oct 

Nov 

Dec 

Rationale 

Ivy 

creeping 

√√√ 

√√√ 

OOO OOX 

XXX 

XXO 

OOO OOO 

XXO 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ds 

climbing 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√O 

OOO OOO OO√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ns 

Broom 

pulling* 

√√√ 

√OX 

XXX 

XXX 

XXX 

XXX 

XXX 

XXX 

XXO 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ds 

cutting 

√√√ 

OOX 

XXX 

XXX 

XXX 

OOO 

O√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ns, ds 

Blackberry 

stems 

√√√ 

OOO OOX 

XXX 

XXX 

OOO 

OXX 

XXX 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ns, fs 

roots 

√√√ 

OOO OOO 

XXX 

XXX 

OOO 

XXX 

XXX 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ns, fs 

Daphne 

pulling* 

√√√ 

√√O 

OOO OOO OOO OOO OOX 

XXX 

XXO 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev 

cutting 

√√√ 

√√O 

OOO OOO OOO OOO 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev 

Holly 

pulling** 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√OO OOO OOO OOO OOX 

XXX 

XXO 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ds 

E. Hawthorn 

pulling** 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√O 

OOO OOO OOO OOX 

XXX 

XXO 

√√√ 

√√√ 

√√√ 

ev, ds 

*NOTE: It is imperative to know the health hazards associated with handling invasive plant species before 

commencing work. Toxic Plant Warning information is found on the WorkSafeBC website. 

(www.worksafebc.com/publications/health_and_safety/bulletins/toxic_plants/default.asp) 

TIMING 

*Pulling should occur only if seedlings are a pencil width or smaller 

**Pulling requires the use of a tool (Weed-wrench© or Pullerbear ©) and should occur only if the shrub is 

3.5 cm or less in diameter 

KEY 

√√√ Ideal season 

OOO Extreme care must be taken (removal from certain areas may be inappropriate) 

XXX Refrain from any removal (see rationale) 

RATIONALE 

ds = dry season, pulling causes severe soil disruption 

ev = emergent vegetation 

fs = fruiting season (can create public backlash) 

ns = nesting season (birds nesting and sensitive to disturbance) 

it to a manageable level in its native locations. Winter Moth is an alien invasive species and a 

detrimental defoliator of several host trees including Garry Oak, aspen, birch, poplar, and Bigleaf 

Maple (Acer macrophyllum) as well as many ornamental trees, shrubs, and native species such as 

snowberry (Symphoricarpus spp.). A joint federal-provincial biological control program, involving 

the importation and release of two European parasites on Vancouver Island, was initiated in 

1978 following the example of a similar program in Nova Scotia which brought the Winter Moth 

populations down to manageable levels within 6 years in the release sites. The two parasitoids 

9-24 



released were Cyzenis albicans, a tachinid fly, and Agrypon flaveolatum, a parasitic wasp (Roland 

and Embree 1995). 

In greenhouse trials, a bioherbicide derived from the fungus Chondrostereum purpureum 

was found to be effective at preventing re-sprouting of 2-year-old broom plants (Prasad and 

Kushwaha, 2001). The development of biological control agents to manage alien invasive species 

requires time for research of the appropriate agent, testing in the safety of the laboratory and 

greenhouse to assess both efficacy and range of target, and then ground-truthing of the agent 

in the field for management of the alien invasive species. An eight to ten year timeframe is 

not uncommon for the development and registration of biological agents prior to use in the 

field. Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency, under the authority of the Pest 

Control Products Act (2002) and the Pest Control Products Regulations, reviews all products, 

including biological pest control products for registration in Canada (Health Canada’s Pest 

Management Regulatory Agency, www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/branch-dirgen/pmra-arla/indexeng.php). 

In the case of an alien invasive species like the Winter Moth, the development 

and release of biological agents can prove to be an invaluable management tool (see invasive 

species field manual found on the GOERT website: www.goert.ca/invasive). The BC Ministry 

of Agriculture’s Integrated Weed Management Introductory Manual (2010) (www.agf.gov.bc.ca/ 

cropprot/weedman.htm#BIOLOGICAL) contains a section on the use of biocontrol for managing 

invasive species. Another resource can be found on the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural 

Resource Operations, Biocontrol Development website which includes biocontrol research, 

and publications on biocontrol of weeds in British Columbia (www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/Plants/ 

biocontrol/index.htm). 

9.5.4 Mowing 

Mowing knocks plants back to ground level but does not disturb the root systems. It can kill 

rhizomatous invasives by depleting energy reserves, which deprives the roots of the energy 

derived from photosynthesis. Repeated cutting at the right time of year can reduce vigour 

Mowing around Deltoid 

Balsamroot (Balsamorhiza 

deltoidea), an Endangered 

plant in Garry Oak 

ecosystems. GOERT is 

creating a document about 

Best Management Practices 

(BMPs) for mowing in Garry 

Oak ecosystems which will 

be available on the GOERT 

website in late 2011. 



9-25


or completely kill offending plants. The key to success is understanding the physiology and 

phenology of the invasive organism so it can be mowed at the weakest point in its life cycle. 

Scotch Broom and some alien perennial grasses can be managed with well-timed mowing. 

Mowing has been used to mimic fire in Beacon Hill Park. 

The Mill Hill Regional Park Restoration Plan contains a section on the Best Practices for Control 

of Scotch Broom that lists technical guidelines to consider when removing this invasive species, 

including mowing (CRD Parks 2003, pp. 36-38). This plan can be found on the CRD website 

(www.crd.bc.ca/parks/documents/mill_hill_restoration_plan.pdf). 

9.5.5 Tilling 

Multiple tilling is used to deplete soil seed banks where the terrain, soil, and seed bank extent is 

favourable to this method. Due to the extensive seed banks of some alien invasive plant species in 

infested Garry Oak ecosystems and to the presence of native forbs at most sites, tilling has limited 

use in most Garry Oak ecosystems. 

9.5.6 Thermal 

On sites where all existing vegetation is considered undesirable, solarization and sheet mulching 

have been used to kill the existing vegetation and prepare the bed for the planting of desirable 

species. Solarization involves the use of clear or black plastic sheets to raise soil temperatures 

enough to kill unwanted seeds and vegetation cover. Various types of mulch can be used to 

eliminate light to unwanted vegetation. The Urban Restoration Project at the Kings Road 

Native Plant Garden conducted by Pat Johnston and friends from the Native Plant Study Group 

employed the sheet mulching technique as a way to suppress weed growth and to prepare the 

ground for a meadow (see photos below). A story about this project can be found on the GOERT 

website: www.goert.ca/news/2009/07/kings-road-native-plant-garden. 

“Before” photo: in the foreground, natural leaf fall at 

the site of a future thicket, and in the background, deep 

sheet mulch prepares the ground for the Garry Oak 

meadow. Photo: Pat Johnston 

“After” photo: a few years later, the meadow is full of 

camas lilies (not in flower) and Red-flowering Currant 

(Ribes sanguineum) (see also pink variety in foreground). 

A few daffodils remain. Photo: Pat Johnston 

9-26 



9.5.7 Management of Hydrology 

Substantial changes to local hydrology due to urban development, land filling of streams, and 

placing streams underground have caused large-scale ecological degradation and weed invasions 

in B.C. Mimicking historical flows on flood controlled rivers may be a means of controlling 

invasives. Increasing spring water release from the Columbia and Snake River dams to aid fish 

migration may also help restore willow bars by flooding out broom and blackberry patches that 

have occupied former floodplains (Polster et al. 2006). With the renewed interest in “day-lighting” 

urban creeks, it may be possible to re-establish willow and other riparian species in these areas. 

In other cases, it may be possible to remove drainage from a site as part of a restoration project. 

For example, over the last 60 years the northeast side of the Garry Oak meadow in Beacon Hill 

Park had three drains placed in the interior of the meadow and one just outside the meadow, 

with an accompanying drainage ditch. The drainage on this section of the meadow changed its 

hydrology: the area went from being a relatively wet meadow with vernal seeps in the winter and 

early spring that dried slowly over the summer season, to a much drier meadow with occasional 

winter seeps. Nuttall’s Quillwort (Isoetes nuttallii) and Golden Paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta) are 

extirpated species that used to live in the moist areas of this meadow, and suites of moisture-fond 

native plants such as the Jeffrey’s Shootingstar (Dodecatheon jeffreyi) have dwindled in numbers 

and have been replaced by their drier-habitat cousins, Broad-leaved Shootingstar (Dodecatheon 

hendersonii). Invasive species such as Orchard-grass (Dactylis glomerata) and Scotch Broom, 

favoured by the dryer conditions, have moved into the meadow, with the nitrogen-fixing Scotch 

Broom feeding the nitrogen-loving Orchard-grass. A recent restoration of a portion of this area 

entailed reclaiming a former meadow from a parking area of 1000 m², removing the drainage 

ditch and drain to put back some of the former hydrology, and planting a suitable suite of plants. 

In addition to encouraging the moist-loving plant species formerly found on this meadow, it is 

hoped that the change in hydrology will be sufficient to discourage drier-loving invasives such as 

Scotch Broom and Orchard-grass. 

9.5.8 Prescribed Burning 

In oak and pine woodlands and savannahs, in the absence of frequent, low-intensity fires, 

both native tree and shrub species such as Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and Common 

Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) and non-native species invade, changing open grassy areas 

into densely-treed or shrubbed areas (see Chapter 3: Natural Process and Disturbance). Restoring 

the natural fire regime would theoretically help manage some of these invaders. In most cases, 

initial site preparation would be required. This could include activities such as cutting the invasive 

species, or raking needles or duff away from old trees, to lower the fuel load prior to engaging in a 

controlled prescribed burn (see Case Study 2 in Chapter 8: Restoration Strategies). 

9.5.9 Chemical 

Various types of chemicals, such as herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, may be used in pest 

management. Herbicides are particularly useful for controlling deep-rooted and rhizomatous 

plant species (Polster et al. 2006). When used as part of an integrated pest management program 

and with careful selection, timing, and application method, chemical herbicides can provide 

excellent control of some invasive species. An example is stem application of glyphosate to 

Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia japonica). Care must be taken to minimize effects on non-target 



9-27


A prescribed burn at the Cowichan 

Garry Oak Preserve, near Duncan, 

B.C. In the absence of fire, 

certain native and non-native 

species can invade open, grassy 

areas and change them into 

more densely vegetated ones. 

Restoring the natural fire regime 

would theoretically help manage 

some of these invaders (for more 

information, see Case Study 2 

in Chapter 8). Photo: Tim Ennis, 

Nature Conservancy of Canada 

species; chemical use should be avoided on sites with species at risk (SAR). There are many 

alternatives to chemical use: new technology exists such as the use of hot water-based weed 

control applicators that provide non-chemical choices in the area of vegetation management 

(Murray and Pinkman 2002). 

9.5.10 Physical 

Manual removal of invasive plant species is practiced in many restoration projects, particularly 

where volunteer labour is available and on sites where other management techniques are not 

appropriate, such as sites with rare or endangered species. 

A variety of approaches and tools are used in physical weed control, ranging from hand-pulling to 

the use of spades, hoes, specially-designed weed pullers like weed wrenches, flamers, weed-eaters, 

brush saws, and in already highly disturbed areas, backhoes and bulldozers. It is important to 

choose the tools appropriate to the site and species being managed. Scotch Broom, for example, 

produces large amounts of seed per plant which can remain in the seed bank for numerous years. 

Methods that minimize soil disturbance, such as cutting with loppers or brush saws as close to the 

ground as possible, should be used for broom plants with stems larger than a pencil width. Young 

broom plants that are smaller than pencil width can be manually pulled by standing on either 

side of the plant and pulling straight up to minimize bringing large potions of the seed bank to 

the surface. Targeting broom prior to flowering, where possible, also avoids seed banking. With 

heavy broom growth in highly disturbed areas with very little of the original habitat remaining, it 

may be appropriate to take in larger wheeled machinery to slash the broom prior to a large-scale 

restoration project. Best management practices for removing several types of invasive species can 

be found on the GOERT website (www.goert.ca/pubs_invasive.php#GDP). 

9-28 



9.5.11 Grazing 

Domestic grazing animals, primarily goats and sheep, have been used with varying degrees of 

success to reduce invasive species such as Scotch Broom, English Ivy, and Himalayan Blackberry. 

Although grazing may not eliminate invasive species, when combined with other methods it 

can reduce the occurrence of such species and help with site preparation. Care must be taken 

to choose the type of animal that has the appropriate grazing habits for the job to be done. For 

example, goats prefer browsing woody species to eating grasses and forbs; therefore, the animals 

can be useful in oak savannahs if they are confined to the target area and then moved when 

appropriate (Soll 2004). On the other hand, over-grazing can cause excessive disturbance of 

grassland sites (Douglas 2011); (see Case Study 1 in Chapter 8: Restoration Strategies). 

9.6 Summary 

Management of alien invasive species focuses on strategies to prevent the species from entering an 

area and becoming established, strategies for the early detection of newly introduced alien species 

that may become invasive, a rapid response to their elimination, and strategies to manage those 

alien invasive species that do become established. 

Although much of the management of invasive species in Garry Oak ecosystems tends to focus 

on alien invasive plants, alien species include a wide variety of organisms such as birds, squirrels, 

rabbits, insects, mites, slugs, and diseases (such as Sudden Oak Death) whose ecological impacts 

may be less obvious at first but more devastating in the long run. 

The early detection of an alien species, accompanied by a rapid response to control that species, 

saves a major investment of resources over an extended period of time. Managing established 

alien invasive species on a site, on the other hand, requires a long-term management commitment 

and is much more costly. 

In some areas, removal of the alien invasive species may be all that is required to re-establish a 

healthy, functioning ecosystem. In other cases, management of invasive species should be done 

in conjunction with other strategies, such as the planting of native species. The development of 

management techniques is dynamic and changes as ecologists and land managers learn what does 

and does not work on their sites, and how they communicate their knowledge and adapt it into 

the next set of management plans. 

With the increase in international trade, world travel, and the relatively temperate climate in 

southern British Columbia, new alien species will continue to enter Garry Oak ecosystems. 

By creating a pest alert system, many of these species may be managed before they become 

established. Through the sharing of knowledge among a variety of groups and individuals 

involved in Garry Oak ecosystem restoration, more and more sites are being restored despite the 

presence of well-established alien invasive species. 



9-29



BC Ministry of Agriculture. 2010. Integrated Weed Management: Introductory Manual. Province 

of British Columbia. www.agf.gov.bc.ca/cropprot/weedman.htm (Accessed June 2011). 

BC Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations. 2010. Biocontrol development. 

Province of British Columbia. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/Plants/biocontrol/index.htm (Accessed 

June 2011). 

BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (BC MLAP), Biodiversity Branch. 2004. Invasive 

alien species framework for BC: identifying and addressing threats to biodiversity. 

CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency). 2004. Action plan for invasive alien terrestrial 

plants and plant pests. Phase 1-Key Initiatives. www.ec.gc.ca/eee-ias/default. 

asp?lang=En&n=78D62AA2-1 (Accessed 2011). 

Coastal Invasive Plant Committee. 2011. www.coastalinvasiveplants.com (Accessed Feb. 2011). 

Copley, C.R. and R.A. Cannings. 2005. Notes on the status of the Eurasian Moths Noctua pronuba 

and Noctua comes (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Journal of 

the Entomological Society of British Columbia 102:83-84. 

CRD Parks. 2003. Mill Hill Regional Park Restoration Plan. CRD Parks, Victoria, B.C. 

Dechaine, N. 2008. Best management practices for invasive species removal from sensitive 

ecosystems. 

Douglas, T. Ecological restoration guidelines for British Columbia. Biodiversity Branch, Ministry 

of Water, Land and Air. www.env.gov.bc.ca/fia/documents/restorationguidelines.pdf 

(Accessed May 19, 2011). 

Environment Canada. 2004. An invasive alien species strategy for Canada.www.ec.gc.ca/eeeias/98DB3ACF-94FE-4573-AE0F-95133A03C5E9/Final_IAS 

_Strategic _Plan_smaller_e.pdf 

(Accessed Feb. 2011). 

Environment Canada. 2005. Proposed action plan for invasive alien terrestrial plants and plant 

pests phase 1. www.ec.gc.ca/eee-ias/4C8E46C8-E648-4528-B12C-33F102C130B2 /plants2_e.pdf 


GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team). 2007. General Decision Process for Managing 

Invasive Plant Species in Garry Oak and Associated Ecosystems (GOEs) www.goert.ca/ 

documents/General_Decision_Process_revised.pdf. 

GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team). 2003. Invasive species in Garry Oak and 

associated ecosystems in British Columbia. www.goert.ca/pubs_invasive.php#plant_species 


Hobbs, R. and S. Humphries. 1995. An integrated approach to the ecology and management 

of plant invasions. Conservation Biology 9(4): 761-770. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1523- 

1739.1995.09040761.x (Accessed Feb. 2011). 

Invasive Plant Council of BC. www.invasiveplantcouncilbc.ca (Accessed May 19, 2011). 

Kliejunas, J. 2003. A pest risk assessment of Phytophthora ramorum in North America. Forest 

Health Protection, USDA Forest Service State and Private Forestry, Vallejo, C.A. 

9-30 



McCune, J. 2010. Detecting changes in Garry Oak vegetation plots after 4 decades: following in 

Dr. Hans Roemer’s footsteps. Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team Research Colloquium 

2010 Proceedings, p. 19. www.goert.ca/documents/GOERT_Research_Colloquium_2010_ 

Proceedings.pdf (Accessed Feb. 2011). 

Moncrieff, A. 2006. Invasive plant early detection and rapid response in British Columbia: an 

intial framework. Prepared for the Invasive Plant Council of BC. www.invasiveplantcouncilbc. 

ca/publications/EDRR%20for%20Review.pdf (Accessed Feb. 2011). 

Murray, C. and C. Pinkham. 2002. Towards a decision support tool to address invasive species in 

Garry Oak & associated ecosystems in BC. Prepared by ESSA Technologies Ltd. for the GOERT 

Invasive Species Steering Committee, Victoria, B.C. www.goert.ca/documents/GOEDSTreport. 

pdf (Accessed Feb. 2011). 

Page, N., P. Lilley and J. Miskelly. 2009. City of Victoria butterfly and moth survey, 2009. 

Parks Canada. 2008. Restoration plan for Anniversary Island in Gulf Islands National Park 

Reserve. Garry Oak Ecosystems and Species at Risk Recovery Project. 

Polster, D.F., S. Jonathan and J. Myers. 2006. In Restoring the Pacific Northwest, ‘Managing 

Northwest Invasive Vegetation’. Island Press pp. 374-392. 

Prasad, R. and S. Kushwaha, 2001. Ecologically-based weed management for the 21st century: 

biological control of forest weeds by a mychoherbicide agent, Chondrostereum purpureum. 

17th Asian Pacific Weed Sci. Conf, 2001, Bejing, China, pp. 348-352. 

Roemer, H.L. 1972. Forest vegetation and environments on the Saanich Peninsula, Vancouver 

Island. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 

Roland, J. and D.G. Embree. 1995. Biological control of the winter moth. Annual Reviews of 

Entomology 40:475-492. 

Soll, J. 2004. Controlling Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus [R. discolor, R. procerus]) in 

the Pacific Northwest. www.invasive.org/gist/moredocs/rubarm01.pdf (Accessed Feb. 2011). 

United States National Invasive Species Council. 2001. National management plan: introduction. 

www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/council/intro.shtml#mgmtplan (Accessed Feb. 2011). 

Vitousek, P. 1990. Biological invasions and ecosystem processes: towards an integration of 

population biology and ecosystem studies. Oikos 57:7-13. 

WorkSafeBC. Toxic plant warnings. 2011. www.worksafebc.com/publications/health_and_safety/ 

bulletins/toxic_plants (Accessed May 18, 2011). 



9-31


Appendix 9.1 

Invasive Alien Species Listed by Restoration Ecosystem Unit 

Restoration Ecosystem Unit 

Number and Name 

Restoration Ecosystem Unit #1: 

Deep Soil, Average Moisture 

Garry Oak Communities 

Invasive Alien Species (from Erickson and Meidinger 2007 and Parks 

Canada Agency 2006a, 2006b) 

Shrubs 

Common Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) 

English Ivy (Hedera helix) 

Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) 


Spurge-laurel (Daphne laureola) 

Tree Lupine (Lupinus arboreus) 

Forbs 

Bur Chervil (Anthriscus caucalis) 

Carpet Burweed (Soliva sessilis) 

Common Chickweed (Stellaria media) 

Common Vetch (Vicia sativa) 

Grass Peavine (Lathyrus sphaericus) 

Hairy Cat’s-ear (Hypochaeris radicata) 

Little Hop-clover (Trifolium dubium) 

Ribwort Plantain (Plantago lanceolata) 

Sheep Sorrel (Rumex acetosella) 

Tiny Vetch (Vicia hirsuta) 

Graminoids 

Barren Brome (Bromus sterilis) 

Barren Fescue (Vulpia bromoides) 

Hedgehog Dogtail (Cynosurus echinatus) 

Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensis) 

Orchard-grass (Dactylis glomerata) 

Rip-gut Brome (Bromus rigidus) 

Silver Hairgrass (Aira caryophyllea) 

Soft Brome (Bromus hordeaceus*) 

Sweet Vernalgrass (Anthoxanthum odoratum) 


Deep Soil, Wetter Garry Oak 

Communities 

Shrubs 

Common Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) 





Forbs 




Graminoids 

Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) 


9-32 



Communities 

Shrubs 


Forbs 





Common Vetch (Vicia sativa)

Forbs 



Chapter Common 9 Alien Vetch (Vicia Invasive sativa) Species 

Graminoids 

Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) 




Communities 

Restoration Ecosystems Unit 




Communities 

Shrubs 


Forbs 





Dovefoot Geranium (Geranium molle) 

Hawksbeard (Crepis spp.) 



Graminoids 

Barren Brome (Bromus sterilis) 


Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) 

Early Hairgrass (Aira praecox) 




Soft Invasive brome Alien (Bromus Species hordeaceus) (from Erickson and Meidinger 2007 and Parks 

Sweet Canada Vernalgrass Agency 2006a, (Anthoxanthum 2006b) odoratum) 

Shrubs 


Forbs 


Small-flowered Catchfly (Silene gallica) 

Small-fruited Parsley-piert (Aphanes australis) 

Wall Speedwell (Veronica arvensis) 

Graminoids 


Hedgehog Dogtail (Cynosurus echinatus). 

Soft Brome (Bromus hordeaceus) 



Communities 

Shrubs 



Forbs 







Ribwort (Plantago lanceolata) 



Graminoids 


Common Velvet-grass (Holcus lanatus) 











9-33




Chapter Ribwort 9 Alien (Plantago Invasive lanceolata) Species 



Graminoids 













Restoration Ecosystems Unit 


Restoration Ecosystem Unit # 7: 

Coastal Bluff Communities 

Forbs 


Creeping Buttercup (Ranunculus repens) 

English Daisy (Bellis perennis) 


Hairy Hawk-bit (Leontodon saxatilis) 

Little Chickweed (Cerastium glomeratum) 

Ribwort (Plantago lanceolata) 

Small-flowered Catchfly (Silene gallica) 

Graminoids 


Creeping Bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera) 





Invasive Perennial Alien Ryegrass Species (Lolium (from perenne) Erickson and Meidinger 2007 and Parks 

Canada Soft Brome Agency (Bromus 2006a, hordeaceus) 2006b) 

Shrubs 

Chinese Elm (Ulmus parvifolia) 

English Hawthorn* (Crataegus monogyna) 

English Ivy* (Hedera helix) 

Gorse* (Ulex europaeus) 


Morning Glory* (Convolvulus sepium) 

Spurge-laurel* (Daphne laureola) 

Tree Lupine* (Lupinus arboreus) 

Forbs 

Broad-leaved Peavine* (Lathyrus latifolius) 

Bull Thistle* (Cirsium vulgare) 


Ribwort Plantain* (Plantago lanceolata) 

Wall Lettuce* (Lactuca muralis) 

Graminoids 

Brome species*(Bromus spp.) 

Hedgehog Dogtail* (Cynosurus echinata) 

Orchard-grass* (Dactylis glomerata) 

Sweet Vernalgrass* (Anthoxanthum odoratum) 

Tickle-grass* (Agrostis spp.) 



Shrubs 


English Holly (Ilex aquifolium) 


9-34 

Forbs 



For early successional stages, many of the species listed for 

Restoration Ecosystem Units #1, #2, and #6 will occur

Ribwort Plantain* (Plantago lanceolata) 

Wall Lettuce* (Lactuca muralis) 

Graminoids 


Brome species*(Bromus spp.) 

Hedgehog Dogtail* (Cynosurus echinata) 

Orchard-grass* (Dactylis glomerata) 

Sweet Vernalgrass* (Anthoxanthum odoratum) 

Tickle-grass* (Agrostis spp.) 



Shrubs 


English Holly (Ilex aquifolium) 


Forbs 


For early successional stages, many of the species listed for 

Restoration Ecosystem Units #1, #2, and #6 will occur 

Plants with the * included in Ecosystem Unit 7: Coastal Bluff Communities, were listed in the 

draft Dallas Bluffs Conservation Plan commissioned by the City of Victoria as requiring priority 

management. City of Victoria, Draft Dallas Bluffs Conservation Management Plan (unpublished 

draft; has not been formally adopted). May 2011. Kerrwood Leidal Associates Ltd. Appendix E. 

Invasive Species Management Prescriptions. 



9-35


References 

Erickson, W.R. and D.V. Meidinger. 2007. Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) plant communities 


Branch, Victoria, B.C. Technical Report 040. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Tr/Tr040.pdf. 

Fairbarns, M. 2010. BC Conservation Data Centre field survey form (plants) species: Lupinus 

densiflorus (Dense-flowered Lupine). 

Parks Canada Agency. 2006a. Recovery strategy for multi-species at risk in Garry Oak woodlands 

in Canada. In: Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Parks Canada Agency, Ottawa, 

Ont. www.sararegistry.gc.ca/document/default_e.cfm?documentID=874. 

Parks Canada Agency. 2006b. Recovery strategy for multi-species at risk in maritime meadows 

associated with Garry Oak ecosystems in Canada. In: Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy 

Series. Parks Canada Agency, Ottawa, Ont. www.sararegistry.gc.ca/document/default_e. 

cfm?documentID=873. 

9-36 



Appendix 9.2 

Regulatory Responsibilities of Agencies with Respect to Alien Species 

Federal Agencies 

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) addresses issues of national interest related 

to agriculture. AAFC maintains the Canadian National Collections containing the most 

comprehensive collections of plants, fungi, arthropods, and nematodes in Canada and 

implements research programs to develop management strategies (including biological 

control) for invasive alien species significant to agriculture. 

Environment Canada (EC) coordinates the development of the Invasive Alien Species 

Strategy for Canada under the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy. EC conducts and supports 

research, monitoring, and management activities for invasive alien plants that pose a risk to 

Canada’s species at risk, migratory birds, wetland habitats and National Wildlife Areas and 

Migratory Bird Sanctuaries. EC contributes to the development of legislation, policies, and 

programs to protect biodiversity from invasive alien plants and other pests. 

Natural Resources Canada’s Canadian Forest Service (NRCan-CFS) promotes the sustainable 

development of Canada’s forests and competitiveness of the Canadian forest sector. Through a 

Memorandum of Understanding, NRCan-CFS provides scientific interpretation, advice, and 

research support pertaining to pest impacts, life histories, control, taxonomy, diagnostics 

and control methodologies for invasive alien species to the CFIA. NRCan-CFS has 

performed research on established invasive alien species such as Dutch Elm disease, White Pine 

blister rust, Gypsy Moth, beech bark disease, balsam Woolly Adelgid, and many others. 

Parks Canada Agency (PCA) is the largest federal land management agency in Canada, 

representing about 2% of Canada’s total land mass. Within national parks, efforts are directed at 

maintaining intact ecosystems of native species. Individual park management plans provide 

guidelines for the management of all non-native species on federal lands in national parks and 

historic sites following a strategy of prevention and control. 

The Canada Border Service Agency (CBSA) facilitates legitimate cross-border traffic while 

preventing the movement of people and goods that pose a risk to Canada. CBSA carries out 

border control/interception programs for invasive alien species based on instructions 

from other government departments, often providing ground-level implementation of 

regulations regarding invasive alien species such as those developed by the Canadian Food 

Inspection Agency. 

Provincial Context 

Most provinces and territories have some legislative capacity to address issues pertaining to 

invasive alien species, but gaps exist in one or more areas for most jurisdictions and the capacity 

for enforcement is often limited. Relevant ministries in most provincial/territorial jurisdictions 

include agriculture, forestry, and natural resources. 





Local Governments – Regional Districts and Municipalities 

Local governments are empowered under provincial legislation to enact bylaws pertinent to 

matters of local importance. Most municipalities are responsible for the enforcement of provincial 

weed and pest legislation, and many have enacted bylaws pertaining to noxious weeds, specifically 

requiring property owners to ensure that certain species are not growing on their property. Local 

governments are also significant land managers within their jurisdiction, with responsibilities for 

local parks, roadsides, and other publicly owned properties. 

First Nations 

First Nations enact bylaws either under the authority of the Indian Act or develop their own legal 

regimes under a self-governing agreement. First Nations own and manage a significant amount of 

land in Canada, with reserves covering over 3 million ha in 2002/03.The Indian Act allows Band 

Councils to develop bylaws controlling noxious weeds. First Nations operating under the First 

Nations Land Management Act or under self-government agreements develop their own land 

management and environmental regimes in accordance to their needs. Provincial legislation rarely 

applies on First Nations lands. Traditional ecological knowledge should not be overlooked in its 

capacity to help with ecosystem restoration. 

Voluntary Sector 

The role of non-governmental environmental organizations such as World Wildlife Fund, Sierra 

Club, and Ducks Unlimited, as well as local naturalists and interested community groups, in 

addressing issues related to invasive alien species can be valuable in invasive alien species detection 

and removal. 

British Columbia 

The Invasive Alien Species Framework is a background document on invasive alien species issues 

that affect biodiversity in British Columbia¹. The Biodiversity Branch of the BC Ministry of Water, 

Land and Air Protection (BC Ministry of the Environment) emphasized the following five areas of 

participation (February 2005): 

• The development of an Invasive Plant Strategy for British Columbia, led by the Fraser Basin 

Council, which included the formation of the BC Invasive Plant Council 

• Participation on an Inter-ministry Invasive Plant Committee to coordinate invasive plant 

initiatives across the province 

• Development of a Federal/Provincial/Territorial Invasive Species Strategy which includes 

action plans for managing invasive Aquatic Species, Terrestrial Plants and Plant Pests and 

Terrestrial Animals and Diseases 

• Revision of the Community Charter in order to provide local governments with tools to assist 

in effective management, including containment, reduction, control and/or elimination of 

alien species 

• Investment of financial and human resources within and outside parks and protected areas 

1 This strategy lists four B.C. ecosystems considered to be particularly vulnerable to alien species invasions: Southern 

Interior Valleys Grassland Ecosystems; Pacific Coastal Islands; Eastern Vancouver Island Garry Oak Meadow Ecosystems; 

and Freshwater Ecosystems: River and Lake Systems, Wetland Habitats and Coastal Estuaries. 

9-38 







Chapter 10 

Species Propagation and Supply 

Contents 

10.1 Introduction..............................................................................5 

10.1.1 Chapter Outline..................................................................6 

10.2 Basic Considerations for Plant Propagation with 

Respect to Restoration...................................................................7 

10.2.1 Ethical Guidelines...............................................................7 

Case Study 1. Plant Salvage ............................................................8 

10.2.2 Species at Risk..................................................................12 

10.2.3 Genetic Integrity...............................................................12 

10.2.4 Species Diversity............................................................. 13 

10.3 Captive Rearing and Plant Propagation Methods................ 13 

10.3.1 Captive Rearing of Vertebrates and Invertebrates........ 13 

Case Study 2. Taylor’s Checkerspot Butterfly Captive Rearing.... 14 



10-1


10.3.2 Plant Propagation Methods............................................ 15 

Case Study 3. Fort Rodd Hill Garry Oak Ecosystem Restoration— 

Parks Canada Agency.....................................................................24 

Case Study 4. Native Grass Restoration at Gonzales Hill.............28 

Case Study 5. Native Meadow Restoration at Cowichan 

Garry Oak Preserve—Nature Conservancy of Canada ................ 31 

10.4 Determining Optimum Techniques for Propagation............36 

10.4.1 Direct Seed Sowing vs. Container Seed Sowing............36 

10.4.2 Nursery Bed vs. Containers for 

Vegetative Propagation............................................................36 

10.4.3 Number of Propagules Needed (Estimation of 

Numbers for Outplanting)........................................................37 

10.5 Seed Collection, Extraction and Cleaning, 

Viability Testing, and Storage........................................................ 37 

10.5.1 Seed Collection................................................................37 

10.5.2 Considerations for Collecting in Adjacent Sites.............38 

Case Study 6. Seeds – Collection, Cleaning, Storage, 

and Germination............................................................................39 

10.5.3 Seed Extraction and Cleaning.........................................44 

10.5.4 Seed Viability Testing......................................................44 

10.5.5 Seed Storage...................................................................44 

10.6 Selection and Treatment of Plant Materials.........................45 

10.6.1 Stock Plants in situ........................................................... 45 

10.6.2 Source Diversity..............................................................45 

10.6.3 Monitoring Program...................................................... 46 

10.7 Consideration of Timelines................................................... 46 

10-2 



10.7.1 Production Schedules (Planning Ahead 

for Outplanting)........................................................................ 46 

10.7.2 Contracting-out Growing for Restoration Projects.......47 

Case Study 7. Contract Growing for Outplanting— 

Considerations.............................................................................. 48 

10.7.3 Post-propagation Records..............................................50 

10.8 Additional Suggestions .........................................................50 

Case Study 8. Small-scale Native Plant Nursery Set-up and 

Operation....................................................................................... 52 

10.9 References..............................................................................53 

10.10 Related Websites..................................................................53 

10.11 Related Guides and Handbooks ...........................................54 

Appendix 10.1.................................................................................55 

Propagating Flower Bulbs, Corms, and Rhizomes: Some 

Shortcuts from the Beacon Hill Nursery Experience...............55 

Appendix 10.2 Seed Collection Record Template........................ 60 

Appendix 10.3 Nursery RecordTemplate (full)............................. 61 

Appendix 10.4 Nursery Record Template (brief)..........................63 

Appendix 10.5 ............................................................................... 64 

List of Garry Oak ecosystem plants and animals 

used in this publication, with REU and propagation 

method information................................................................. 64 



10-3


10-4 



Chapter 10 

Species Propagation and Supply 

by Fred Hook and Brenda Costanzo 

Propagation of Common Camas (Camassia quamash) at Beacon Hill Park Nursery. Photo: City of Victoria 


In almost every restoration project, obtaining appropriate native species will be challenging. For 

example, many of the plant species of interest may not be in commercial production or available 

in the numbers needed; others will not be available at all. Vertebrate and invertebrate species, 

such as butterflies, may have to be captive-raised or collected under appropriate conditions, and 

permits may have to be obtained before those or other endangered species are re-introduced to a 

site (see Chapter 4: Species and Ecosystems at Risk). 

Maintaining the genetic integrity not only of existing source populations but also of the 

resulting re-introduced populations must also be considered. Maintaining the genetic makeup 



10-5


of the material collected on your restoration site or from a nearby similar site is important 

for the longevity of the restoration project, especially in view of climate change and other 

types of environmental change. Additionally, budget concerns, availability of space for on-site 

propagation, availability of native plant nurseries, and availability of skilled staff can present 

challenges to restoration projects. Availability of plant material from salvage sites will have to 

be factored into the decision about whether to collect and propagate the plants yourself or to 

contract-grow all or part of the supply with commercial nurseries. 

The restoration of animal populations through re-introduction or population enhancement 

requires consideration of similar factors. 

Chapter 2: Distribution and Description describes the Restoration Ecosystem Units (REUs) that 

may be present in your restoration project area, or those that could be sustained on the project 

site. Refer to Table 2.2 (Chapter 2) and Appendix 4.1 (Chapter 4) to find the species that may 

have been present in your representative REU but which are currently absent from or present in 

reduced numbers on the site. Once you have determined your restoration target (what your site 

should look like and how it should function), you can generate a list of native species that you 

can attempt to re-introduce or enhance. Refer to Chapter 8: Restoration Strategies section 8.4, for 

further information. 

10.1.1 Chapter Outline 

Most of Chapter 10 deals with plant species but provides some references to other organisms. The 

overall outline of this chapter is as follows: 

Section 10.1: Introduction—gives a brief overview of some of the challenges involved in carrying 

out a restoration project. 

Section 10.2: Basic considerations for plant propagation with respect to restoration 

—considers questions regarding the ethical collection of plants and species at risk, and the 

maintenance of genetic integrity and species diversity. 

Section 10.3: Captive rearing and plant propagation methods—provides general methods for 

propagating plants from seed, cuttings, and divisions. Appendix 10.1 indicates which methods are 

appropriate for species mentioned in this publication. 

Section 10.4: Determining optimum techniques for propagation—discusses the advantages 

and disadvantages of different propagation techniques and when those techniques might be 

appropriate. 

Section 10.5: Seed collection, extraction and cleaning, viability testing, and storage— 

provides a general discussion of seed collection, extraction and cleaning, viability testing, and 

storage methods. Moralea Milne’s case study of seed collection at Camas Hill (p. 10–37) provides 

additional information on these topics. 

Section 10.6: Selection and treatment of plant materials—discusses the selection of suitable, 

healthy material to produce vigorous, genetically diverse, but species-true plants for your project. 

Section 10.7: Consideration of timelines—outlines considerations for planning the initiation 

of your restoration project, and the propagation, growing, and planting of material for it. 

10-6 



Section 10.8: Additional Suggestions 

Section 10.9: References—lists references cited in this chapter plus those which provide 

additional information on species-specific propagation techniques. 

Section 10.10: Related Websites—a compilation of additional information and suggestions for 

those starting to plan and implement a propagation program for restoration. 

Section 10.11: Related Guides and Handbooks 

In addition, the following case studies highlight propagation programs used in a number of 

restoration projects: 

• Plant Salvage, Section 10.2 

• Taylor’s Checkerspot Captive Rearing (butterfly re-introduction), Section 10.3 

• Fort Rodd Hill Garry Oak Ecosystem Restoration, Section 10.3 

• Native Grass Restoration at Gonzales Hill, Section 10.3 

• Native Meadow Restoration at Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve, Section 10.3 

• Seeds—Collection, Storage, and Germination, Section 10.5 

• Contract Growing for Outplanting—Considerations, Section 10.7 

• Small Scale Native Plant Nursery Set-up and Operation, Section 10.7 

10.2 Basic Considerations for Plant Propagation with 

Respect to Restoration 

10.2.1 Ethical Guidelines 

Various ethical guidelines have been developed for collecting native plant 

material for propagation. The Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team’s Native 

Plant Propagation Steering Committee has posted guidelines at: www.goert. 

ca/ethical_collection. 

As well, there is the “1-in-20 rule”, which refers to collecting no more than 

one-twentieth (5%) of a plant’s parts, of a plant, or from a plant population 

in a particular site. So before collecting, there should be at least 20 plants 

within the population, and when collecting propagules, no more than 5% of the plant should be 

removed, or no more than 5% of the seeds or fruit should be taken. 

For further information about considerations when collecting plant materials for propagation, 

refer to the Genetic Integrity section (10.2.3), and also Source Diversity section (10.6.2). 

Salvage of plant 

materials should 

not be done 

unless the site is 

scheduled to be 

destroyed. See 

the following case 

study on plant 

salvage. 

Salvage of plant materials should not be done unless the site is scheduled to be destroyed. See the 

following case study on plant salvage. 



10-7


Case Study 1. Plant Salvage 

by Nathalie Dechaine 

Introduction 

Ideally, native plants would remain in 

their natural environment. Typically, 

native plant salvaging is a last resort to 

rescue plants that would otherwise be 

lost to site alteration, such as for housing 

developments (refer to GOERT's ethical 

collection guidelines: www.goert.ca/ 

ethical_collection). Preferably, salvaging 

is conducted by an organized group for 

an established program rather than as an 

informal activity. Proper planning ensures 

that native plant salvage is done in such a way that it protects salvagers, landowners, infrastructure, 

and ultimately the native plants being salvaged. Native plant rescue is hard but rewarding work 

if done properly. Salvaging can provide an inexpensive source of locally adapted plants, but it 

is important to know what will be done with the plants after they are salvaged. Depending on 

circumstances, they may go directly to a restoration site, a native-plant demonstration garden, 

or a holding site, or they may be taken by individuals to enhance their own backyards. It is not 

appropriate to take plants from parks or protected areas. That is considered poaching. 

Planning Prior to Salvaging 

The People 

Plant salvage tools and equipment ready for harvesting. 

Photo: Nathalie Dechaine 

It is important to consider who will organize and administrate the salvaging and who will help with 

it. In most cases, native plant rescue is undertaken by volunteers. Fortunately, most areas have 

local botany, naturalist, or gardening clubs from which the coordinator can recruit volunteers. 

People with some expertise in gardening and/or native plants can help train other interested but 

inexperienced volunteers. Preferably, the group can meet beforehand to sign any release of liability 

forms. Training can be done in a club or classroom setting prior to salvaging, or it can be done in 

the field. Suggested training topics include ethics, plant identification, salvaging techniques, care 

and maintenance of salvaged plants, and how to avoid transplanting pests, diseases, and invasive 

species. 

CASE STUDY 

The Site 

Finding potential salvage sites can be made less challenging by considering the following. Each 

agency has different development approval processes, so it is important to become familiar with 

local requirements. Some agencies require publication of development applications, or in some 

states, an intention to clear land. These announcements can be found in local newspapers, on 

public websites, on signs on the site, or by notifying the local community associations. It is helpful 

to screen the salvaging potential of the site by speaking with local naturalist groups, neighbours, 

and the planning department responsible for processing the development application. It is equally 

important to build a good relationship with the applicant because they are usually responsible for 

10-8 



project timelines and granting permission. Generally, supporting native plant salvaging is one way 

an applicant can help demonstrate their attempt to address environmental and social concerns, and 

to gain community support, all of which can be requirements for approval. 

Once a site has been identified, there are several things to consider prior to salvaging. Permission 

to salvage must be granted from the appropriate landowner or agency, preferably in writing. The 

agreement should include terms, conditions, and logistics, such as liability issues (release disclaimer 

and whether or not insurance is required), how the salvagers will access the site and during which 

dates and hours, how adjacent property owners will be notified about the salvaging activities, and 

what will be done with the salvaged plants. 

CASE STUDY 

Once permission is granted, it is important to ensure that the area is appropriate. The following 

conditions should be met prior to salvaging: 

• An inventory of the native and invasive plants has been conducted, as thoroughly as possible 

(seasonally dormant plants may present challenges). 

• Legal boundaries are known and marked on-site. 

• Underground utilities have been checked, and if present, marked on-site (this may be a legal 

requirement in some areas). 

• Local authorities or naturalist clubs have been contacted for information about any species at 

risk that may be on-site. 

• Any areas that are not appropriate for salvaging (e.g., that are protected for conservation or 

which pose safety risks) have been identified. 

The Next Step: Opening the Site to Salvagers 

Once all the background information has been compiled, a map and written instructions can be 

used to communicate that information to the salvagers. Email and blogs can be used to organize 

volunteers and share information, as long as there are measures in place to protect sensitive 

information. A site orientation is recommended for training volunteers on-site. 

Plant Salvaging 

Timing of plant salvaging can be challenging. Ideally, plants should be transplanted when they are 

dormant, yet dormant perennial plants can be difficult to locate and identify. Annual plants may 

also be present but not obvious because they can remain ungerminated (dormant) in the soil (a 

seed bank) until conditions become favourable. Salvaging opportunities are generally the result 

of the development process, which does not necessarily align with the most opportune time to 

salvage. It is important to remember that salvaging can be successful at any time of year if the 

plants are properly cared for. 

General Tips for Successful Plant Salvage 

• Protect the roots. This is key to successful salvage. 

• Smaller is better. Smaller plants (especially shrubs and trees) adjust to disturbance better than 

larger, more established plants (with the exception of bulbs). 

• Dig around and under, not through plants. This method avoids “collateral damage”. 

• Care for the plants immediately after salvaging them. If possible, transplant plants directly into 

containers on-site, especially if they are to be stored for a period of time. Plants seem to adjust 



10-9


better if they rest in containers for a short period of time. In addition, unwanted transplants 

like weeds or invasive species can be removed, which prevents them from being unintentionally 

introduced on the new site. Allow for as much time to process and transplant items as it took to 

dig them up. 

• Keep all plants well watered. Even though some native plants may be drought tolerant, they 

will need extra care to help them through the upheaval. For at least the first year of being 

transplanted, plants should be kept well watered. 

• Salvage components as well as plants. Salvage other habitat components such as woody 

debris, rocks, mosses, and soil, which contain mycorrhizal fungi and other beneficial biota. 

• The right plant in the right place. When replanting the salvaged plant, consider the conditions 

where it was growing (aspect, drainage, sun or shade, etc.) to ensure conditions in its new spot 

are appropriate. 

• Dig deep. Depending on the habitat, some plants, especially bulbs, are quite deep in the soil. 

CASE STUDY 

Tips for Salvaging Specific Types of Plants 

Perennials: Bulbs 

A transplant spade can wedge up a clump of soil, and bulbs can be pulled from the bottom of the 

clump. This is easier and protects the bulbs much better than trying to dig them out from the top 

of the soil. If bulbs are dormant, keep them covered in loose soil and try to bury them as close as 

possible to the same level as where they were found (to be conservative, bury them a bit deeper 

than they were found). If the bulbs are flowering, cut off the bloom to preserve the bulb’s energy 

before burying them. Most native bulbs do not do well when left to dry like horticultural bulbs. 

Perennials: Root Wads 

Dig around root wads carefully. Try to keep the roots as intact as possible. Some native perennials 

can be divided like horticultural varieties if they appear to be crowded, and may prosper from being 

separated. Carefully replant the root wads near the soil surface but ensure they are covered with 

enough soil or mulch to protect them from the elements. 

Salvaged plants potted for 

growing on and re-planting. 

Photo: Nathalie Dechaine 

10-10 



Annuals 

Annuals generally do not transplant well but will continue to grow if well cared for. The goal is to 

keep the plant alive long enough so that it can set seed. Sometimes annuals will appear around 

other salvaged plants because they came from the seed bank in the soil. It is always recommended 

to transplant native soil for this and many other reasons (unless there are known diseases or pests 

present). 

CASE STUDY 

Shrubs 

Choose as small a shrub as possible. Get as much root ball as possible, and when necessary, cut 

roots with a sharp instrument so they heal along clean lines. Prune the top growth so that is it 

smaller than the underground root ball. More roots than shoots will give the plant enough energy 

to adjust to being transplanted. Most shrubs are fairly resilient. 

Trees 

Choose as small a tree as possible. Get as much root ball as possible, and when necessary, cut roots 

with a sharp instrument so they heal along clean lines . A transplant spade can dig through roots 

cleanly and can dig deeper than a conventional shovel. Depending on the type of tree, pruning may 

help or hinder the tree’s success. Hardwood trees generally tolerate and in some cases benefit 

from pruning. Prune the top growth so that it is smaller than the underground root ball. This is 

generally not recommended for most conifer species. Trees will not survive if their roots dry out, so 

transplant them immediately and water well. 

Sources 

Personal experience, The District of Saanich’s Native Plant Salvage program, other experienced 

salvagers. 

Useful Links 

Indiana Native Plant and Wildflower Society—Native Plant Rescue Protocol www.inpaws.org/ 

INPAWS%20Native%20Plant%20Rescue%20Protocol.pdf. 

King County Native Plant Salvage Program www.kingcounty.gov/environment/stewardship/ 

volunteer/plant-salvage-program.aspx. 

Mason & Grays Harbor Counties – Native Plant Salvage Program http://graysharbor.wsu.edu/ 

NativePlant. 

Native Plant Salvage Alliance www.ssstewardship.org. 

Native Plant Study Group (Victoria, British Columbia) www.npsg.ca/index.shtml. 

Saanich Native Plant Salvage Program www.gov.saanich.bc.ca/resident/environment/salvage.html. 

Thurston County – Native Plant Salvage Project http://thurston.wsu.edu/NPS.htm. 

Nathalie Dechaine is a member of the Native Plant Study Group in Victoria and formerly worked as 

Environmental Education Officer for the District of Saaanich. 



10-11


10.2.2 Species at Risk 

If species at risk are going to be restored to a site, permits are required if the species are listed on 

Schedule 1 of the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) on the SARA registry website. 

For provincial Red- and Blue-listed species (listed by the BC Conservation Data Centre) that occur 

in a Provincial Park or Protected Area, permits must be obtained through the Permit Bureau 

website. 

For information on species at risk and recovery planning, refer to these websites: 

• BC Species and Ecosystems Explorer: www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/toolintro.html 

• NatureServe: www.natureserve.org 

• Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): www.cosewic.gc.ca/ 

eng/sct5/index_e.cfm 

• Species at Risk Public Registry – Recovery Planning: www.sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm 

• Ministry of Environment – Recovery Planning in British Columbia: www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/ 

recoveryplans/rcvry1.htm 

See also Chapter 4: Species and Ecosystems at Risk, for further guidance on restoration involving 

species at risk. 

10.2.3 Genetic Integrity 

When selecting plant material for propagation, it is recommended that the ecoregion 

characteristics of the collection site be considered (e.g., the amount of rainfall, including winter 

precipitation, and the soil types). As well, plants propagated for outplanting should be field tested 

to assess the adaptive abilities of each provenance. 

If possible, determining the type of breeding system and whether the plants cross-pollinate is 

also useful to know (genetic composition of the species), but in reality, we know little about our 

native plant pollinators. Individuals that cross-pollinate produce populations that are genetically 

different and therefore more adaptable than self-pollinating individuals, which are more 

genetically homogenous (Jones 2005). Self-pollination can lead to inbreeding and potentially 

weaken the populations’ ability to adapt to different environmental stresses and/or climate 

change. A plant that is endemic, ephemeral (as are many of the Garry Oak associated species in 

B.C.), and self-pollinated will have greater genetic variation between populations, whereas a plant 

that is wide-spread, long-lived, and cross-pollinated will have greater genetic variation within the 

population and greater ability to adapt to changing conditions. 

To preserve the genetic integrity of plant material that will to be restored to a site, it is 

recommended plants not be used if they are genetically similar to those that were initially (or 

still) on the site. If seeds are used from plants that were located far from the restoration site, 

outbreeding depression and swamping could result (Booth and Jones 2001). However, this takes 

time to assess; therefore, most projects do not have the budget to do field trials and genetic 

studies. To minimize problems of inbreeding and outbreeding depression, plant material from 

adjacent or nearby sites can be used for propagation (refer to Species Diversity Section 10.2.4 and 

Selection and Treatment of Plant Materials, Section 10.6). 

10-12 



If the site where the propagules were collected was already disturbed, the plants will also need 

resilience and adaptability, which may be found in non-local genotypes (Johnson and Mayeux 

1992). The flip-side is that these genotypes may contaminate the local gene pool through 

hybridization, which is more common in annuals and short-lived perennials (a large number of 

Garry Oak associated plant species hybridize readily). 

10.2.4 Species Diversity 

Along with the genetic considerations above, appropriate plants need to be chosen according 

to the microhabitats occurring on the restoration site. If it is not possible to define or use a 

reference ecosystem you could instead consider the ecological processes that build communities. 

Refer to the Restoration Ecosystem Units described in Chapter 2: Distribution and Description, 

Table 2.2, and in particular, the plant species column for plant communities. A target plant 

community/subcommunity needs to be selected for the restoration site, and an assemblage of 

plants chosen for propagation. These species assemblages will naturally change and evolve with 

time, as influenced by climate change, natural succession, and effects of species already present. 

Depending on how rigorous the restoration target is, there may be a need for ongoing culling and 

additions to the restoration site. 

Questions to Ask About Species Diversity 

How many individuals are used, which individuals, and collected from where? 

How do the species and their numbers relate to community structure and viability? 

Will we be able to ensure species diversity in our restoration? 

10.3 Captive Rearing and Plant Propagation Methods 

This chapter deals mainly with plant propagation methods; however, a brief case study on the 

captive rearing of Taylor’s Checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha taylori) is also presented. 

For information on propagating other animal species, GOERT may be able to refer the reader to 

appropriate experts. 

10.3.1 Captive Rearing of Vertebrates and Invertebrates 

See Case Study following. 



10-13


Case Study 2. Taylor’s Checkerspot Butterfly Captive Rearing 

by Brenda Costanzo and Jennifer Heron 

Captive rearing of several butterfly species found in Garry Oak ecosystems has been ongoing in 

the United States. Species reared include Zerene Fritillary (Speyeria zerene bremnerii), Fender’s 

Blue (Icaricia icarioides fenderi), and Taylor’s Checkerspot (Euphydryas editha taylori, a.k.a. 

Edith’s Checkerspot var. taylori). The most recent captive-rearing research has centred on Taylor’s 

Checkerspot. 

CASE STUDY 

Taylor’s Checkerspot is listed as Endangered in British Columbia. There are records from southeastern 

Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands, and the species’ global range extends southward west of the Cascades 

into Oregon’s Willamette Valley. Denman Island currently supports the only known population in B.C. 

Captive rearing of Taylor’s Checkerspot has been ongoing since 2003 at the Oregon Zoo in Portland Oregon, 

in conjunction with butterfly reintroduction projects in Washington State. 

The captive-rearing project at the Oregon Zoo involved collecting Taylor’s Checkerspot eggs from the wild 

(eggs are laid from mid-May to early June), collecting wild females for egg production, and using captivereared 

females for egg production. The first two methods of egg production have provided the greater 

percentage of hatched eggs. The larvae are reared in small plastic containers that are lined with paper towels 

and closed with a clear perforated lid. The lid is then covered with fabric to prevent the larvae from escaping 

because they tend to crawl to the top of the containers. Leaf material (Ribwort, Plantago lanceolata) is placed 

in the containers to provide the larvae with food. In order to keep the humidity high, the containers are 

placed on damp towels inside a large open bin. Light is also provided by UV fluorescent tubes above the bins. 

Pre-diapause larvae enter diapause anytime from mid-July until mid-February. Once molting is completed, 

the larvae are placed in clean, small plastic containers. These containers have inverted terra cotta plant pots 

placed over top of them, and they are moved to an outdoor location that is protected from wind and rain. 

They are checked weekly, and any larvae that have died are removed. After diapause, the small containers 

are removed from the plant pots, placed back into large open bins, and again provided with fresh host plants, 

high humidity, and exposure to light. The larvae may enter the pupal stage by early March, and are then ready 

for release into the wild. 

The Oregon Zoo has had increasing success with their captive-rearing projects. For example, 490 eggs were 

collected in 2005, and 29 larvae were released in 2006. In 2006–2007, 930 larvae were hatched, and 726 (or 

approximately 78%) were released into the wild. 

References 

Oregon Zoo: www.oregonzoo.org/Conservation/Butterflies/checkerspot.htm. 

Linders, M.J. 2007. Development of captive rearing and translocation methods for Taylor’s 

checkerspot (Euphydryas editha taylori) in south Puget Sound, Washington: Washington 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Program, Olympia, Wash. 2006–2007 Annual Report. 

www.southsoundprairies.org/documents/LindersTCSTransAnnReport07.pdf. 

Brenda Costanzo is the Senior Vegetation Specialist with the BC Ministry of Environment. Jenny Heron is the 

Invertebrate Specialist with the BC Ministry of Environment and the Chair of GOERT’s Invertebrates at Risk RIG. 

10-14 



10.3.2 Plant Propagation Methods 

This section details the methods for plant propagation through sexual methods (fertilized seed) 

and asexual or vegetative methods (plants produced using material from a single parent with no 

exchange of genetic material). Vegetative methods include herbaceous cuttings, stem cuttings 

from shrubs, and division. Required supplies, materials, equipment, and techniques are given for 

successfully starting and growing native plants in the nursery. 

Supplies, materials, and equipment needed for seed sowing and growing 

Growing media 

• mix for starting seed – commercial seed starter 

• mix for plug propagation – soilless Sunshine Mix #4 

• mix for potting on – sterilized soil:peat moss:perlite mixed at a 2:1:1 ratio 

and add 30 ml (2 tbsp) of 2-13-0 bonemeal to each 10 litres (2.6 gal) of mix 

• mix for growing on – perlite or sawdust:sand:peat mixed at a 1:1:1 ratio. 

Note: Moisten the peat/sawdust before mixing. If using perlite, use a dust-mask 

and dampen to avoid dust inhalation. 

Containers 

Pots 

• small pots – 2" or 4" (5 or 10 cm) 

• plastic cell packs or plugs in trays with drainage; use nursery trays with drainage holes for 

cells/plugs 

• deep boxes 24" x 12" x 4" (60 x 30 x 10 cm) with slats in the bottom for bulbs e.g., Fawn Lilies 

(Erythronium oregonum) or camas lilies (Camassia spp.); or, for less time to flowering, use 

shallow plastic trays with no more than 1" (2.5 cm) of soil. Note: A good watering regime is 

required and trays must not be allowed to dry out during the growing season. 

• open nursery flats with drainage for direct sowing of herbaceous perennials 

Root trainers 

• Hillson root trainers (for larger plants such as rose, Saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia), Alder 

(Alnus spp.), Common Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) 

• Smaller root trainers for grasses/perennials 

Vegetative 

methods include 

herbaceous 

cuttings, stem 

cuttings from 

shrubs, and 

division. 

• Tinus containers for Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) seedlings (these are approximately 1 litre, 

or .26 gal) 

Note: Root trainers 1 are plastic containers with ribbed sides and an open bottom. The ribs are 

designed to encourage deep growth rather than circling and the containers are hinged to open so 

that plants can be removed without root disturbance. 

1 All root trainers are supplied by Spencer-Lemaire Industries Limited, Beaver Plastics Ltd Head Office: 7-26318-TWP RD 

531A, Acheson, Alberta, Canada T7X 5A3, phone 1-888-453-5961, Fax: 1 780 962 4640, 

E-mail: growerinfo@beaverplastics.com 



10-15


Plugs 

Plug trays are generally 11" x 21.5" (28 x 55 cm) with 

between 36 and 522 cells from 1/2" to 3" (1.3 to 7.5 cm) 

deep. They are designed to be used with mechanical 

seeders and must be matched to the specific 

requirements of each machine. Plugs can be seeded by 

hand and some large, commercial growers will sow trays 

on contract. 

• Plug tray sowing is used where large numbers of 

plants are required. Plants are usually moved from 

cells into larger containers after germinating and 

establishing but some species may be planted out 

directly as plugs. 

• It will be necessary to determine the appropriate 

Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) seedlings in a 

number of seeds per cell for each species and the 

112 plug styroblock. Photo: City of Victoria 

appropriate size and depth of cell. As this information 

is not generally available for Garry Oak ecosystem 

restoration species, it may be necessary to acquire extra seed to do trial sowings. 

• Individual cells are open at the bottom to allow watering by placing on wick mats, reducing the 

incidence of seedling damage through overhead watering. Their advantage over open sowing 

(where seeds are scattered on trays of soil) is that roots don’t intertwine with those of other 

plants in the tray and so little disturbance takes place when they are pricked out and potted on. 

• Due to the limited volume of medium in each cell, plants are especially vulnerable to damage 

through insufficient or excess watering or fertilizing, and accumulation of salts. The number of 

plants in a small space makes them susceptible to insect attack or fungal growth. 

• For species where limited seed is available, the use of root trainers which hold more soil can 

allow for growing seedlings larger, which may be advantageous. 

• Plug trays are usually only used once but can be recycled. Root trainers, if treated carefully, can 

be re-used for 5 years before recycling. 

Plastic cell packs – 21" x 11" (55 x 28 cm) 

• plastic tray with or without perforations for drainage, and containers that fit inside the tray in 

range of sizes with various cell sizes 

• trays can be re-used; cells will last about two seasons and then can be recycled 

Styro blocks 2 

• usually for forestry trees but can used for vigorous shrubs and grasses (Case Study 4) and come 

in a variety of sizes 

• common block formats are 200 and 112 plugs; cavity volumes of 2.4–6.6 cu inch (40–108 ml) 

2 Supplier: Beaver Plastics Ltd., 7-26318-TWP RD 531A, Acheson, Alta, Canada, T7X 5A3, 1-888-453-5961, 

techsupport@beaverplastics.com 

10-16 



Sexual Propagation 

Seed dormancy is the mechanism that prevents seeds from germinating until conditions are 

appropriate. There are two basic types of seed dormancy: 

• Seed coat dormancy – The seed coat is impermeable to water 

• Embryo dormancy – The seed embryo must undergo physiological 

changes, usually under cool, moist conditions. This process, known as 

stratification, is a method of simulating the natural conditions under 

which the seed would normally germinate: a period of cool, moist weather 

for plants that germinate in the spring in our climate; a period of warm, 

moist weather for those that germinate in summer or early fall. 

Seed dormancy 

is the mechanism 

that prevents seeds 

from germinating 

until conditions are 

appropriate. 

Methods for overcoming dormancy 

• Seed coat – The most common way to overcome seed coat dormancy is 

to scarify the seed coat to allow water to pass through. This can be done mechanically by 

rubbing the seeds with sandpaper, nicking with a file or knife, or, in a few cases, chemically by 

acid etching. In any case it must be done in such a way that it does not damage the embryo. 

• Embryo – Seeds may be sown outside in the fall and overwintered outside, or stratified by 

placing the seeds between damp paper towels in an airtight plastic container, and storing in 

the refrigerator at 2–5 o C (36–40 o F) for 1–3 months. The same result can also be achieved by 

covering seeds in damp peat moss in plastic bags and storing them in the refrigerator. Time 

will vary for stratification within the same seed lot and it is possible to do several seed lots for 

one, two, and three months, starting in January/February so that seeds are ready to be sown 

outside in spring. Check containers for mold and germination, and remove any seeds that 

show either. Pot up germinating seeds (see below). 

Seed sowing methodology 

• Refer to the previous section to determine the time and method of sowing for their dormancy 

type. This information can be found in a variety of places including the propagation 

guidelines on GOERT’s website (www.goert.ca/propagation) and the USDA Fire Effects 

Information Database. 

• Clean your pots/flats just prior to using them by soaking in a solution of 10% household 

bleach for 20 minutes, and then dry. 

• Determine which seeds will be sown at what quantity in what container. Sowing density may 

need to be determined through trials but some information can be extrapolated from rates 

for similar species that are in commercial production. See also section 10.4.3 on determining 

quantities of seeds to be grown. 

• Use cleaned seed (see section 10.5 for information on seed collection, cleaning, storage). 

• Fill containers with appropriate medium and lightly tamp down. The planting mix should be 

moderately moist (i.e., not running with water when squeezed). 

• Place small seeds on the top of the medium and separate as best as possible; press slightly into 

the soil medium; lightly cover with dry, clean, washed sand, forestry sand, or crushed granite 

(crushed granite is an Imasco product sold in agricultural supply stores for use as poultry grit) 

and bottom water, or gently mist using a watering rose (fine watering roses are sold in some 

garden supply stores, from specialist greenhouse suppliers, and from outlets like Lee Valley 



10-17


Tools). You can mix the smaller seeds with fine sand before sowing as this makes it easier to 

handle the seeds and spread them into the containers by using a salt shaker with appropriate 

sized holes (this works best for sowing into open flats). 

• Very fine seeds and spores can be sown on top of the topping grit. The pots are then set in a 

tray of water until the medium pulls water up to the surface of the soil. The same capillary 

action will pull the fine seeds or spores down to the medium’s surface. 

• Plant larger seeds at a depth of 1–2 times the diameter of the seeds, cover with medium, then 

pea gravel or clean washed sand (to help with drainage and prevent damping off), and gently 

water with a fine mist nozzle. Cover and maintain moisture levels as with small seed. 

• Label (using a permanent, waterproof, fade-resistant marker (pencil works the best!)) the 

flat/container with the plant name and date of sowing. Record this information with the 

amount of seed sown, source of seed, seed treatment, medium type, in nursery records 

(templates for nursery records are given in the appendices). Cover with a sheet of glass, 

Plexiglas, or plastic wrap, or layers of moistened newspapers to retain the moisture. 

• Place flats outside. If necessary cover with screen door mesh stapled to the edges of the flats 

to deter insects/pests from removing seeds. Germinating seeds need to be moist and may 

need to be checked twice a day, or be watered on a timed system. 

Post-germination care 

• Move seedlings into semi-shaded location or one with morning sun/dappled sun only. 

• Monitor moisture; do not overwater or allow the seedlings to dry out. 

• Once the seedlings have their first true leaves, prick or plant them out into a nutrient-rich 

potting mix. Make your own mix: sterilized soil:peat moss:perlite in a 3:2:1 ratio and add 

30 ml (2 Tbsp) of 6-8-6 fertilizer to each 10 litres (2.6 gal) of mix. You can water with a weak 

liquid form of transplanting fertilizer (4-10-2) weekly, but ensure that the soil is moist before 

applying any fertilizer. 

• Seedlings should be acclimatized in a shade house or lath-covered cold frame for a few weeks 

until they are set out in longer-term storage areas. Fertilize every 7–14 days from spring until 

late July. 

• In the fall, pot up seedlings that have sufficient root mass into larger pots. Check the size of 

the root balls to determine the next pot size that should be used (see "Potting On" below). Do 

not use a pot that is too large or too small. 

• Overwinter in a cold frame, sunk in sand, sawdust, or soil in nursery beds (to retain moisture 

and protect from frost), in a cool greenhouse, or in a place that is protected in some way (such 

as by using Remay cloth or shade cloth) from fluctuating temperatures and wind. 

Potting on 

• Moving seedlings to a larger pot size may be required the following spring, which will vary 

with the species growth rate, but this should be done before the plant is pot-bound. 

• Move up one container size (pots are usually in 2" (5 cm), 3" (7.5 cm), 4" (10 cm), 6" (15 cm), 8" 

(20 cm), 1/2 gallon (2 litres), 1 gallon (4 litres) sizes). 

• Put some potting mix in the bottom of the container, place the plant in the centre of the new 

pot, and make sure it is at the same height as the previous pot. 

10-18 



• Add potting mix around the plant and firm gently around the edges of the pot and next to the 

stem. 

• Water and re-label. 

• Record the date of transplanting and numbers of species in nursery records. 

Asexual or Vegetative Propagation 

Herbaceous cuttings are of three types: tip, root, and rhizome. See also stem cuttings below. 

Tip cuttings 

• Tip cuttings are taken from early spring to early summer from herbaceous 

perennials. 

• Choose cuttings from healthy, vigorous plants. Remove the top 3–6" 

(7–15 cm) with at least two leaf nodes. 

• To ensure that there will be enough cutting material, shear back the stock 

plants repeatedly in the spring/summer, and keep them well fertilized. 

The stock plants will bush out and there will be a succession of tip cuttings available. 

• Take the cuttings on a cloudy, humid day with no wind and have the potting mix and pots 

ready for insertion of the cuttings. 

• Place at least one leaf node or axil well into the potting mix. Remove any leaves that will be 

below the soil, and pinch out any growing tips and buds. 

• For a good potting mix use seed starting mix and coarse perlite at a 2:1 ratio; peat moss and 

coarse perlite mixed at 1:1 ratio, or a 1:1 mix of sharp sand and perlite. 

• Strike cuttings into containers using 16"x 16" x 3" (40 x 40 x 7.5 cm) flats, or 11" x 21" (28 x 55 

cm) flats, or plugs. 

• Keep air around cuttings humid with a mist system or enclose in a plastic bag using small 

sticks to keep the bags open, or use the domed plastic lids that fit over standard flats. 

• The cuttings should receive only morning light until they are rooted, then should be 

hardened-off gradually (in the spring) in a cold frame over a 2-week period before placing 

outdoors. 

Root cuttings 

Examples of root types: Small roots: Woolly Sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum) (REU#3, 5), 

Common Yarrow (Achillea millefolium) (REU#1, 3, 5), Shootingstar (Dodecatheon spp.) 

(REU#1)Medium-sized roots: Rough-leaved Aster (Eurybia radulinus) (REU#3) 

• Root cuttings can be taken for the propagation of some shrubs and herbaceous perennials. 

• Use healthy root pieces in late winter or early spring prior to the start of new growth, but 

when the roots have a supply of stored foods. 

• Wash roots and choose firm, fleshy roots about the thickness of a pencil. 

• Choose sections that are as close as possible to the root crown of the plant. Dispose of any 

weak, damaged, or diseased roots. 

• Use sterilized secateurs or knives to cut roots into short sections. Cut the root tip end on an 

angle, and straight-cut the end nearest the root crown (this will make it obvious which end 

goes up when striking the cutting). 

Herbaceous 

cuttings are of 

three types: tip, 

root, and rhizome. 



10-19


• Dibble a hole with a pencil approximately 1–2" (2.5–5 cm) deep. Place cuttings vertically or at 

45° angle into a soil-less potting mix of coarse sand, a 2:1 mix of sand and peat moss, or a mix 

of equal parts vermiculite and perlite (use a dust mask) with the root tip end placed down 

into the pot. 

• Cover the medium’s surface with fine sand or pea gravel. 

• Water the cuttings in gently to ensure good contact with the medium and cover the container 

with plastic, glass, or Plexiglas. 

• Label the containers and enter the name of the plant, its source, the number of cuttings, 

the date they were collected and the type of medium used in your nursery records (see 

appendices). 

• Place pot in a warm but shaded place. It may take 6–8 weeks before new shoots and roots have 

developed. 

• Cuttings can be potted up when they have 2–3 sets of leaves, or sooner, depending on the size 

of the container in which they have been started. 

Rhizome cuttings 

Examples: Perennials: Long-stoloned Sedge (Carex inops) (REU#1, 2, 7). 

Shrubs: Saskatoon (REU#7), Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana) (REU#1, 2, 5), snowberry 

(REU#1, 2, 3, 5, 7) 

• Divide rhizomes with at least 2–3 buds or nodes in each section. 

• Lay the section on the top of soil-less potting mix so that it is in contact with the soil. You may 

want to anchor the sections with opened up paper clips or some other type of anchor. 

• Water and cover with glass or Plexiglas. 

• Label the containers and enter the name of the plant, its source, the 

number of cuttings, the date they were collected and the type of medium 

used in your nursery records. 

• Place in the shade until new shoots have developed. 

Stem cuttings taken from shrubs are of three types: softwood, semihardwood, 

and hardwood cuttings. Use potting medium of equal parts 

sand:peat moss (or peat substitute if peat from a renewable source is not 

available), perlite:peat, or vermiculite:sand. 

Softwood cuttings 

Examples: Dull Oregon-grape (Mahonia nervosa) (REU#8), Indian-plum (Oemleria 

cerasiformis) (REU#1, 2), Mock-orange (Philadelphus lewisii) 

• Take these in early morning during spring or early summer, using new growth when 

deciduous shrubs are first leafing out. 

• Take the growing tip plus two to three nodes (3" (75 mm) in length). 

• Cut beneath a leaf node. 

• Trim large leaves to reduce moisture loss. 

Stem cuttings 

taken from shrubs 

are of three types: 

softwood, semihardwood, 

and 

hardwood cuttings. 

• Place rooting medium in 4" (10 cm) pot. Press firmly down leaving approximately 3/8" (1 cm) 

at the top. 

10-20 



• Use a pencil or dowel to make holes in the medium. 

• Dip the root ends of cuttings in rooting hormone #1. 

• Insert cuttings into the holes in the medium and firmly press media around the edges so 

cuttings remain upright. 

• Gently water and label the containers and in your nursery records enter the name of the plant, 

its source, the number of cuttings, the date they were collected and the type of medium used. 

• Provide mist and bottom heat if it is available. If not, cover the container with clear plastic bags 

(support bags with small sticks such as chopsticks or bamboo skewers), clear plastic domes 

(ones that fit over flats), or cut open large, clear pop bottles and use them as domes. Check for 

condensation build-up and vent the cover. 

• Place in a semi-shady location (cuttings will need filtered light such as under deciduous trees) 

and check for mold and monitor moisture levels. 

• Check for rooting in 6–8 weeks by gently tugging on the cuttings. Knock out the cuttings and 

check the roots, which should be 1/2–3/4" (1.5 to 2.25 cm) long. 

• Pot up rooted cuttings in 4" (10 cm) pots and place in a shade house or sink into sand or soil in a 

cold frame over the winter. 

Semi-hardwood cuttings 

Examples: Saskatoon (REU#7), Tall Oregon-grape (Mahonia aquifolium) (REU#1, 3, 5, 7), 

Western Trumpet Honeysuckle (Lonicera ciliosa) (REU#1, 2) 

• Take these cuttings in early morning in mid to late summer (early June to August). 

• Use the current year’s growth, approximately 4-6" (100–150 mm) in length including the softer 

top growth and the slightly hardened older growth. 

• Remove any developing buds or blooms. 

• Use steps iv–xiii in Softwood cuttings, except use rooting hormone #2. 

• Use a mist system and bottom heat, if available. 

Hardwood cuttings 

Examples: Oceanspray (Holodiscus disolor) (REU#1, 2, 3, 7), Indian-plum (Oemleria 

cerasiformis) (REU# 1, 2), Nootka Rose (REU#1, 2, 5) 

• Take these in mid-winter, usually from deciduous trees and shrubs once their leaves have 

dropped. 

• Use previous season’s growth—about the thickness of a pencil. 

• Take long lengths, about 12" (0.3 m), bundle together with elastic bands or string, and dip the 

root ends in liquid hormone #3. 

• Place the bundles in boxes filled with damp peat moss or sharp sand and plunge up to ¾ of their 

length into the medium. 

• Cover bundles with Garry Oak leaves, burlap, or Remay cloth, and store over the winter (2–3 

months) in cold frames while the callus forms. 

• Plant the rooted cuttings out in nursery beds in spring, or pot them up into the rooting 

medium. Remember to label the containers and enter the name of the plant, its source, the 



10-21


number of cuttings, the date they were collected and the type of medium used in your nursery 

records. 

Division 

Division of herbaceous perennials and shrubs 

Examples of herbaceous perennials: Yarrow (Achillea millefolium) (REU#1, 3, 5), Thrift 

(Armeria maritima) (REU#6), Rough-leaved Aster (Eurybia radulinus) (REU#3?), Pearly 

Everlasting (Anaphalis margaritacea) (REU#5?) 

• Divisions can be made of fibrous-rooted herbaceous perennials, fleshy crowned perennials, 

and some multi-branched woody shrubs, which form dormant buds at the base of the stems. 

• Cuttings are best done when the plant is dormant in early winter or late fall. 

• Ensure the plant material is moist before dividing. 

• Prepare either a transplanting bed or pots with soil mix. 

• Divide the crown by cutting around the perimeter of the perennial or shrub with a sharp 

shovel. 

• Split the crown of herbaceous perennials by slicing with a sharp transplanting shovel or a knife 

into pie-shaped wedges (about 2–3 only), ensuring there is sufficient root material attached to 

the crown. Remove any dead material from the centre of the plant. 

• For shrubs, cut back the tops of the shrub and slice off the outer sections with adequate roots 

at the base of the stems (e.g., Nootka Rose (REU#1, 2, 5), Oceanspray (REU #1, 2, 3, 7)). 

• Keep the material moist while the sections are out of the ground, and water in once 

transplanted or potted up. 

• Perennials that are kept as stock plants should be divided every 2–3 years following the 

guidelines for dividing in the fall for spring/summer bloomers, and dividing in the spring for 

late summer/fall bloomers. 

Division of bulbous perennials 

For more information, please see “Propagating Flowering Bulbs, Corms, and Rhizomes: Some 

shortcuts from the Beacon Hill Nursery Experience”, Appendix 10.1. 

Examples of bulbous perennials: Bulbs: Nodding Onion (Allium cernum) (REU#7), 

Hooker’s Onion (A. acuminatum) (REU#5), camas spp. (REU#1, 3, 4, 5), Chocolate Lily 

(Fritillaria affinis) (REU#4) 

Corms: Harvest Brodiaea (Brodiaea coronaria) (REU#4), Fawn Lily (REU# 1, 2), Fool’s 

Onion (Triteleia hyacinthina, White Triteleia) (REU#4) 

• Using stock plants, lift and divide bulbs. 

• Bulblets can be removed from the edges of the basal plate (camas spp.) or at the leaf bases 

(onion spp.). 

• Divide stock plants every 3–4 years in the fall by lifting and separating bulblets. 

• Pot the bulblets up into flats or pots, water in, and label. 

• Corms can be divided in the fall by removing the old inner corm and separating the outer 

smaller cormels from the base of the new corm. 

10-22 



• Place the dry new corms and smaller cormels in a paper bag or box in a cool area that will not 

freeze. 

• Plant these in pots, flats, or nursery beds in the spring. 

Suckers 

Examples of plants that produce suckers: Saskatoon (REU#7), Nootka Rose (REU#2), 

Mock-orange (Philadelphus lewisii), Common Snowberry (REU#1, 2, 3, 5, 7) 

• Take side shoots from shrubs that arise from below the ground. 

• Make cuttings when the shrub is dormant. 

• Dig out the suckering shoots with roots intact and separate from parent plant. 

• Pot up or transplant the rooted suckers into nursery bed. 

Leaf petiole cuttings 

Examples: Broad-leaved Stonecrop (Sedum spathulifolium) (REU#3,7). 

• Leaves can be used to propagate perennials vegetatively. 

• Take leaf cuttings in spring when the leaves are plump, but prior to flowering, or in early fall. 

• Using a sharp knife, remove the leaf near the base of the plant. 

• Insert the leaf base into the rooting medium; water and label the containers and enter the 

name in your nursery records of the plant, its source, the number of cuttings, the date they 

were collected and the type of medium used. 

• Place the pot in a warm place with diffused light. 

• Repot into individual pots after about four months. 



10-23


Case Study 3. Fort Rodd Hill Garry Oak Ecosystem 

Restoration—Parks Canada Agency 

by Conan Webb 

CASE STUDY 

The objectives of this project at Fort Rodd Hill (FRH) were to: 

a. test the efficacy of cutting out mature Orchard-grass (Dactylis glomerata) by removing only the 

root crown 

b. test the feasibility of removing Orchard-grass by hand on a small scale (four 6 m x 6 m deep-soil 

plots (7.17 sq. yds.) and two shallow soil plots on rocky slope areas: one approximately 10 m x 10 

m (10.95 sq. yds.); the other 10 m x 20 m (10.94 yds. x 20.87 yds.) 

c. test the feasibility of removing Orchard-grass by hand on a medium scale (1.3 ha rock outcrop 

(3.21 acres)) 

d. investigate the feasibility of converting an herb layer dominated by Orchard-grass into one 

dominated by native grasses by removing mature Orchard-grass and planting native grasses at 

both a small (0.04 ha (0.098 acre)) and medium (0.5 ha (1/24 acres)) scale. 

The study site is located in Victoria, on the west side of Esquimalt Harbour, and is in the Nanaimo 

Lowlands Ecosection and the Coastal Douglas-fir biogeoclimatic zone. Most of the area is underlain 

by Wark gneiss, a coarse to medium-grained metamorphic rock that outcrops extensively. Glacial 

deposits overlay bedrock throughout much of the study area, and deep-soil pockets occur within 

many bedrock exposures. Due the large number of deer present on the site, a fence was installed 

prior to planting. The study site is on the slopes and toe of a wooded (Garry Oak and Douglas-fir, 

Pseudotsuga menziesii) rock outcrop. The outcrop has been surrounded by a deer fence 2.1 m high 

and 400 m long (2.29 yds. x 437.45 yds.), which encloses approximately 1.3 ha (3.21 acres). 

The grass species that were outplanted were selected based a number of factors: 

a. common native species found growing in similar habitats around the Orchard-grass field 

b. common native species found growing in similar less-invaded habitats at FRH 

c. how robust native species were, which was presumed to correlate with their ability to compete 

with Orchard-grass 

d. ease of growing 

e. availability of local seed sources (at FRH) 

As well, the native Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus), Alaska Brome (Bromus sitchensis), Columbia 

Brome (Bromus vulgaris), and Alaska Oniongrass (Melica subulata) were selected as species to plant 

in the study site. The study site already contained individuals of all of these species. 

The wildflower species selection was based on the same criteria as those for grasses, except 

for criterion (a). Wildflower species planted were Spring Gold (Lomatium utriculatum), Harvest 

Brodiaea (Brodiaea coronaria), and Fool’s Onion (Triteleia hyacinthina, White Triteleia). 

Seed was collected on-site within the 54 ha (133.43 acres) of land managed by Parks Canada 

Agency. Seed was collected by University of Victoria co-op students who had been hired annually 

10-24 



as part of the larger Garry Oak restoration project at this site. When grass seed was naturally 

dispersing, it was collected by using the thumb and forefinger to pinch the stem firmly below the 

inflorescence, then drawing the hand down the inflorescence to collect the seed in the palm of the 

hand. Collecting sites were visited weekly over the seed-ripening period, and plants were tested to 

determine when most of the seeds from any given inflorescence would detach easily. Regular visits 

ensured that a site was not left so long that no mature seeds were left on the plants. 

CASE STUDY 

The amount of time needed to collect seed was highly dependent on: 

a. the overall plant density and number of inflorescences per plant: low plant density (or few 

inflorescences per plant) increases the time to search for and travel between plants 

b. the number of seeds collected per plant (this is also affected by seed readiness: if too early, few 

seeds can be collected from each plant) 

It took approximately 50 hours to collect 1.1 kg (2.43 lbs.) of seeds from the species at FRH, and 

more time if species identifications had to be confirmed. Grass seed generally was ready for 

harvesting from mid-June to mid-July; however, there were also yearly variations of approximately 

two weeks. To obtain a broad genetic mix, seed should be collected from tall, medium, and short 

plants in equal amounts, as well as from plants growing in different microhabitats. Because seed at 

different sites ripens at different times, collections have to be made over a number of days. 

The collected seed was sent to Yellow Point Propagation 1 for cleaning. Airflow was used to blow 

away the chaff and unfilled florets. Only a few hours were required to clean the 1.1 kg (2.43 lbs.) of 

grass seed. 

Seed storage was not necessary as grass plugs could be sown and outplanted in the same year, 

and seeds could also be broadcast in the fall. The seeds underwent a simple germination test prior 

to sowing: seeds were counted out; placed on a moist paper towel and sealed in a jar; the jar was 

placed on a windowsill; and the number of germinates were counted over a set period of time (two 

weeks) to estimate percent germination. 

Seeds that were to be grown as plugs were sent to the nursery shortly after being collected and 

sown in early August. Seed to be broadcast was kept in a dry place until early fall when it was 

scattered after the fall rains began. 

Seed was sown in 310 styro block at the beginning of August (310 Beaver Styro blocks have 160 

cells, each holding 60 ml (2.03 oz.) and are about 10 cm deep (4")). Originally, 410 styro blocks 

(112 cells each holding 80ml (2.70 oz.) and are 10 cm deep (4")) were used; however, the smaller 

310 size allowed the roots to fill the cavity quicker and were also easier to plant. The number of 

seeds planted per cavity was generally 3, but this may well vary based on the results of standard 

germination tests conducted in a growth chamber, the state of the seed, and the growing time 

(plugs can be ready sooner if more seeds are sown). 

Some species exhibited dormancy while others did not. No dormancy was found in Blue Wildrye, 

Alaska Brome, or Columbia Brome. It was found that Alaska Oniongrass needed a cold stratification 

1 Yellow Point Propagation, 13735 Quennell Road, Ladysmith, B.C. V9G 1G5 Phone: 250-245-4635. Email: ypprop@shaw.ca 



10-25


period prior to germination. The seeds at FRH were stratified naturally over the winter by leaving 

them in mild weather in the unheated greenhouse (with the polyethylene walls removed). If 

colder weather or snow was in the forecast, the greenhouse walls were put on. This needs to be 

considered during the planning stage as it can drastically affect the sowing time, or the seeds will 

require artificial stratification. 

The growing medium was peat-based with other components: vermiculite, perlite, and bark mulch 

to a ratio of 2:1 (peat:other components). This ratio gives a porous mixture that drains quickly and 

allows for frequent misting without over-watering. A slow release 14-14-14 fertilizer was used in 

the mix (100 day release) along with the other soil amendments of: 2 kg (4.40 lbs.) of lime and 500 

grams (17.64 oz.) micronutrients in approximately 1 1/2 yd. mix. Dolomite lime was added to adjust 

the pH to approximately 6. 

CASE STUDY 

The greenhouses were kept at 15 o to 25 o C (59 o F to 77 o F) until the seeds germinated, and then the 

temperature was allowed to drop to 10 o C (50 o F) at night. During the day, the greenhouse vents 

opened automatically at 20 o C (68 o F), and were closed at night. 

After the plants germinated, a 20-8-20 forestry water-soluble fertilizer was applied at a rate of 

150 ppm of nitrogen at each watering. During the rapid period of growth the plants were given a 

water-soluble fertilizer at each watering. 

A block weight difference between dry and wet weight was used to determine when to water. 

The difference from saturation to dry was approximately 2 kg (4.40 lbs.) and depending on the 

temperature and growth, it would take from a few days to over a week between fertilization. 

The grass plants were allowed to reach approximately 25 cm (10") in height and then cut back to 15 

cm (6"). This procedure produced a bushy plant with a good root for transplanting. The best plugs 

resulted from two shearings before outplanting, and shearing done in the spring. A good plug from 

spring planting would take about 8 weeks, whereas in the fall it would take about 11 weeks. 

The plugs are ready when they can be removed from the styroblock cell cavity and have a good 

tight bundle of roots. Care must be taken that the plants are not grown too long or they will 

become root-bound. At this time, the seedlings were extracted from the styroblocks, bundled, and 

then placed in boxes for shipping. The plugs are able to stay in the boxes for 7–10 days if kept in a 

cool, shady place. If they are to be held for a longer period of time, the boxes need to be opened 

and watered. Outplanting can begin soon after the first soaking fall rain, usually around mid- 

October, and can continue throughout winter and early spring. 

The site must be prepared prior to planting. This was initially done in September, however, 

preparing in June prior to Orchard-grass seed set proved to be better. No new weeds will germinate 

after this time due to the summer drought conditions. Preparation entails removing Orchard-grass 

by cutting out the root crown with a hooked knife (e.g., carpet knife). This method was chosen 

because it created minimal soil loss and disturbance compared to pulling out the entire root system. 

It took two people approximately a week to clear 444 metres 2 (531 sq. yds.), and the grass had 

covered 100% of the area. 

Since 2005, 4000-5000 plugs have been planted into the study site annually. Grass plugs are 

trimmed to about 10 cm (4") in height before planting. A planting hole is created by cutting into the 

soil with a tool and the plant is inserted with the top of the plug being level with the soil that is then 

10-26 



packed back around the plug. This method is quicker and creates less soil disturbance than digging 

does. All species were planted 25 cm to 30 cm apart (10" to 12") (~ 13 plugs metre 2 (1.2 yds. 2 )). No 

aftercare is generally needed if the plugs are planted in the fall after the first heavy rains. The first 

year planting was done using inexperienced staff and took 7 days for two people. In subsequent 

years a professional planter was contracted and planted approximately 4000 plugs in two days. 

Two methods of monitoring have been used for this project: 1) recording percent cover of all 

species in the planting sites before and after treatment and annually since, and 2) photo monitoring 

of the sites (see Chapter 7, Case Study 1 and Appendix 7.1 for photo monitoring techniques). 

Orchard-grass has declined from an average of 16-30% percent cover in 2005 to less than 5% in 2008. 

Percent cover for Blue Wildrye has increased from less than 5% to 31-50% cover. No change was 

detected for California Brome, which was not detected in pre-treatment surveys, but is now at less 

than 5% cover. Columbia Brome was planted in one area, and has now increased to 6-15% cover. 

Alaska Oniongrass was a minor component planted in each area: its cover has not changed since 

the study began in 2005, and the study is ongoing. 

CASE STUDY 

Costs were highly variable and depended largely on how much of the work was contracted, 

however the main steps and their costs are: 

a. Collecting the seed (a few hours to a couple of days of work) was done by staff. Cost per square 

metre is negligible. 

b. Seed-cleaning cost is negligible compared to the other costs. If care is taken in collecting seeds 

using the method described, you may not have to clean the seed further. 

c. Nursery cost has proven to be the most variable: from $0.15 per plug up to $0.75 per grass plug. 

d. Planting the plugs generally costs around 4 cents per plug or around $5.59 per square metre at 

our planting density of about 13.7 per square metre (16.4 yd 2 ) 

Conan Webb is a Species at Risk Recovery Planner for Parks Canada Agency at Fort Rodd Hill National 

Historic Site. 



10-27


Case Study 4. Native Grass Restoration at Gonzales Hill 

by Tara Todesco 

The objectives of the restoration at Gonzales Hill Park were to remove non-native species from 

two fairly highly disturbed areas and replant with native grasses, grown by local community 

members from seed harvested within the park. TLC The Land Conservancy of B.C., along 

with other partners, has been working to restore the Garry Oak ecosystem in the park. The goals 

of the project were to improve the ecological integrity of Gonzales Hill Regional Park, to use an 

adaptive management strategy in the restoration plan for the park, and to encourage community 

participation. 

CASE STUDY 

Gonzales Hill Regional Park is located on Denison Road just off Beach Road in Victoria. Gonzales 

Observatory, built on the summit of the hill in 1914, was a weather station for 75 years, and the 

building is a heritage building. The 1.8 ha (4.45 acre) park was established in 1992 and is a small 

fragment of Garry Oak habitat located within a residential area. Due to its location, the site is 

subjected to a high degree of recreational use. Soil compaction, site disturbance, and lack of active 

management have resulted in the establishment of a high proportion of non-native invasive species. 

The elevation at the summit of the park is 67 m (220 ft.). The site is ridged, with elongated hillocks 

of metamorphic rock (Wark Gneiss) that run in an east/west direction with pockets of soil in the 

rock indentations and in low-lying areas. In the five areas surveyed, there was a top layer of organic 

material 2–10 cm (3/4"–4") deep. The aspect of the soil pockets is approximately westward with 

a slope between 0 and 15º. Water is from precipitation, and the site drains rapidly. Surrounding 

vegetation includes patches of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and Shore Pine (Pinus contorta 

var. contorta). 

Native grass plantings were carried out in two main areas near the observatory on sites that 

had been impacted by both the construction of the building and the development of a small, 

ornamental garden during the 1950s and ’60s. Both areas were covered primarily with non-native 

grasses, cotoneaster (Cotoneaster sp.), and English Ivy (Hedera helix). Both sites, except for a few 

rocky sections, had deeper soils than most of the rest of the park, probably due to past gardening 

activities and the subsequent decomposition of ivy leaves. 

With the help of biologist James Miskelly (CRD Parks), two grass species were identified for 

propagation and replanting in the park: Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus) and California Brome (Bromus 

carinatus). These two species were chosen because they are both native and common within the 

park. Collections were made when grass seeds could easily be pulled by hand from the heads during 

a period of relatively dry weather (late July). No cleaning was required. Seed collection took less 

than 1 hour in each season, and both harvests in 2007 and 2008 took place in late July. 

Seeds were counted and packed by hand for distribution to volunteers within a few weeks of 

harvesting. Seeds were then stored in paper envelopes in a dark, dry place. Volunteers were given 

seeds and supplies and looked after sowing and growing-on of grass plugs, which took a few hours 

each season. The volunteers grew the grass plugs at their homes. 

A propagating plan was designed to allow the planting-out of the grass plugs in late September or 

early October to take advantage of the start of the fall rains. During the first two weeks of August, 

10-28 



CASE STUDY 

Outplanting of grass plugs at Gonzales Hill Regional 

Park. Photos: Tara Todesco and Kathryn Martell 

volunteers sowed the seeds into plastic planting trays that each contained 50 cells (54 cm x 27 cm 

(22" x 10"). Four seeds were sown in each cell, and moist peat was used as the planting medium. 

Seed trays were placed in a sunny location and kept moist until germination occurred. The trays 

were then moved to a semi-shaded location and were watered as required (i.e., not allowing the 

plants to be flooded or dry out completely). No fertilizer was added. 

The grasses remained in the trays for an average of eight weeks. Planting-out of the plugs, using 

approximately 5 cm (2") of space between plugs, was carried out in late September and early 

October. A full day each year was required for two volunteers to complete the planting. The plugs 

were watered for the first two weeks after planting, or until consistent rainfall occurred. 

During the growing period, the two target sites were cleared of all non-native grasses and any 

remaining roots. Removal techniques were based on best practices outlined on the GOERT website 

at www.goert.ca/invasive, and clearing was carried out by volunteers. There was no over-digging of 

the soil, and planting was carried out in the resulting open soil. This was to minimize opportunities 

for re-invasion by non-native species. 

The grass growing project attracted a different set of volunteers to The Land Conservancy. These 

volunteers were interested in growing plants for the park’s restoration but were not necessarily 

interested in other types of volunteering. To attract volunteers, local advertisements were placed 

through Volunteer Victoria, The Fairfield Community Organization, and the Garry Oak Ecosystems 

Recovery Team. In addition, volunteers were recruited from TLC’s on-call volunteers. Each volunteer 

came in ahead of time to discuss the project and fill out volunteer application forms. As well, 

volunteers were encouraged to come by individually to take a look at the park and to review the 

growing instructions when they picked up their seeds and supplies. 

Volunteers were used whenever possible in all stages of the project in order to develop a core 

of local community members with a sense of stewardship for the park. Ongoing communication 



10-29


with volunteers, including asking for follow-up phone calls and emails to track when the grasses 

were sown and how growth progressed, was important for keeping the volunteers’ interest and 

commitment. 

The costs involved with the restoration of the park were minimal: they covered the costs of 

planting trays and peat. In-kind costs included the staff hours from TLC and CRD staff, including the 

transport of the debris from the site by CRD Parks. 

CASE STUDY 

References 

Bonenfant, N., L. Kwasnicia, and A. Smith. 2007. Gonzales Hill Regional Park: study site—restoration 

of Garry Oak ecosystem. University of Victoria, Restoration of Natural Systems Program, 

Student Technical Series No. STS0710-311. 

Tara Todesco formerly worked at Gonzales Hill for TLC The Land Conservancy as Volunteer 

Management Coordinator. 

English Ivy (Hedera helix) growing at Gonzales Hill Regional Park before clearing, September 24, 2007 (left) and ivy 

partially cleared at Gonzales Hill Regional Park, September 27, 2007 (right). Photos: Tara Todesco 

10-30 



Case Study 5. Native Meadow Restoration at Cowichan 

Garry Oak Preserve—Nature Conservancy of Canada 

by Irvin Banman and Tim Ennis 

CASE STUDY 

The main objective of the restoration 

conducted at the Cowichan Garry 

Oak Preserve (CGOP) by the Nature 

Conservancy of Canada (NCC) is to restore the 

native deep-soil Garry Oak ecosystem grasses 

and camas on a site that was formerly dominated 

by introduced agronomic grasses. A second 

objective is to establish a native Garry Oak nursery 

comprised of grasses for the purposes of seed 

harvesting. 

The non-native grasses that dominated the site 

are well-established forage and hay grasses, 

mainly Meadow Foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis) and 

Timothy (Phleum pratense). The rich dark topsoil 

extends to a depth of 1 m (3 feet) (an average 

depth of .4-.6 m or 1-2 feet), under which lies 

layer of heavy clay, then bedrock and shale. 

Historically, CGOP may have been a Qggc 

plant association – Garry Oak – Great Camas 

(Camassia leichtlinii) – Blue Wildrye (Elymus 

glaucus), according to the Erickson and Meidinger 

Classification Guide of 2007 (www.for.gov.bc.ca/ 

hfd/pubs/Docs/Tr/Tr040.htm). 

Sedges (Carex spp.) and camas growing in old farm 

fields at the Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve. Photo: 

Irvin Banman 

a 

The site is part of the extensive deep-soil camas 

meadows that were maintained by the Cowichan 

First Nations in the lower Cowichan River 

watershed before European settlement. The 

field in which the study is being conducted still 

contains the historical Garry Oak ecosystem deep 

soil savannah structure with very large old Garry 

Oak (Quercus garryana) trees spaced far apart 

(anywhere from 50 m (55 yds) to distances of 

Native grass seedlings planted out in an old hayfield 

at the Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve. Photo: Irvin 

Banman 

hundreds of metres). The terrain slopes very gently to the west. The field is moderately wet during 

the winter months and retains moisture until late May to early June depending on the amount of 

winter and spring precipitation, after which time the ground becomes very dry until the arrival of 

the fall rains. 

The species planted were Blue Wildrye (Elymus glaucus), California Brome (Bromus carinatus), 

California Oatgrass (Danthonia californica), Junegrass (Koeleria macrantha), Roemer’s Fescue 



10-31


Junegrass (Koeleria macrantha) and California Oatgrass 

(Danthonia californica) seed stock plantings at Cowichan 

Garry Oak Preserve. Photo: Irvin Banman 

Propagation frames at the Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve. 


(Festuca roemeri), and Great Camas (Camassia 

leichtlinii). Seed was collected at the 

Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve and several 

other local areas with permission and under 

permit where required, and ethical seed 

collection guidelines were followed. These 

species were chosen partially to serve as a 

supply of native seed for further restoration. 

As well, they were chosen in order to observe 

which native grasses would perform the best 

in competition with each other and the nonnative 

species, the seed of which is still in the 

seed bank. It is expected that the tall stature 

grasses, Blue Wildrye and California Brome, 

will out-compete the other grasses over time. 

The site for the nursery is situated along a 

main access road into the preserve. The area 

chosen was in very poor condition, having 

been heavily disturbed and dominated 

by introduced grasses, Oxeye Daisy 

(Leucanthemum vulgare), Scotch Broom 

(Cytisus scoparius), and thistles (Cirsium 

spp.) The site is exposed to full sun and was 

enclosed with fencing to keep out deer and 

rabbits. Water is supplied by garden hose 

from the house on-site which is 200 m (218 

yards) upslope from the nursery. A frame 

was constructed over the nursery for the 

installation of shade cloth in the spring until 

September. 

The nursery has 20 cold frames, 2.5 metres 

x 1.5 metres (8 feet x 4 feet), for starting 

grasses and forbs. Some of these accommodate pots and trays; others are filled with soil and hold 

plants grown from seed. Three cold frames have been filled with salvaged camas, and there is open 

ground covered with landscape fabric for more mature plants, as well as trees and shrubs. Raised 

tables were constructed outside of the fenced area to accommodate additional potted plants when 

more space was needed. There is also a small greenhouse, which is being used on a trial basis for 

growing grass plugs. Mixed ready-to-use soil is stored under tarps next to the nursery. 

CASE STUDY 

Currently, two staff are employed at the site. Volunteers assist mainly during the winter months 

when youth programs are up and running and when community members are available. Volunteers 

contributed 500–600 hours to the nursery and out-planting program from October 2009 to April 

2010. In addition, casual volunteers put in approximately 50 hours assisting with weeding and 

watering during the summer months. 

All seed is locally collected in the Cowichan Valley area. Care is taken to collect no more than 5% of 

10-32 



seed in any given population, and only up to this amount if the species are common and abundant 

throughout the region. 

All plants for the restoration are propagated at the nursery except for salvaged plants like Common 

Camas (Camassia quamash), Spring Gold (Lomatium utriculatum), and Broad-leaved Shootingstar 

(Dodecatheon hendersonii). Trees and shrubs are salvaged from construction sites in the immediate 

vicinity, usually within a couple of kilometres of CGOP. 

CASE STUDY 

Seed collection occurs between the beginning of June and the end of September. Timing depends 

on the species collected and when the seed is ripened. Collection takes place during a warm and 

dry portion of the day, never after a rain or heavy dew, so that the seed is as dry as possible when 

going into storage. Most (95%) of the seed is collected on-site at CGOP. Some common forb and 

grass seed is collected at Mt. Tzuhalem Ecological Reserve under a permit issued by BC Parks for 

the purposes of Garry Oak ecosystems restoration. Seed collection is done mainly by NCC staff, and 

occasionally by volunteers. 

The seed collection method is basic. Seed is collected by hand and several plastic yogurt containers 

wired together are used so that seed from numerous species can be collected at once. Seed is 

always transferred to breathable paper bags for storage so that it can continue to dry if there is any 

moisture left. 

Seed collection from the grass nursery is carried out by cutting the grass stalks and taking them 

in bundles to the work shed. The stalks are spread out on the floor of the shed and the seed is 

separated by either shaking the seed off the stalk or combing it into plastic tubs. The time spent on 

grass seed collecting is approximately 80 hours per year. The amount of seed that can be collected 

from the grass nursery is far greater than what can be collected from the field in the same amount 

of time. 

Seed cleaning, if necessary, is done by hand by rolling the seed to remove the husks and/or by 

winnowing (blowing off the chaff). Berries from shrubs and tree species like Saskatoon 

Weeding in the propagation area at Cowichan 

Garry Oak Preserve. Photo: Irvin Banman 

Grass seedbed at Cowichan Garry Oak Preserve 

after seed harvest. Photo: Irvin Banman 



10-33


CASE STUDY 

Grass plugs growing in root-trainers at Cowichan Garry 

Oak Preserve. Photo: Irvin Banman 

Potted seedlings growing in frames at Cowichan Garry 

Oak Preserve. Photo: City of Victoria 

(Amelanchier alnifolia) are macerated, washed, hand-rubbed over screens and then air-dried. Visual 

inspections are done to ensure that non-native seeds do not contaminate the mix. In total, 16 hours 

are spent annually cleaning seed at CGOP by NCC staff. 

All seed is stored in the uninsulated work shed, which allows it to undergo natural temperature 

fluctuations and humidity levels until it is planted in the nursery. So far, no seed has been lost to 

mold or rot. This may be due in part to the fact that seed is not stored for very long periods (it is 

generally used within a year). 

The standard soil blend used for all species grown in pots and trays is: 

• 45% native soil (from what was once a hay field and is now cultivated to make way for native 

grasses) 

• 45% sterilized fish compost* 

• 5% Garry Oak soil (to inoculate the mix) 

• 5% perlite 

For most of the 45 species grown at the CGOP nursery, planting is initiated in the fall and continues 

into early- or mid-winter. Grasses are sown into plug trays; bulbous species (e.g., camas) and longer 

rooted species (e.g., Spring Gold) are sown in longer open trays. Tree and shrub species are sown in 

one-gallon pots. On average, 3–6 seeds per cell or pot are sown to ensure that each container has 

one plant in it. If more than one seed germinates, plants are separated into their own containers 

unless the roots are too intertwined. Almost all of the seedlings are subsequently replanted into 

larger containers for further development. 

All plants remain exposed to the elements, and since the growing environment is not controlled, 

there is no need to harden-off the plants prior to outplanting in the field. No fertilizer is used, and 

watering is done only when required, which depends on the weather. 

*certified organic fish and forest fines with neutral pH, heat treated to eliminated weeds; made on Vancouver Island and 

obtained from a local nursery. 

10-34 



Grasses started early in summer that have had sufficient warm weather to develop adequately go 

into the field 2 months after sowing. If the grasses are sown in the fall, they go into the field up to 

8 months later. Some grass plugs are replanted first into one-gallon pots to grow larger because 

they not only survive better but also will then produce seed in the field in the first season. Bulb 

and perennial species are planted out after a minimum of 3 years in the nursery; trees and shrubs, 

anywhere from 2 to 3 years. Almost all species stand a much better chance of surviving if they have 

well developed deep root systems, which enable them to draw enough water to make it through 

the summer drought. 

CASE STUDY 

A variety of preparation techniques is used on planting sites. For grass species, the location is 

either on tilled ground or ground that is plant-free after having been covered with ground fabric 

for a couple of seasons (study plot). When grasses are planted out in ecologically sensitive areas 

at CGOP, they are placed into holes left from the removal of introduced species. In general, 

outplanting for all species takes place during the fall and winter months when soil moisture levels 

are high so that plants do not suffer from lack of water. On sites that are easy to water, outplanting 

is done at any time of year. Camas bulb planting is usually done in the fall and winter, but this is 

not absolutely necessary as the bulbs are very resilient, even when planted in spring and summer 

(as long as they are at least 2 cm (3/4") in diameter). 

During the course of a year, 6000 grass plugs are started. It takes approximately 7-person hours to 

outplant 1000 grass plugs, not including preparation time and moving the plugs and supplies to the 

site. If plugs are planted into untilled areas, it may take 14–20 hours to plant 1000 plugs. 

Suggestions/Pit-falls 

• Frost may sometimes push plugs up and out of the ground if planted in bare cultivated soil, so 

care must be taken to plant the plugs as deep as possible. 

• Sometimes too many plugs were grown and there was insufficient time to plant them all out. 

• Herbivory is an issue and deer had a significant impact in the study plot on species they favour; 

they browsed heavily on California Oatgrass and Great Camas in particular. 

• Fencing has been installed to keep out the native Columbian Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus 

hemionus columbianus) and non-native Eastern Cottontail (Silvilagus floricans) rabbits that have 

impacted the plantings. Additional 300 cm (9 feet) high exclosures have been installed around 

the outplantings to minimize losses. 

• Ensure that plants are well-watered at all stages of growth and when they are re-potted, and 

that enough time is budgeted for weeding. 

• If at all possible, allow plants to develop good root systems by keeping them in the nursery 

for as long as possible before outplanting, otherwise they may easily be overwhelmed by 

competition or die from lack of moisture. 

Irvin Banman is the Site Manager and Restoration Technician at CGOP, NCC. 

Tim Ennis is the Director of Land Stewardship for NCC (B.C. Region). 



10-35


10.4 Determining Optimum Techniques for Propagation 

10.4.1 Direct Seed Sowing vs. Container Seed Sowing 

Direct seed sowing generally requires more work than container seed sowing because the site has 

to be prepared ahead of time and any germinating weed seeds have to be removed. In addition, 

seeds that are direct sown may not find the appropriate germination site if they are scattered, and/ 

or they may be eaten by animals or insects. 

It is easier to control the growing environment and track seed germination and rooting of any 

type of cuttings if they are in containers (e.g., you can control watering/media during the growth/ 

fertilization schedule). Seeds started in plugs or containers will be able to obtain sufficient root 

development before outplanting. The exception will be when using whip cuttings, such as those 

used in bioengineering projects (Polster 2009). Starting seedlings in containers will give them a 

competitive advantage over other plants, especially weeds. 

Container seed sowing also enables development to be monitored and provides consistent growing 

conditions, especially during the vulnerable seedling stage. Record keeping is easier with this 

method of sowing (e.g., you can determine the known number of propagules to outplant), as is 

the automatic application of water and fertilizer. A greater number of propagules will also reach 

maturity and therefore will be available for outplanting. 

10.4.2 Nursery Bed vs. Containers for Vegetative Propagation 

Deciding on using either nursery beds or containers for vegetative 

propagation depends on the growth type of the species to be propagated. 

Nursery beds are traditionally used for shrubs and trees, but they can also be 

used for perennials and grasses. 

Some advantages of using nursery beds are as follows: 

• They are less costly than containers. 

• Less water is used (containers can dry out faster). 

• There is greater root development for larger shrubs and trees; however, 

you may need to ball or burlap them for transportation which will require 

equipment to lift the plants, supplies, and the correct timing to be 

arranged for this process. 

• Using nursery beds may allow the plants to stay in the beds longer than if in containers since 

they will not need to be repotted, as their roots are not constrained by a container. Beds may be 

used for trials, and plants can be maintained for future stock production (e.g., shrubs can be 

cut back to generate long stems to use as whip cuttings for bioengineering). 

• Perennial plant materials in beds can be used for division and for taking root cuttings. 

Some disadvantages of using nursery beds are as follows: 

• Plants in nursery beds are hard to move around in the nursery and containers also facilitate 

taking plants directly to the outplanting site. 

It is easier to 

control the growing 

environment 

and track seed 

germination and 

rooting of any type 

of cuttings if they 

are in containers. 

10-36 



• The need to weed the nursery beds, which will have more ground surface area for weeds to 

grow in than containers. 

• When the plant material develops through rhizomes, it is possible that the material will 

become too large and difficult to divide. 

• Nursery beds require an initial investment to prepare the soil, which is costly. 

10.4.3 Number of Propagules Needed (Estimation of Numbers for 

Outplanting) 

When estimating the numbers of plant materials required for outplanting at a specific site 

consider the following: 

• spacing (width and height considerations of the mature plant) 

• percentage germination for species (each collection of seeds will differ) 

• the plant composition (matrix) of the landscape microsite (refer to Table 2.2 in Chapter 2) 

that you want to restore to 

• guidelines for spacing and numbers per species (e.g., one bunchgrass per m 2 for woodland 

and up to 5/m 2 ; 4-8 herbaceous perennials/m 2 ; one shrub every 5 m 2 ; one tree every 50 m 2 ). 

10.5 Seed Collection, Extraction and Cleaning, Viability Testing, 

and Storage 

10.5.1 Seed Collection 

When collecting seeds for native plant propagation, ethical collection guidelines should be 

followed. The GOERT website provides an example of such guidelines (www.goert.ca/ethical_ 

collection). Additional guidelines can be found at the florabank website (www.florabank.org.au). 

When collecting 

seeds for native 

plant propagation, 

ethical collection 

guidelines should 

be followed. 

Seeds must be collected when they are ripe, which depends on the type of 

seed. For example, capsules must be dry and papery, and the seeds usually 

become brown to black when ripe. Berries or drupes normally turn red to 

dark purple when ripe. Banerjee et al. (1998) provide collection guidelines for 

woody plant seeds. 

Collection methods for fruits vary depending on the type of fruit and the 

volume needed. Methods include simple hand-picking, removing entire fruit 

clusters, raking naturally fallen fruit from the ground, or flailing branches to 

cause fruit to fall onto tarps. 

Collect only what you need for your project, and be prepared to properly store the cleaned and 

dried seeds for future use. 

Record-keeping is extremely important in the propagation of native plants (refer to Section 

10.7.3 and appendices); records can be referred to in subsequent years for guidance. The types of 

information that should be recorded are: species name, collection site, site description, date of 





collection, elevation, aspect, etc. You may want to use a specific code and a unique number for 

each record (see Appendix 10.2 for a seed collection record template). 

10.5.2 Considerations for Collecting in Adjacent Sites 

Before collecting seed from sites adjacent to the restoration site, a microhabitat assessment of 

these sites (refer to Table 2.2 in Chapter 2) should be completed to improve compatibility of 

propagated plants with the restoration site. This will increase the chance that the gene pool is 

maintained for those species collected. 

When considering whether or not to collect from a site adjacent to the restoration site, determine 

if the species are the same (by identifying them correctly to species, variety, or subspecies), and 

if the genetic diversity of the resulting restoration planting will be increased by collecting at this 

site. It is also important to obtain written permission from the landowner to access the land, and 

to have the appropriate liability insurance (see Case Study 1). You should also ensure that there is 

minimal damage to the site and propagule sources. 

10-38 



Case Study 6. Seeds – Collection, Cleaning, Storage, and 

Germination 

by Moralea Milne 

CASE STUDY 

One of the most enjoyable aspects of restoration is the collection of propagules for your 

project. After you have surveyed your site and reference sites, and determined which 

species are most likely to have been present and which species you will spend your efforts 

on replanting, you have the opportunity to search for these species. 

Plant Identification and Locating Plants in the Field 

If you are in any doubt as to plant identification, it is best to locate promising populations with 

the help of an expert, preferably during the flowering season because many vascular plants are 

easier to identify when they are in bloom. You will need to receive permission to hike in and collect 

from these areas. Identify the healthiest and most vigorous plants; they will likely produce the 

highest quality seeds. Mark their exact locations so when you return you can identify the plants 

in their new, less obvious stage as seed containers. The best way to record their locations is with 

a GPS device, but a little brightly coloured tape (that is removed later) can also be used to narrow 

down the location to the last few metres. It is also useful to collect or photograph representative 

seedheads and mount them so they can be used as a learning/identification tool. 

Step lightly through these Garry Oak and associated ecosystems; disturbances, especially in 

sensitive rocky bluffs, can facilitate the spread of invasive species. It is best to collect seeds on dry 

days so that you do not have to worry about wet seed heads and subsequent mold problems. 

It is most important to collect propagules from within your restoration site or from the nearest 

populations. Researchers are discovering new information on species every day. Some species 

that have been identified as a single species are in fact separate species with different ecological 

preferences. 

Seed Collection 

Refer to GOERT’s ethical guidelines (www.goert.ca/ethical_collection) on the number of propagules 

that you should collect from species, populations, and locations. As well, consult with local 

knowledgeable sources as to the appropriate time to collect seeds. 

Many factors can influence when seeds are ripe and the quantity of seeds you might find: early and 

late seasonal changes, moisture and drought, browsing by predators, elevation and geographic 

variations, disturbance regimes, the plants’ own individual requirements, and other vagaries of 

which we have no or incomplete knowledge. For example, Garry Oaks are mast-fruiters—plants 

that produce acorns in abundance only irregularly—but the acorns are predated by Band-tailed 

Pigeons (Columba fasciata), Steller’s Jays (Cyanocitta stelleri), and Eastern Grey Squirrels (Sciurus 

carolinensis), and are vulnerable to infestations by various weevils. 

Consider when you are harvesting in lean years that you are decreasing the quantity of seeds 

available for natural reproduction and for food for some native species. Also, a population might 

have been decimated already; therefore, find and mark more sites than you think you will need. 



10-39


Seed collection supplies include paper and plastic (Ziploc) bags, or small plastic storage containers; 

a small, waterproof booklet and additional waterproof paper; indelible writing implements; a GPS 

unit; and field guides for identification. Use paper bags when collecting dry seeds to reduce the 

possibility of mold. Soft-bodied seeds, such as berries, are better collected in plastic bags or plastic 

storage containers. 

On each seed container, record the date, plant name, location, and any other relevant information 

(e.g., plant colour and vigour, associated plant species, recent weather conditions (dry year, wet 

year), a note to try collecting two weeks earlier, later, etc.). You may want to use a code for each 

collection and record the code and its corresponding information in a field notebook (see also 

Section 10.7.3 and appendices). 

CASE STUDY 

Directions for Cleaning Dry Seeds 

by Heather Koni-Pass (from Jan 2007 NPSG News: www.npsg.ca) 

FLUFFY SEED HEADS (e.g., Yarrow (Achillea millefolium), Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor)): You will 

need sturdy gardening gloves, a sieve that will allow seeds to pass through, an ice cream bucket, 

newspaper, small plastic bags, and labels. With gloves on, take small handfuls of seedheads and 

rub them between your hands over a newspaper to separate the seeds and chaff. Place the broken 

seedheads into the sieve and sift. Save and label the seeds after discarding the chaff. 

CAPSULES and PODS (e.g., Nodding Onion (Allium cernuum), camas spp., shootingstar spp.): You 

will need sturdy gardening gloves, a rolling pin, a large screen with mesh that will let seeds pass 

through, newspaper, small plastic bags, and labels. With gloves on, put a handful of capsules or 

pods on the newspaper. GENTLY crush the capsules or pods with the rolling pin. Take the resulting 

mixture and place it over a small mesh screen to separate out the chaff. Save and label the seeds; 

discard the chaff. Many pods curl open when dry; therefore, it is just as easy to flick the seeds out 

with your fingers or a thin probe. 

CONES (for Grand Fir (Abies grandis)): You will need a face mask, paper grocery bag, blank 

newsprint, and a sieve that will allow the seeds to pass through. Put the cones in the paper bag and 

shake vigorously. Pour the contents into the sieve and sift the seeds through. Dry the seeds on the 

blank newsprint. 

WINNOWING (e.g., grasses, sedges, and rushes): Winnowing is best for separating heavier seeds 

from the chaff. This is easiest done by working at a large table. You will need a broom, a dust pan, 

a large plastic sheet, newspaper, a fan, two deep buckets of the same height, and an ice cream 

bucket. Cover the table with the plastic sheet and cover the plastic with newspaper. Place one deep 

bucket at the end of the table, upside down, and stand a fan on the bucket with its head in a fixed 

position, facing down the length of the table. Turn the fan on low speed. Hold your hand in front 

of the fan so you can judge where the airflow is not too strong. Position the second deep bucket, 

right-side up, at this point in front of the fan. 

Put the seeds and chaff into the ice cream bucket and hold that bucket above the second bucket 

that is in front of the fan, slowly pouring a little of the contents into the second bucket. If 

positioning is correct, the heavier seeds will fall into the deep bucket and the chaff will blow onto 

the table. If the air current is too strong and everything blows onto the table, simply scoop up 

the mixture, move the deep bucket a little further away from the fan and try again. With some 

experience, it becomes easy to judge the distance from the fan. 

10-40 



NUTS (e.g., Garry Oak (Quercus garryana)): You will need seeds, a bucket of water, two screens of 

the same size with two pieces of black landscape cloth to match the screens, and weights or clamps 

to hold the screens together. For acorn sowing: use 1-gallon pots full of leafy compost. 

Put all seeds in the bucket of water and soak overnight. Seeds that sink are viable; discard any ones 

that float. 

CASE STUDY 

Planting Oak Seeds: Place a layer of landscape cloth on a screen, spread the acorns over the 

cloth, and cover with a second layer of landscape cloth. Place the second screen on top and weigh 

or clamp all together. This is to ensure that rodents or birds do not eat the seeds. Place this package 

on a table in a greenhouse or in a shady spot outdoors, and water 3–4 times a day. As the acorns 

sprout, transfer them individually to deep, narrow pots containing good leafy compost that has 

been gently tamped down. Water in and continue to water regularly. Seedlings should remain in 

this pot until sold or ready to plant out. Take care not to damage the long root. 

If you have only a handful of acorns, sprouting can be done in a canning jar with a screen on top. 

The cupboard under the kitchen sink is a good, dark, warm spot for sprouting the acorns. 

Directions for Cleaning Soft-Berried Seeds 

by Heather Koni-Pass (from May 2006 NPSG News: www.npsg.ca) 

Examples: Saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia), Salal (Gaultheria shallon), honeysuckle (Lonicera 

spp.), Oregon-grape (Mahonia spp.), Indian-plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), Nootka Rose (Rosa 

nutkana), Common Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) 

EQUIPMENT: Waterproof apron, water source at work table, several buckets, food processor, duct 

tape, large sieve, clean stir stick, several cleaning rags, fine-meshed screens, clean newspaper, fan, 

small plastic flower pots. 

• Put one or two layers of duct tape on the blades of the food processor—one layer for small 

seeds (e.g. Rubus-raspberries), two for larger seeds (e.g. Indian-plum). 

• Put a small number of berries in the food processor; fill with cool water. 

• Holding your hand over the spout, pulse several times until a slurry forms. 

• Fill a bucket 1/2 full of cool water. Pour the slurry into the bucket of water and swirl around. 

Unviable seeds and berry mush will float to the surface. Viable seeds will sink to the bottom of 

the bucket. Set the sieve over another bucket. 

• Slowly pour swirling water through the sieve, stopping before the clean seeds are poured out of 

the first bucket. If cleaning fine seeds, line a screen with clean newspaper. Omit newspaper for 

large seeds. Retrieve clean seeds from the first bucket and spread on the screen. 

• Examine the remains that are left in the sieve. If you feel there are enough seeds remaining in 

the slurry dregs, repeat processing. 

• Repeat this process until all fruits are seeded. 

When you have completed the screening process, put the screens of cleaned seeds in a wellventilated 

space to dry. Stand a flower pot under each corner of the screens to ensure good 

ventilation. Cover with a second screen so the seeds are not eaten by rodents. Stir gently several 

times a day while drying, or gently run a fan in this area to help the drying process. If seeds stick 



10-41


together while drying, simply rub them through your hands occasionally to separate. When 

sufficiently dry, the seeds can be sown, or stored in the refrigerator. 

Seed Storage 

from: www.jvk.net/pdf/drk_seed_storage_and_handling.pdf 

Check the Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team’s (and other) propagation guidelines (www.goert. 

ca/propagation) for information on seed storage times. Some species will keep for decades. Others 

will keep for only months or a few years, with decreasing germination success as time goes by. 

CASE STUDY 

Generally, seeds should be dried to 5–8% relative humidity (RH) and then stored at 5ºC (41oF) to 

retain optimum seed quality. Seed quality will be affected when moisture content falls below 5% RH 

(vigour declines) or above 8% RH (seeds deteriorate); above 12% RH, fungi can grow. Refrigerators 

are the right temperature for seed storage but have approximately 40% RH. To ensure proper 

drying, seal the seeds in a jar (wide mouth canning jars work well) with a desiccant such as silica 

gel. 4 The amount of silica gel placed in the jar should equal the weight of the seeds. Storing the 

seeds for 7–8 days in a tightly sealed container along with the silica gel should bring the seeds down 

to approximately 8% RH. Once this is done, remove the seeds, repackage/label, and store in an 

airtight container. Seeds should be stored in a cool, dark, dry place such as an unheated basement 

room or the refrigerator. 

If silica gel is not available, powdered milk or cornmeal, tied in a small breathable fabric such as 

cheesecloth, can be used. Small seeds will dry sufficiently overnight; larger seeds may take several 

days. If dried seed packets are opened and left unsealed for several hours, the seeds’ moisture 

content will increase rapidly. They will have to be dried again to ensure continued vigour and 

viability. 

Some seeds have short lifespans and can be stored only a short while. Garry Oak acorns should be 

planted almost immediately. They should be kept cool and moist until planting because they will 

not tolerate being dried out. 

Seed Scarification 

In order to propagate plants at our convenience, it is sometime necessary to artificially induce 

germination. One technique for doing so is seed scarification (see page 10–17). It is used on 

many tree and shrub species that have developed hard seed coats for protection. In their natural 

environment, the seeds might sit for one, two, or more seasons until their seed coats have 

deteriorated enough to allow moisture and air to access to the embryo and initiate the germination 

process. Hairy Manzanita (Arctostaphylos columbiana) and Kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi) 

are two species that can be forced into an earlier germination by using various means of seed 

scarification. Mechanical treatments involve gently rubbing the seeds with sandpaper or a nail 

file, nicking them with a sharp implement, or cracking them with a hammer. Chemical treatments 

include immersing the seeds in vinegar for periods of time, or covering them with boiling water and 

leaving them to sit until the water has cooled. Whichever method is used, it is important to open 

the seed coat without harming the embryonic plant. Scarified seeds do not store well and should be 

planted as soon as possible. 

4 Silica gel can be purchased at scientific supply stores. It comes as a coloured product. A pink or red colour means the 

product is still working; blue means it has ceased to be useful. The gel can be reinvigorated by heating to 110–180ºC. 

10-42 



Seed Stratification 

Many seeds need stratification. This involves manipulating the seeds’ environment by providing 

moisture and alternating cold and warm temperatures, which simulates seasonal changes. For 

example, Saskatoon seeds will germinate after a cool, moist stratification period. This can be done 

by placing cleaned seeds in a sealable plastic bag along with some slightly moistened peat moss, 

and keeping the bag in the refrigerator for approximately three months. After this time, the seeds 

can be sown. Alternatively, the seeds can be planted directly into their container and left outdoors 

for the winter. Common Snowberry seeds are more particular; they first require a warm, moist, 60- 

day period of stratification followed by 180 days of cool, moist storage before planting. The seeds 

should be checked regularly as they stratify to monitor for signs of mold or dryness. 

CASE STUDY 

Some seeds need both scarification and stratification to germinate. Check propagation guidelines 

for individual species’ requirements. 

Whether for large-scale production or your own satisfaction, proper seed collection, storage, and 

germination technique is an important consideration in any project. Enjoy the process! 

Moralea Milne is a graduate of the Restoration of Natural Systems Program at the University 

of Victoria, and a member of GOERT’s Native Plant Propagation and Invasive Species Steering 

Committees. 



10-43


10.5.3 Seed Extraction and Cleaning 

Cleaning and extracting seeds can be done on a small scale, as described below. See also Case 

Study 6, and Young and Young (1986). 

Dry, dehiscent capsules (fruits which spontaneously open to release the seeds within) can be 

placed upside down, while still attached to the main flowering stem, into large paper bags and 

allowed to dry until the seeds are released (e.g., camas spp., shootingstar spp., Small-flowered 

Alumroot (Heuchera micrantha), Chocolate Lily, Fawn Lily). Note that not all seeds will mature 

in the capsules if collected while still immature. This method is mainly for capsules that have 

maturing seeds but are not quite open yet. 

Dry, indehiscent fruit (fruits which don’t spontaneously release their seeds) should be separated 

from the stalk or capitulum of the plant; e.g., Western Buttercup (Ranunculus occidentalis), 

Lomatium spp., Woolly Sunflower, Aster species. It may take some time to hand-remove the seeds 

from the stem. 

Fleshy fruits can be hand-mashed or lightly macerated in a blender with water. The remaining 

pulp is floated off, and the filled seeds (ones that sink to the bottom of the container) are then laid 

out to dry on newsprint or paper towels. 

For record keeping purposes, record the genus and species, date of collection, source of seed, 

approximate numbers or weight of seed, method of cleaning, seed production per kilogram 

of initial fruit collected, and any associated costs. Refer to Section 10.7.3 and record-keeping 

templates Appendices 10.2–10.4. 

10.5.4 Seed Viability Testing 

Seed germination testing is performed to generate an estimate of the viability of the seed lot. A 

sample of 100 seeds per seed lot is used to determine the percent germination under a controlled 

experiment (e.g., germination in a growth chamber). Appropriate temperature and light 

conditions are employed over a set time period. The standard is 15/20 o C (59/68 o F) alternating for 

16 hours in the light and 8 hours in the dark (Baskin and Baskin 1998). This method requires some 

controlled environment conditions and a replication of samples. 

It is also possible to X-ray seeds (using a subset of the seedlot) to see if the embryos are filled, but 

this requires access to a seed testing lab. Another standard viability test is the tetrazolium test, 

which is performed on a subset of the seed lot (Baskin and Baskin 1998). The embryo can also be 

excised from a subset of the seed lot, and should be white and firm (Baskin and Baskin 1998). 

All of these methods will provide an indication of how many seeds are needed to be sown in order 

to produce the required number of propagules for the project. 

10.5.5 Seed Storage 

Seed viability depends on the general health, age, and maturity of the seed, and on preventing 

deterioration while in storage. The latter depends on providing the optimal temperature and 

humidity conditions for the seeds when they are in storage. 

In general, the smaller the seed, the less time it remains viable in storage; therefore, some species 

10-44 



are best sown as soon as they are ripe. Garry Oak acorns are recalcitrant, meaning they are 

meant to germinate soon after ripening, and therefore do not store well. Seeds that have embryo 

dormancy can be stored for only 2–5 years (grasses); seeds with seed coat dormancy could remain 

viable for 15–20 years under optimal storage conditions. 

Storage Conditions 

• Dry seeds to 4–6% moisture content. This is the most important factor in determining the 

viability of stored seed. 

• Seal in paper packets in moisture-proof containers. 

• Add a silica desiccant or a twist of cornmeal in wax paper to maintain low moisture content 

while in storage. 

• Maintain an ideal storage temperature of 3–5 o C (37–41 o F). 

• Maintain an ideal relative humidity of 20–25%. 

Plant material 

must be collected 

10.6 Selection and Treatment of Plant Materials 

properly, the 

species identified 

correctly, and 

10.6.1 Stock Plants in situ 

Propagules can be collected from the restoration site and then grown in 

complete records 

kept. 

a nursery setting for outplanting in one to two seasons’ time. However, it 

is important not to inadvertently select the propagule in a way that will 

potentially decrease the genetic diversity of the resulting plant material 

and its adaptability to the restoration site (see Reichard 2001; Dunwiddie and Delvin 2006). 

For genetic considerations, refer to Basic Considerations for Plant Propagation with Respect 

to Restoration, Section 10.2. Also, refer to Determining Optimum Techniques for Propagation, 

Section 10.4, and to Case Studies 3 and 5 for more examples. 

Plant material must be collected properly, the species identified correctly, and complete records 

kept. Seeds and cuttings should always be kept in separate containers and labelled with the 

scientific name, collection date, and collection site (provenance), using a code, if necessary. 

Seeds and cuttings that have been collected from different microsites but are of the same species 

should also be kept separate and labelled. Following the ethical collection guidelines of GOERT 

(www.goert.ca/ethical_collection) will increase the chances that a wide variety of propagules are 

collected which contain genotypic and phenotypic diversity. 

If stock plants are continually grown on a nursery site for propagule collection, they may hybridize 

with wild species and other native species (particularly grasses). Therefore, it is recommended 

that multiple generations of propagules not be produced from nursery stock plants. Instead, the 

nursery stock plants should be renewed frequently from appropriate local sources (Dunwiddie 

and Delvin 2006). 

10.6.2 Source Diversity 

As mentioned above, collecting from a wide variety of parent stock material on the site will 

increase the likelihood that broad genetic diversity is represented within the propagules, and thus 



10-45


also in the restored population. One way this can be ensured is to collect propagules from the site 

to be restored as well as at adjacent sites (see Section 10.4). 

Additionally, plants that are close to one another at the collection site will likely have a similar 

genetic make-up (Millar and Libby 1989; Rogers 2004). Therefore, material should be collected 

from plants that are farther apart, and the 1-in-20 rule should be used (see Section 10.2). Also, 

since there may be genetic variation in germination, growth patterns, and development, the best 

seedlings or the first to root should not be the only ones selected. It is essential to have a broad 

window of time for germination and growth in order to allow a variety of propagules with a full 

range of characteristics to develop (Campbell and Sorensen 1984; Meyer and Monsen 1993). In this 

way, the selection of resulting materials for restoration will have included consideration of the 

geographic, genetic, and adaptation diversity of those materials (Jones 2005). 

For further information on retaining a broader source diversity including genetic composition, 

refer to the section on stock plants in situ 10.6.1, and the genetic integrity section 10.2.3. As well, 

following the ethical collection guidelines (www.goert.ca/ethical_collection) provided on the 

GOERT website will also provide a wider variety of parent stock for the restoration site. 

10.6.3 Monitoring Program 

To monitor outplanting success, it is essential that accurate and complete records are maintained 

during the production stages (see Section 10.7). As well, monitoring the outplanting success of 

each species relative to its source (provenance) data will provide useful information for future 

restoration projects. Additionally, the number of propagules that survive at the restoration site 

over a certain time period should be measured. This may aid in evaluating whether or not the 

species becomes a self-sustaining population. Refer to Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring for 

full details on monitoring a restoration site. 

10.7 Consideration of Timelines 

10.7.1 Production Schedules (Planning Ahead for 

Outplanting) 

In order to develop production schedules for the species, type, and number of 

propagules to be used in restoration, the time-frame for outplanting must be 

known. The production schedule is then based on the length of time required 

for the seedlings and cuttings to develop, and is planned backwards from the 

outplanting time. 

Garry Oak species 

should be planted 

in the late fall to 

late winter when 

the ground is 

already moist. 

Garry Oak species should be planted in the late fall to late winter when the ground is already 

moist. Early spring may also be an optimal time if there are spring rains in late May to early June; 

however, with climate change, this may not necessarily be a reliable time for outplanting unless 

irrigation is used on site. 

Timelines need to be determined for collecting cuttings, sowing seeds, potting-up cuttings, and 

potting-on seedlings/plugs. As well, time for acclimation will also be necessary, and will require 

the use of a shade or lathe house, or a cold frame to overwinter and/or harden plant material 

10-46 



off before planting out the following spring. Other temporal considerations will depend on the 

species and the growth habit. For example, there may be a need to pot-on larger shrubs that are 

slower growing and require a longer (2–3 years) period to mature before being outplanted. 

When planning the production schedule, also consider the following: 

• Determine which species are going to be propagated. 

• Determine the numbers of species required. 

• Determine what locality the species will be collected from. 

• Maintain records of the provenance of the propagules for all species. 

• Determine how these species will be propagated (vegetatively or by seed) and how much 

stock material or what volume of seed is required. 

• Determine the size of the propagated material required to ensure optimal outplanting 

survival (this will vary with the species and propagation method). 

• Determine the date by which the site should be prepared so it is ready to receive the materials. 

Coordinate this date with the delivery of the materials. 

• Ensure adequate numbers of staff are available to organize and load the materials for delivery. 

• Create an outplanting schedule that is somewhat flexible to ensure the weather is appropriate 

for outplanting (preferably a non-windy, overcast morning). 

10.7.2 Contracting-out Growing for Restoration Projects 

If the materials are to be grown by a wholesale nursery, then the considerations listed in Section 

10.7.1 have to be coordinated with the grower. As well, a budget has to be developed for the 

grower’s costs. These include costs for labour; materials and supplies such as containers, soil 

media, water, and fertilizers; collection of seeds and cuttings and preparation of propagules; and 

maintaining the resulting seedlings and cuttings as well as the plants and stock plants. (See Case 

Study 7 following.) 



10-47


Case Study 7. Contract Growing for Outplanting— 

Considerations 

by Siriol Paquet, Sylvan Vale Nursery 

CASE STUDY 

Sylvan Vale Nursery Ltd. is a located in Black Creek on Vancouver Island, B.C. The nursery was 

established in 1980, has 200,000 sq feet (18,580 sq metres) of growing space, and remains 

a family-run business. It maintains a custom program, and currently grows forest seedlings, 

Christmas tree seedlings, native plants, ornamentals, berry plants, and grasses, as well as plants 

for restoration, agroforestry, hedging, and many other applications. Services include on-site seed 

stratification, cold storage, and delivery. Over the years, modern techniques and automation have 

been incorporated along with many new buildings and equipment. 

The number of propagules per species that are required to meet plant orders is based on historical 

data of the number of recoveries (successfully germinated and grown plants) per container type. 

The length of time to produce each species is also determined by historical data, and is speciesdependent. 

For example, grasses tend to have fairly high recovery per block; approximately 80–90% 

of plants per container are grown to shipping size. Bulbs tend to be more problematic because 

consistent production of a set amount of shippable plants per container is not possible; therefore, 

more seed is needed. 

Facilities include greenhouses, cold frames, mist bench/heated benches for rooting, and nursery 

fields. The different facilities’ use is determined by the species to be propagated and the needs 

of clients. Seed storage is a minor consideration at the nursery and does not normally factor into 

pricing. Supplies needed are based on the volumes of each container type and include soil and 

other media, potting supplies (pots, flats, labels, cells, plugs, fertilizers, and/or growth hormone). 

Other costs factors include labour, energy, packing supplies, and sometimes shipping. Staffing is 

required in the greenhouses and office throughout the year and 24-hour computer monitoring 

of greenhouse environmental conditions is also used. A seasonal crew is employed for sowing, 

harvesting, etc. 

Scheduling seeding, division, and growing-on to ensure that plants are ready for the project is 

determined by the client’s requested delivery date. Scheduling is also determined by the overall 

production demands at the facility, seed availability, and stratification times. 

Large-scale production is more economical for the nursery; however, small numbers of plant 

species can be produced, with the smallest amount being 100 plants. Price is determined by volume 

of plants required. Plants are held up to two years from sowing. After that time, the maintenance 

cost far outweighs the price received for the plant. The ideal production time in a business context 

is from four months to one year. 

The nursery tries to use a seed source that is located near the project planting site, and seed is 

collected from a variety of plants to maintain genetic diversity. Planning is necessary, and timing is 

dependent on when the seed is ready for collection, when it is viable, and whether or not there is 

an accessible seed source location. As well, it may be determined that it is not economical to collect 

seed. Instead, seed may be purchased from a reputable seed dealer. 

10-48 



For some of the most commonly ordered plant species, the nursery maintains stool beds, which 

are nursery beds of plants for cutting stock. Where possible, vegetative material (twigs, roots, and 

divisions) is also collected or purchased for production of plant material. 

Once the plant material is deemed to be extractable from the container, shipping can be done on 

very short notice; however, the usual required notice is 48 hours. When shipping, consideration as 

to the time of year and seasonal weather patterns is necessary to ensure optimal survival of plant 

material. 

CASE STUDY 

One challenge for nursery growing of native plants is obtaining enough information about 

producing plant material. There is a limited amount of knowledge on the species-specific methods 

of seed stratification, length of time to produce plant material, scheduling production of materials, 

seed availability, and budget considerations. Another problem for growers is that the market is 

currently depressed, so it is not economical to retain a large volume of plant material on hand. As 

well, for some requests, the time it takes to produce material may not meet clients’ needs. 

References 

GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team) Native Plant Propagation Guidelines: www.goert. 

ca/propagation. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Fire Effects Information database: www.fs.fed.us/ 

database/feis/plants/index.html. 

Native Plant Network Propagation Protocol database: www.nativeplantnetwork.org/network . 

Siriol Paquet is co-owner of Sylvan Vale Nursery, Ltd., in Black Creek, B.C. 



10-49


10.7.3 Post-propagation Records 

Record-keeping is essential to monitor the progress of the restoration project and to find 

efficiencies in techniques, methodology, and budgets. All stages should be documented, from the 

initial collection stage through all growing phases to outplanting. The success of the restoration 

project should also be monitored. By compiling this knowledge through the use of templates, 

the restoration practitioner will be able to fine-tune or adapt certain techniques or budgets for 

the next project. This body of knowledge will also allow the sharing of information for other 

restoration projects during the planning phase. 

Examples of post-propagation records include: 

• dates and numbers/species by provenance for pricking-out of seedlings 

• date and numbers/species by provenance of seedlings or cuttings potted 

up 

• number of seeds or cuttings required to produce required amount of 

material for outplanting 

• overall timeline of when seedlings or cuttings are ready for outplanting 

relative to method of propagation 

• final production characteristics (e.g., size, age, height, pot size) 

• costs of labour, equipment, materials, and supplies to produce each 

species 

• final destination of the plants produced 

• survival numbers after one, two, three, and five years at the site 

Record-keeping 

is essential to 

monitor the 

progress of 

the restoration 

project and to 

find efficiencies 

in techniques, 

methodology, and 

budgets. 

See record-keeping templates Appendices 10.2–10.4 and Chapter 7: Inventory and Monitoring for 

more information. 

10.8 Additional Suggestions 

A compilation of additional information for those starting to plan and implement a propagation 

program for restoration. 

1. Track species, seed source (provenance) and performance (monitor on a yearly basis) 

including outplantings, and any nursery trials. 

2. Maintain detailed and complete records (label materials using a code if necessary to help with 

tracking). 

3. Confirm the taxonomic identification of difficult species (e.g., grasses, sedges, rushes) for all 

seed lots, and check after they mature. 

4. Determine the amount and type of materials needed (e.g., start planning 1–3 years ahead of 

outplanting). 

5. Schedule propagation to correspond with outplanting deadlines so that the appropriate 

numbers of propagules are produced and are ready to leave the nursery. 

6. Collect species from on-site and adjacent to the site, but not too far away. 

10-50 



7. Use your records to continue to learn about each species and methods of propagation (i.e., 

use adaptive management). 

8. Have a goal even if you cannot rely on a reference ecosystem for the site, and inventory and 

classify the site (refer to Table 2.2 in Chapter 2 on Restoration Ecosystem Units). 

9. Try to avoid decreasing the gene pool for the species (e.g., avoid inbreeding or repeatedly 

using the same stock material for different outplanting sites). 

10. Publicize both the failures and successes of your project (i.e., share your information!). 

11. Publicize the work that will be done ahead of time (before collecting propagules) in order to 

engage the neighbours, naturalist groups, environmental non-governmental organizations, 

and other stakeholders. 

12. Recognize both the ecological and cultural significance of the site to be restored and plant 

appropriate species. 



10-51


Case Study 8. Small-scale Native Plant Nursery Set-up and 

Operation 

by Carrina Maslovat 

CASE STUDY 

Small-scale nurseries can provide stock to individual areas, which ensures there is a supply 

of plants grown from local genetic stock material. Most nurseries will collect from material 

close at hand, and very few projects are able to request contract-grown local plant material. 

However, because land costs are extremely high, particularly in urban areas, it may be costprohibitive 

to purchase land for a nursery. Efficiency of scale is also a consideration for nurseries. A 

small nursery, such as one that is less than 0.4 ha (1 acre), can be maintained by hand rather than 

with equipment. Larger-scale nurseries are more efficient but require a greater land base. 

Choice of nursery location is related to the site-specific requirements of the plants that will be grown 

(e.g., level ground, sun exposure, soil quality unless growing strictly in containers, access roads, 

quality and cost of water). Each site will naturally be better for growing some species rather than 

others—for example, hot dry sites are potentially better for growing Garry Oak ecosystem species. 

Determining which species to grow for restoration purposes is difficult unless the nursery grows for 

a specific project. It is almost impossible to determine what the demand will be for restoration and 

to have the right plants in the quantity and size required for a project. Large restoration projects 

generally happen sporadically and require large volumes of plants. As plants continue to outgrow 

their pots, they have to be potted up into larger pots; however, larger sizes of some species are not 

desired for some restoration projects. Some restoration practitioners prefer to purchase local stock 

from a supplier that they know will provide healthy material. This will ensure a higher success rate of 

survival in the long term, rather than requesting specific species that have not been field-tested and 

therefore may not perform as well. 

The initial budget for set-up of a small nursery is usually for infrastructure, such as cold frames and an 

irrigation system, plus the cost of supplies such as containers, hoses, soil media, etc. For Garry Oak 

species, a heated greenhouse is not necessary, but a cold frame to protect small and newly rooted 

plants from the wind is essential. As well, a mist bench with a heating coil is essential for propagation 

by rooting. A small bar fridge can be adequate for seed storage. Soil and associated amendments 

are also essential. Storage areas may include simple open-ended, 3-sided cinder block containers. 

A shade/lathe house or shade cloth in part of the nursery is useful especially for protecting plants 

during more sensitive stages of development. 

Staffing for a small nursery is mainly seasonal, with additional staff required in early spring and fall 

for propagation, pricking-out, and potting-on. Summertime labour is needed mainly for maintenance, 

watering, and pruning. Seeding can be done outdoors in the fall, so stratifying the seed ahead of 

time in refrigerators is not necessary. Hardwood cuttings can be taken in the fall; softwood cuttings 

can be taken in the spring. Using nursery field plots instead of containers to grow plant material 

will be impractical unless the soil is amenable; using nursery field plots can be costly, and for a small 

nursery, not possible due to size constraints. Seed collecting following ethical guidelines can also be 

done by nursery staff in the summer and fall. 

Carrina Maslovat is a consulting biologist, Salt Spring Island, B.C. 

10-52 




Banerjee, S.M., K.R. Creasey, and D.D. Gertzen. 2001. Native woody plant seed collection guide for 

British Columbia. Ministry of Forests, Tree Improvement Branch, Victoria, B.C. 

Baskin, C.C. and J.M. Baskin. 1998. Seeds: ecology, biogeography, and evolution of dormancy and 

germination. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. 

Booth, T.D. and T.A. Jones. 2001. Plants for ecological restoration: a foundation and a philosophy 

for the future. Native Plants Journal 2(1):12-20. 

Campbell, R.K. and F.C. Sorensen. 1984. Genetic implications of nursery practices. In: Forest 

Nursery Manual: Production of Bareroot Seedlings. M. L. Duryea, and T. D. Landis (editors). 

Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, Netherlands. 

Cottrell, H.J. 1947. Tetrazolium salt as a seed germination indicator. Nature 159:748. 

Dunwiddie, P. and E. Delvin. 2006. Inadvertent selection in the propagation of native plants: a 

cautionary note. Native Plants Journal 7(2):121-124. 

GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team). 2009. The Garry Oak gardener’s handbook: 

nurturing native plant habitat in Garry Oak communities, 2nd edition. 

Jones, T.A. 2005. Genetic principles and the use of native seeds—just the FAQs, please, just the 

FAQs. Native Plants Journal 6(1):214-224. 

Johnson, H.B. and H.S. Mayeux. 1992. Viewpoint: a view on species additions and deletions in the 

balance of nature. J. Range Manage. 45:322-333. 

Millar, C.I. and W.J. Libby. 1989. Disneyland or native ecosystem: genetics and the restorations. 

Restoration and Management Notes 7(1):18-24. 

Myer, S.E. and S.B. Monsen. 1993. Genetic considerations in propagating native shrubs, forbs, and 

grasses from seed. In: Proceedings Western Forest Nursery Association Meeting. Fallen Leaf 

Lake, C.A., T. D. Landis (editor). USDA Forest Service GTR-RM221P, Ogden, U.T., Sept. 14-18, 

1992. 

Polster, D.F. 2009. Restoration of landslides and unstable slopes using soil bioengineering. 

Canadian Land Reclamation Association, 2009 Conference, Quebec City, Que. 

Reichard, S. 2001. Considerations in the propagation of rare plants. In: Native plant propagation 

and restoration strategies. R. Rose and D. Hasse (editors). Nursery Technol. Cooperative and 

West. Forestry and Conserv. Assoc., Corvallis, OR., pp. 69-70. 

Rogers, D. 2004. Genetic erosion: no longer just an agricultural issue. Native Plants Journal 

5(2):212-222. 

10.10 Related Websites 

Florabank www.florabank.org.au. 

GOERT (Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team): Native Plant Propagation Guidelines 

www.goert.ca/propagation. 

King Co., Washington State: Native Plant Guide: http://green.kingcounty.gov/GoNative/ 

Index.aspx. 



10-53


Lady Bird Johnston Wildflower Center: www.wildflower.org/about (see plants database). 

Native Seed Network (U.S.) www.nativeseednetwork.org. 

Native Plants Journal http://nativeplants.for.uidaho.edu/journal. 

Portland Bureau of Environmental Services: Native Plant Selection Guide www.portlandonline. 

com/bes/index.cfm?a=eahdc&c=dcbec. 

Saanich Municipality: Native Plant Salvage Program www.saanich.ca/resident/environment/ 

salvage.html. 

University of Victoria Restoration of Natural Systems (ER338): Selection and Propagation 

of Native Plants for Ecosystem Restoration (Spring 2002) www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/library/ 

FIA/2002/FIA2002MR022.pdf. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture/U.S. Forest Service: Celebrating Wildflowers www.fs.fed.us/ 

wildflowers. 

Washington State Master Gardeners: Gardening in Western Washington http://gardening.wsu. 

edu/nwnative (see gardening, propagating, and growing section). 

U.S. Department of Agriculture/U.S. Forest Service: Fire-effects Information database www.fs.fed. 

us/database/feis/plants/index.html. 

10.11 Related Guides and Handbooks 

Cullina, W. 2000. Growing and propagating wildflowers of the United States and Canada. 

Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Mass. 

Hartmann, H., D. Kester, F. Davies, and R. Geneve. 2001. Plant propagation—Principles and 

practices. Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 

Kruckeberg, A. 1996. Gardening with native plants of the Pacific Northwest. University of 

Washington Press, Seattle, Wash. 

Pettinger, A. and B. Costanzo. 2002. Native plants in the coastal garden. Whitecap Books, 

Vancouver, B.C. 

Rose, R., C.E.C. Chachulski, and D.L. Haase. 1998. Propagation of Pacific Northwest native plants. 

Oregon State University Press, OR. 

Smith, M. 2007. The plant propagator’s bible. Rodale Inc., Emmaus, Pa. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 1984. Seeds of wood plants in the United States. 

Agriculture Handbook 450. 

Young, J.A. and C. Young. 1986. Collecting, processing and germinating seeds of wildland plants. 

Timber Press, Portland, OR. 

10-54 



Appendix 10.1 

Propagating Flower Bulbs, Corms, and Rhizomes: Some Shortcuts from the 

Beacon Hill Nursery Experience 

The staff of the City of Victoria Nursery at Beacon Hill Park have grown native bulbs and 

perennials for use in the park for several years. The following observations come from that 

experience. 

With an understanding of native species’ adaptations to environmental patterns, growers can 

use knowledge of plant characteristics to take shortcuts in producing plants. The Garry Oak 

ecosystems of southern Vancouver Island share a relatively common pattern of long, dry summers 

and warm, wet winters. The response of many plants to that pattern is to go into some form 

of resting state in the hottest, driest part of the year. Seeds rest on the soil and many of them 

germinate in fall as rains begin and while temperatures are still warm enough for growth. Bulbs, 

corms, and rhizomes rest below the surface, insulated from the heat by a blanket of soil, until fall 

rain spurs them into new root growth. Some bulbs move themselves down into the soil to a point 

where temperature and moisture levels remain relatively constant. 

Extending the pre-drought growing season, adding nutrients, and keeping roots cool can help to 

produce blooming size perennial plants earlier than by following natural growth patterns. The 

tendency of some bulbs to work their way down through the soil to a level where they remain 

cool and slightly moist can be exploited by growing in shallow containers to produce larger bulbs 

sooner. 

For some other plants exploiting their natural tendency to multiply can be used to produce 

moderate numbers of useable size plants faster than growing from seed. 

Camas – Greater and Common (Camassia leichtlinii & C. quamash) 

In nature, camas is reported to take 5 to 7 years to flower from seed. This time can be shortened to 

between 2 and 4 years by taking advantage of their natural growing patterns. 

Left: Camas seed 

germinating in plug 

trays. Photo: City of 

Victoria 

Right: Blooming 

size camas in open 

flats. Photo: City of 

Victoria 



10-55


Much of the time from seed to flower for camas in relatively deep soil sites in our region is the 

time it takes for the bulb to find its proper level in the soil—anywhere from 15 to 30 cm (6" to 12") 

below soil surface. In nature camas seeds germinate in the fall and begin to put a root down. In 

the next spring they put up a leaf and begin to form a bulb during the brief growing season before 

the summer drought sets in. The next fall roots begin to grow again and the small, new bulb 

elongates down into the soil, reaching for the depth that stays cool through the summer. It may 

extend as much as 2 cm (3/4") each year and the energy needed for that limits the increase in the 

size of the bulb until the appropriate depth is reached. 

In the nursery it is possible to grow camas in shallow flats, reducing the energy loss from the 

bulbs working down through the soil. Both Great Camas and Common Camas benefit from being 

sown thickly. Fill normal 25 x 50 cm (10" x 20") plastic plant trays that have some drainage holes 

with a sterile mixture of sharp sand and horticultural peat or sterile potting soil to a depth of 

approximately 4 cm (1 1/2"). Sprinkle freshly collected seeds in late summer over the surface at the 

density that would be appropriate for grass seed: a coverage of about 1 seed per centimeter (per 

1/2"). If seeding must be done later in the season and the seeds are no longer round and smooth, 

they can be moistened by spreading on moist paper towels until they plump. In either case, cover 

them thinly enough with medium grit or forestry sand to still be able to see the seed through the 

cover. Place the flats in a cool, shaded area until rains begin in the fall. Once the rain begins and 

the air cools, germination will begin. Place the flats where they will be exposed to the weather and 

in the sun. Put them on a surface such as large crushed rock or a mesh top bench. If the trays are 

placed on soil or on a flat surface, the camas roots will move out through the drainage holes and 

bulbs will form under the flats. An air gap is essential during the growing season to prevent this. 

The germination rate of camas sown in this way will be very high (close to 100%). 

As soon as leaves begin to show in the following spring, begin to fertilize the camas with a 

balanced, liquid fertilizer (any soluble plant fertilizer with a number like 20-20-20 will do) at 

approximately 1/2 the rate recommended on the label at each watering. Water and fertilize, 

being careful not to overwater, through the summer, moving the flats into partial shade when 

temperatures are at their hottest. The leaves will die down on their own, some weeks later than 

those growing in the wild, and at that time stop watering and put the flats aside in a cool spot to 

wait for the fall rains begin again and restart growth. Repeat the treatment. 

In the summer of the second year, after the leaves have died down and before the rains begin, 

screen the bulbs out of the sand/peat/soil mixture. Some will be the size of grains of rice and 

some the size of peas. Screen or sort the larger bulbs from the rest and plant them into a flat of the 

same mix as before: put a 2 cm (3/4") deep layer of the mix in the bottom of the same kind of plant 

tray and spread the larger bulbs over the surface, about 2 cm apart (3/4"). Cover with another 

2 cm of sand/peat/soil mix and then with a thin layer of grit. Do the same with the smaller bulbs 

but at about 1 cm (1/2") spacing. Once again put them in a cool spot until fall and then continue to 

fertilize and water. Some will bloom in the third summer and most will do so by the fourth. 

Bulbs can be left in the flats for several years as long as they are watered and fertilized during the 

growing season. They should be screened out of their flats during their summer dormancy for 

planting in the following fall. Plant out as soon as the soil is moist more than a few centimetres 

(~1") down but be sure to plant at least 15 cm (6") down—if not you’ll wait a few years before you 

see a bloom as the bulb spends energy finding its preferred depth. 

10-56 



Onions (Allium acuminatum & A. cernuum) 

The onions take 2 to 3 years from seed collected in the 

summer and sown that fall. Like camas, they like to be 

crowded in their pots and their growing season can be 

extended by watering and fertilizing through the dry part of 

early summer. Sow them in the same way as camas, thickly 

in shallow flats, and screen and thin them in their second 

summer. 

If you take the largest bulbs in the second year and pot them 

into 10 cm (4") pots in a good potting soil in clusters of 5 or 6, 

they will begin to divide and multiply on their own, giving you 

a good pot-full after another growing season. 

Harvest Brodiaea (Brodiaea coronaria) 

Harvest Brodiaea take 2 to 3 years to flower from fresh seed 

planted in the fall immediately after collection. They, too, can 

be sown thickly in flats but aren’t as sensitive as camas to soil 

depth—corms will stay relatively near the top of the pot. 

Nodding Onion (Allium cernuum) 

seedlings from a 10 cm pot. Photo: 

City of Victoria 

Pot them on 2 or 3 to a 10 cm (4") pot but not in a clump—separate them and they will spread to 

fill the space. 

Chocolate Lily (Fritillaria affinis) 

Chocolate Lily (Southern Rice-root) will bloom from seed in 3 to 4 years from fresh seed, sown in 

the fall of the year in which it is collected. Sow thickly but not so thick that the flat, papery seeds 

overlap, on the surface of a good, sterile potting soil mixed with about half the volume with sharp 

sand and just cover with a very thin layer of the same mix. Water and fertilize as long as the leaves 

remain green in the spring and summer after sowing and leave them untouched in the flat until 

some begin to flower. 

Left: Chocolate 

Lily (Fritillaria 

affinis) seeds 

germinating 

in a plug tray. 

Photo: City of 

Victoria 

Right: Chocolate 

Lilies blooming 

in propagation 

flats. Photo: City 

of Victoria 



10-57


In the driest part of the summer during flowering, very carefully lift the bulbs out of the mix. The 

largest will have already begun to produce the rice-grain-like bulb scales that give them the name 

‘rice-root’. They are very easily knocked off at this stage. Collect any that have been knocked off 

and replant them in the flat with the smaller, non-flowering bulbs for harvest in the following 

years. Most will have reached flowering size by their fourth growing season. 

A slightly quicker way to grow Chocolate Lily is to harvest the rice-grain bulb scales from large, 

mature plants. Take a Chocolate Lily that is several years old out of its pot and it will have a large 

number of bulb scales around a central bulb. Harvest those scales and sow them like seeds into 

flats of potting soil, just covering them with more soil, and they will reach blooming size at least 

one year ahead of those grown from seed. They can be left in crowded flats for 4 to 5 years but will 

then begin to self-thin—the smallest will die off. 

White Fawn Lily (Erythronium oregonum) 

Fawn Lilies in nature take 4 to 5 years to bloom from seed. Sown in shallow flats, in an equal parts 

sharp sand/peat/soil mixture, and watered and fertilized to extend their growing season, they will 

bloom in 2 to 3 years. 

They should be treated in the same way as camas seed but care should be taken to provide them 

with some shade and to grow them in the coolest spot possible. 

Like camas, they will mature at different rates but, unlike camas, they cannot be left for more than 

3 to 4 years in crowded flats. As soon as some plants begin to grow large and produce multiple 

leaves they will crowd each other out and many of the smaller plants will die. 

Fawn Lily bulbs are more fragile than camas and 

so it is necessary to be gentle in the screening 

process. The bulbs are starchy and so attractive 

to slugs and other creatures in the soil. Care 

must be taken to prevent them from entering 

through the drainage holes in the flats. Fine 

screening is a useful preventative measure. 

Fawn Lily (Erythronium oregonum) seeds germinating 

in a plug tray. Photo: City of Victoria 

Satinflower (Olsynium douglasii) 

Satinflower is fast-growing from seed, flowering 

often in its second year, but the seed is difficult 

to collect as it is flung out from the capsules as 

soon as it ripens. It won’t germinate well unless 

the seed is ripe and so collecting the pods early 

requires sacrificing a part of the stem to ensure 

that there is enough energy for the seeds to 

ripen. 

Satinflower is in the iris family and, like most members of this family, it produces rhizomes that 

are easy to divide. Each grassy stem in a clump can be divided off as a separate plant. The division 

needs to be done while the satinflower is in active growth as the tiny, spider-like rhizomes are very 

hard to find in the soil after they plant goes dormant in early spring. Just after flowering is a good 

time to work on them. Wash the soil off the roots of the clump and tease the individuals apart. Pot 

10-58 



them into individual 10 cm (4") pots in any good potting mix. Fertilize well through the following 

spring, keeping them as cool as possible to extend the season. There should be a new crop of 

divisions by the next season. 

Broad-leaved Shootingstar (Dodecatheon hendersonii) 

The shootingstars are relatively quick from seed—2 to 3 years from fresh seed sown in the fall of 

the year it is collected. 

Seed is the fastest way to propagate shootingstars but if there is some reason to propagate a 

specific plant—for instance if its colour, form, or leaf is exceptional—it can be propagated 

successfully from divisions. Shootingstars are in the primrose family and, like most of the family, 

root divisions with a bud attached will grow well. A mature plant that is growing in rich soil or is 

fertilized well will often divide on its own, producing extra leaf crowns in its second year and more 

in subsequent years. Separating those from the main plant will produce good plants. More can be 

produced by carefully slicing roots with crown buds from around the edge of the original plant. 



10-59


Appendix 10.2 Seed Collection Record Template 

SEED COLLECTION FORM 

Basic Information 

Collection Number: 

Genus and species 

English name 

Date collected 

Collection site name 

Number of seeds 

Extended data 

Subspecies or variety 

Number of plants 

Seed maturity 

Weather at harvest 

Street address/site description 

GIS/Lat.&Long. coordinates 

Slope/Position 

Aspect 

Soil texture 

Soil moisture 

Sun/Shade 

Notes: (Plant community, 

tree cover/species, # of 

plants sampled, seed state, etc.) 

10-60 



Appendix 10.3 Nursery RecordTemplate (full) 

NURSERY SOWING RECORD 

SEED COLLECTION NUMBER: 

Genus & Species: 

English Name: 

Seed Collection Site: 

Seed Year: 

Germination Data 

Number of Seeds: 

Chill Germ %: 

No Chill Germ %: 

Purity %: 

Seed Weight: 

Store Moist %: 

Total Germinants: 




Total Germinants: 

Stratification Data 

Date Received: 

Soak Date: 

Hours Soaked: 

Chill Date: 

Days Chilled: 

Dry Date: 

Seed Treatment (scarify, nick, etc.): 

Problem/Comment: 

(i) 

Sowing Data 

Sowing Date: 

Container: 

Medium: 



10-61

Chill Date: 

Days Chilled: 


Dry Date: 

Seed Treatment (scarify, nick, etc.): 

Problem/Comment: 

Nursery Record Template 

Sowing Data 

Sowing Date: 

Container: 

Medium: 

Sowing method (scatter, place, etc.): 

Density: 

Cover material: 

Cover depth: 

Number sown: 

Seed Grow Location 

Greenhouse/Frame/Outside: 

Exposure/Protection: 

Light/Shade: 

Temperature Range: 

Moisture Regime: 

Fertilizer (type, concentration): 

Post Germination 

Pot up/Re-pot Date: 

Seedling Stage: 

Container: 

Medium: 

Number of Seedlings: 

Mulch: 




(ii) 

Seedling Grow Location 


10-62 Exposure/Protection: Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: Principles and Practices 

Light/Shade:

Seedling Stage: 

Container: 


Medium: 

Number of Seedlings: 

Mulch: 

Appendix 10.4 Nursery Record Template (brief) 




Seedling Grow Location 


Exposure/Protection: 

Light/Shade: 

Temperature Range: 

Moisture Regime: 

Fertilizer (type, concentration): 




Growing Record 

Year 

Potting Date 

Pot Size 

Medium 

Grow Location 

Quantity 

Notes: 



10-63


Appendix 10.5 

List of Garry Oak ecosystem plants and animals used in this publication, 

with REU and propagation method information 

by Brenda Costanzo, with contributions from lead authors 

1. “*” means the species is an invasive alien species; propagation is inappropriate (X) 

2. Propagation methods are for plant species only, and are only for the native species that are 

not federally (SARA) listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern. 

Restoration 

Propagation 

English Name 


Ecosystem Unit 1 

Method 2 

Trees 

Arbutus 


1; 3 

1 

Douglas-fir 


1; 2; 3; 5; 8 

1 

English Holly* 

Ilex aquifolium* 

-- 

X 

European Elm* 

Ulmus spp.* 

-- 

X 


Quercus garryana 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7 

1 

Grand Fir 

Abies grandis 

7; 8 

1; 2.2.3 

Oregon Ash 

Fraxinus latifolia 

2 

1; 2.2.3 

Seaside Juniper 

Juniperus maritima 

7 

1; 2.2.2; 2.2.3 

Shore Pine 

Pinus contorta var. contorta 

3; 7 

1; 2.2.3 

Western Hemlock 

Tsuga heterophylla 

8 

1 

Western Redcedar 

Thuja plicata 

8 

1; 2.2.3 

Shrubs/Vines 

Common Hawthorn* 

Crataegus monogyna* 

-- 

X 


Symphoricarpos albus 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7 

1; 2.1.3; 2.2.1; 2.2.2; 

2.2.3; 3; 5.1 

Cotoneaster* 

Cotoneaster spp.* 

-- 

X 

Dull Oregon-grape 


8 

1; 2.1.2; 2.2.1; 2.2.3; 3 

English Ivy* 

Hedera helix* 

-- 

X 

Gorse* 

Ulex europeaus 

-- 

X 

Hairy Honeysuckle 

Lonicera hispidula 

1;3 

1 

Hairy Manzanita 

Arctostaphylos columbiana 3 

1; 2.2 

Himalayan Blackberry* 

Rubus armeniacus* 

-- 

X 

Indian-plum 

Oemleria cerasiformis 

1; 2 

1; 2.2.1; 2.2.2; 2.2.3; 

3; 5.1 

Kinnikinnick 

Arctostaphylos uva-ursi 

3; 7 

1; 2.2 

Mock-orange 

Philadelphus lewisii 

1;2.2.1;2.2.3; 5.1 

Nootka Rose 

Rosa nutkana 

1; 2; 5 

1; 2.1.3; 2.2.3; 5.1 

Oceanspray 


1; 2; 3; 7 

1; 2.2.2; 2.2.3; 3; 5.1 


Toxicodendron diversilobum 3 

1; 2.2.1; 2.2.3 (wear 

protective clothing 

and face masks) 

Red Huckleberry 

Vaccinium parvifolium 

8 

1; 2.2.3 

10-64 Salal Restoring British Columbia’s Gaultheria Garry shallon Oak Ecosystems: 8 Principles and Practices 1; 2.2.2 

Saskatoon 

Amelanchier alnifolia 

7; 8 

1; 2.1.2; 2.1.3; 2.2.1; 

2.2.2; 3; 5.1

Himalayan Blackberry* 

Rubus armeniacus* 

Indian-plum 

Oemleria cerasiformis 

3; 5.1 


Kinnikinnick 

Arctostaphylos uva-ursi 

Mock-orange 

Philadelphus lewisii 

Nootka Rose 

Rosa nutkana 

Oceanspray 



Toxicodendron diversilobum 

Red Huckleberry 

Vaccinium parvifolium 

Salal 

Gaultheria shallon 

Saskatoon 

Amelanchier alnifolia 

Scotch Broom* 

Cytisus scoparius* 

Spurge-laurel* 

Daphne laureola* 

Tall Oregon-grape 

Mahonia aquifolium 

Trailing Blackberry 

Rubus ursinus 

Tree Lupine* 

Lupinus arboreus* 

Western Trumpet 

Lonicera ciliosa 

-- 

X 

1; 2 

3; 7 

1; 2.2.1; 2.2.2; 2.2.3; 

1; 2.2 

1;2.2.1;2.2.3; 5.1 

1; 2; 5 

1; 2.1.3; 2.2.3; 5.1 

1; 2; 3; 7 

1; 2.2.2; 2.2.3; 3; 5.1 

3 

1; 2.2.1; 2.2.3 (wear 

protective clothing 

and face masks) 

8 

1; 2.2.3 

8 

1; 2.2.2 

7; 8 

1; 2.1.2; 2.1.3; 2.2.1; 

2.2.2; 3; 5.1 

-- 

X 

-- 

X 

1; 3; 5; 7 

1; 2.1.2; 2.2.1; 2.2.2; 

2.2.3; 5.1 

3; 5 

1 

-- 

X 

1; 2 

2.2.2 

Forbs 

American Vetch 

Vicia americana 

2 

Barestem Desert-parsley 

Lomatium nudicaule 

5 


Triphysaria versicolor ssp. 5; 6 

versicolor 



1; 3 

Blinks 

Montia fontana 

4; 6 



6 

Bracken Fern 

Pteridium aquilinum 

5; 8 

Broad-leaved Shootingstar Dodecatheon hendersonii 1 

Broad-leaved Stonecrop 

Sedum spathulifolium 

3; 7 

Brook Spike-primrose 


5; 6 

Bull Thistle* 

Cirsium vulgare* 

-- 

Bur Chervil* 

Anthriscus caucalis* 

-- 



5 

California Hedge-parsley 


3; 4 



3 

Camas 

Camassia spp. 

1 

Canada Thistle* 

Cirsium arvense* 

-- 

Carpet Burweed* 

Soliva sessilis* 

1 

Chickweed Monkey Flower Mimulus alsinoides 

4 

Chocolate Lily 

Fritillaria affinis 

2; 4; 5 

Cleavers 

Galium aparine 

1; 2; 3; 5 



6; 7 

Coastal Scouler’s Catchfly 

Silene scouleri ssp. grandis 5 



7; 8 


Githopsis specularioides 

4 

Common Camas 

Camassia quamash 

1; 3; 4; 5 

Common Chickweed* 

Stellaria media* 

1 

Common Vetch* 

Vicia sativa* 

1 

Common Yarrow 

Achillea millefolium 

1; 3; 5 

Creeping Buttercup* 

Ranunculus repens* 

-- 

Cup Clover 


6 

Death-camas 


Part Zigadenus IV Implementing venenosus Restoration 1; 5; 7 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Balsamorhiza Recovery deltoidea Team www.goert.ca/restoration 

1; 3; 5 



5 

densiflorus 

1 

1 

N/A 

N/A 

1 

N/A 

3 

1; 2.1.2 

1; 5.2 

N/A 

X 

X 

N/A 

N/A 

1 

1; 4 

X 

X 

1 

1; 4 

1 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

1 

1; 4 

X 

X 

1; 2.1.2; 3 

X 

1 

1; 4 

N/A 

N/A 

10-65

Cleavers 

Galium aparine 

1; 2; 3; 5 

1 



6; 7 

N/A 

Coastal Scouler’s Catchfly 

Silene scouleri ssp. grandis 5 

N/A 




7; 8 

N/A 


Common Camas 

Common Chickweed* 

Common Vetch* 

Common Yarrow 

Creeping Buttercup* 

Cup Clover 

Death-camas 




Dwarf Owl-clover 



English Daisy* 



Fern-leaved Desert-parsley 

Field Chickweed 

Fool’s Onion 



Goldback Fern 


Grass Peavine* 

Grassland Saxifrage 


Great Camas 

Hairy Cat’s-ear* 

Hairy Hawk-bit* 

Harvest Brodiaea 

Hawksbeard* 

Heterocodon 

Hooded Ladies’ Tresses 

Hooker’s Onion 

English Howell’s Name Triteleia 


Githopsis specularioides 

Camassia quamash 

Stellaria media* 

Vicia sativa* 

Achillea millefolium 

Ranunculus repens* 


Zigadenus venenosus 



densiflorus 


Triphysaria pusilla 



Bellis perennis* 

Crassula connata var. connata 

Clarkia amoena var. lindleyi 

Lomatium dissectum var. 

dissectum 

Cerastium arvense 

Triteleia hyacinthina 


Allium geyeri var. tenerum 

Pentagramma triangularis 


Lathyrus sphaericus* 

Saxifraga integrifolia 


Camassia leichtlinii 

Hypochaeris radicata* 

Leontodon taraxacoides* 

Brodiaea coronaria 

Crepis spp.* 


Spiranthes romanzoffiana 

Allium acuminatum 

Triteleia Scientific howellii Name 


4 

1; 3; 4; 5 

1 

1 

1; 3; 5 

-- 

6 

1; 5; 7 

1; 3; 5 

5 

2; 5; 6 

6 

6 

5 

1 

5 

5 

3; 5 

5 

4 

5; 6; 7 

5 

1; 3 

5 

-- 

4 

3 

2 

1 

1 

1; 4 

1 

4; 5 

6 

5Restoration 

5Ecosystem Unit 1 

5 

1 

1; 4 

X 

X 

1; 2.1.2; 3 

X 

1 

1; 4 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

1 

N/A 

1 

X 

N/A 

1 

N/A 

1 

1; 4 

N/A 

1; 4 

spores 

N/A 

X 

1 

N/A 

1; 4 

X 

X 

1; 4 

X 

1 

1; 2.1.2 

Propagation 

1; 4 

Method N/A 

1; 3; 5.2 

Jeffrey’s Shootingstar 

Lace Fern 

Large-flowered Blue-eyed Mary 

Licorice Fern 

Lindley’s Microseris 

Little Chickweed* 

Little Hop-clover* 


Long-spurred Plectritis 

Lowland Cudweed 

Macoun’s Groundsel 


Dodecatheon jeffreyi 

Cheilanthes gracillima 

Collinsia grandiflora 

Polypodium glycyrrhiza 

Microseris lindleyi 

Cerastium glomeratum* 

Trifolium dubium* 


Plectritis macrocera 

Gnaphalium palustre 

Senecio macounii 


2; 5; 7 

3 

3; 4 

1; 2 

3 

-- 

1 

6 

6 

5; 6 

3 

6 

1;2.1.2 

spores 

1 

3 

N/A 

X 

X 

N/A 

1 

1 

1 

N/A 

10-66 



7 

1 


Manroot 


7; 8 

N/A 

Menzies' Larkspur 

Miner’s Lettuce 

Delphinium menziesii 

Claytonia perfoliata 

1; 7 

1 

1 

1

Large-flowered Blue-eyed Mary Collinsia grandiflora 

Licorice Fern 

Polypodium glycyrrhiza 

Microseris lindleyi 

3 

N/A 


Lindley’s Microseris 

Little Chickweed* 

Cerastium glomeratum* 

Little Hop-clover* 

Trifolium dubium* 



Long-spurred Plectritis 

Plectritis macrocera 

Lowland Cudweed 

Gnaphalium palustre 

Macoun’s Groundsel 

Senecio macounii 





Manroot 


Menzies' Larkspur 

Delphinium menziesii 

Miner’s Lettuce 

Claytonia perfoliata 

Mountain Sneezeweed 

Helenium autumnale var. 

grandiflorum 


Centaurium muehlenbergii 

Narrow-leaved Montia 

Montia linearis 

Needle-leaved Navarretia 


Nodding Onion 

Allium cernuum 



Olympic Onion 

Allium crenulatum 

Oregon Lupine 

Lupinus oreganus var. kincaidii 

Oxeye Daisy* 

Leucanthemum vulgare* 

Pacific Sanicle 

Sanicula crassicaulis 

Pearly Everlasting 

Anaphalis margaritacea 

Pine Broomrape 

Orobanche pinorum 


Trifolium depauperatum var. 

depauperatum 


Lupinus lepidus var. lepidus 

Pretty Shootingstar 

Dodecatheon pulchellum 

Puget Sound Gumweed 

Grindelia stricta 



Pygmyweed 


Ribwort Plantain* 

Plantago lanceolata* 


Orthocarpus bracteosus 

Rough-leaved Aster 

Eurybia radulina (Aster 

radulinus) 

Satinflower 

Olysinium douglasii 

Scalepod 


Scouler’s Popcornflower 

Plagiobothrys scouleri 

Sea Blush 

Plectritis congesta 

Seaside Birds-foot Lotus 





Psilocarphus tenellus var. 

tenellus 



Small-flowered Alumroot 

Heuchera micrantha 

Small-flowered Birds-foot 

Lotus micranthus 

3; 4 

1 

1; 2 

-- 

1 

X 

6 

N/A 

6 

1 

5; 6 

1 

3 

1 

6 

N/A 

7 

1 

7; 8 

N/A 

1; 7 

1 

1 

1 

5 

1; 3 

5; 6 

N/A 

4 

1 

5 & 6 

1 

7 

1; 4 

6 

N/A 

3 

1; 4 

5 

N/A 

1 

X 

5; 7 

1 

5 

1; 3 

3 

1 

5 

1 

3 

N/A 

5 

1; 2.1.2 

5; 6; 7 

1 

5 

N/A 

6 

5.2 

-- 

X 

6 

N/A 

3 

1; 2.1.2; 3 

3 

1; 3 

5 

1 

6 

1 

1; 3; 7 

1 

5 

N/A 

5 

N/A 

6 

N/A 

5 

1; 4 

7 

1; 3 

3 

1 

Trefoil 

Small-flowered Blue-eyed Mary Collinsia parviflora 

3 

1 

Small-flowered Catchfly* 

Silene gallica* 

-- 

X 



5 

1 

quadrivulnera 



3 

N/A 

Small-fruited Parsley-piert* Part Aphanes IV Implementing occidentalis* Restoration -- 

X 

Small-leaved Montia Garry Oak Ecosystems Montia parvifolia Recovery Team www.goert.ca/restoration 

4 

1 


Madia minima 

3 

1 

3 

X 

10-67


Psilocarphus tenellus var. 

tenellus 


5 

1; 4 



Small-flowered Alumroot 

Heuchera micrantha 

Small-flowered Birds-foot 

Lotus micranthus 

Trefoil 

Small-flowered Blue-eyed Mary Collinsia parviflora 

Small-flowered Catchfly* 

Silene gallica* 



quadrivulnera 



Small-fruited Parsley-piert* Aphanes occidentalis* 

Small-leaved Montia 

Montia parvifolia 


Madia minima 

Small-headed Clover 

Trifolium microcephalum 

Smooth Fringecup 

Lithophragma glabrum 





unifoliolatus 

Spring Gold 

Lomatium utriculatum 

Sword Fern 

Polystichum munitum 

Stonecrop 

Sedum spp. 

Strawberry 

Fragaria spp. 




Nuttallanthus texanus 

Thistle* 

Cirsium spp.* 

Thrift 

Armeria maritima 

Tiny Mousetail 

Myosurus minimus 

Tiny Vetch* 

Vicia hirsuta* 

Tomcat Clover 

Trifolium willdenowii 


Castilleja victoriae (old name: C. 

ambigua ssp. ambigua) 

Wall Speedwell* 

Veronica arvensis* 



Water-starwort 

Callitriche spp. 

Water-plantain Buttercup 

Ranunculus alismifolius var. 

alismifolius 

Western Buttercup 

Ranunculus occidentalis 

White Fawn Lily 

Erythronium oregonum 





White-tipped Clover 

Trifolium variegatum 


Sericocarpus rigidus (old name: 

Aster curtus) 

Wild Strawberry 


Woolly Sunflower 

Eriophyllum lanatum 

Winged Water-starwort 


Yellow Monkey-flower 

Mimulus guttatus 


Viola praemorsa ssp. praemorsa 

6 

N/A 

7 

1; 3 

3 

1 

3 

1 

-- 

X 

5 

1 

3 

N/A 

-- 

X 

4 

1 

3 

1 

1 

1 

4 

1 

6 

N/A 

5 

1 

1 

1 

8 

3 

3; 7 

1; 2.1.1; 5.2 

5; 7 

1; 3 

3; 6 

N/A 

3; 5 

1 

-- 

X 

6 

3 

6 

1 

-- 

X 

4 

1 

6 

N/A 

-- 

X 

3; 7 

2.1.1; 4 

5; 6 

1 

6 

N/A 

1 

1; 2.1.2; 3 

1; 2 

1; 4 

5 

N/A 

1; 8 

1 

5; 6 

1 

2; 3 

N/A 

5; 7 

3 

3; 5 

1; 2.1.1; 2.1.2 

5; 6 

N/A 

6 

1; 2.1.1 

5 

N/A 

Graminoids/Sedges/Rushes 

Alaska Oniongrass 

Melica subulata 

1; 8 

1; 3 

Alaska Brome 

Bromus sitchensis 

7 

1; 3 

Barren Brome* 

Bromus sterilis* 

-- 

X 

Barren Fescue* 

Vulpia bromoides* 

-- 

X 

10-68 Blue Wildrye 


1; 2; 3; 5 

1; 3 




1; 2; 3 

1 

California Oatgrass 

Danthonia californica 

1; 5 

1 

Poa compressa* 

-- 

X

Wild Strawberry 

Aster curtus) 


Eriophyllum lanatum 

3; 5 


Woolly Sunflower 

Winged Water-starwort 


Yellow Monkey-flower 

Mimulus guttatus 


Viola praemorsa ssp. praemorsa 

5; 7 

5; 6 

3 

1; 2.1.1; 2.1.2 

N/A 

6 

1; 2.1.1 

5 

N/A 

Graminoids/Sedges/Rushes 

Alaska Oniongrass 

Alaska Brome 

Barren Brome* 

Barren Fescue* 

Blue Wildrye 


California Oatgrass 

Canada Bluegrass* 

Carolina Meadow-foxtail 

Creeping Bentgrass* 

Cheatgrass* 

Colonial English Name Bentgrass* 

Columbia Brome 

Common Timothy* 

Common Velvet-grass* 



Early Hairgrass* 



Hedgehog Dogtail* 

Junegrass 


Kentucky Bluegrass* 

Long-stoloned Sedge 

Many-flowered Wood-rush 

Meadow Foxtail* 

Orchard-grass* 

Pacific Woodrush 

Perennial Ryegrass* 

Red Fescue 3 

Poverty Oatgrass 

Ripgut Brome* 



Silver Hairgrass* 

Soft Brome* 

Sweet Vernalgrass* 

Toad Rush 

Tufted Hairgrass 

Western Rush 

Melica subulata 

Bromus sitchensis 

Bromus sterilis* 

Vulpia bromoides* 



Danthonia californica 

Poa compressa* 

Alopecurus carolinianus 

Agrostis stolonifera* 

Bromus tectorum* 

Agrostis Scientific capillaris* Name 

Bromus vulgaris 

Phleum pratense* 

Holcus lanatus* 



Aira praecox 


Carex feta 

Cynosurus echinatus* 



Poa pratensis* 

Carex inops ssp. inops 

Luzula multiflora 

Alopecurus pratensis 

Dactylis glomerata* 

Luzula comosa 

Lolium perenne* 

Festuca rubra 

Danthonia spicata 

Bromus rigidus* 

Festuca roemeri 


Aira caryophyllea* 

Bromus hordeaceus* 

Anthoxanthum odoratum* 

Juncus bufonius 

Deschampsia cespitosa 


1; 8 

7 

-- 

-- 

1; 2; 3; 5 

1; 2; 3 

1; 5 

-- 

5 

-- 

Restoration 

-- 

Ecosystem -- Unit 1 

1 

1; 2; 5; 7 

-- 

4 

5 

-- 

5 

5; 6 

-- 

1 

5; 6 

-- 

1; 2; 7 

1; 3 

1; 2; 5; 7 

-- 

5 

-- 

5; 7 

3; 

-- 

1; 3; 7 

2(?); 5 (?); 6 

-- 

-- 

-- 

6 

5 

5; 6 

1; 3 

1; 3 

X 

X 

1; 3 

1 

1 

X 

1 

X 

Propagation 

X 

Method X 2 

1; 3 

X 

X 

1 

1 

X 

N/A 

1 

X 

1; 3 

N/A 

X 

1; 2.1.3; 3 

1 

X 

X 

1; 3 

X 

1; 3 

1; 3 

X 

1; 3 

1 

X 

X 

X 

1 

1; 3 

1 

Mosses 

Red Bryum 

Bryum miniatum 

4 


Entosthodon fascicularis 

3 

Broom Moss 


3; 7 

Electrified Cat’s-tail Moss 

Rhytidiadelphus triquetris 2; 8 

Flat Moss 

Grey Rock-moss 

Part Plagiothecium IV Implementing undulatum Restoration 8 

Garry Oak Ecosystems Racomitrium Recovery spp. Team www.goert.ca/restoration 

1; 3; 4 

Juniper Hairy-cap Moss 

Polytrichum juniperum 

1; 3 

N/A 

N/A 

? 

? 

? 

? 

10-69

Silver Hairgrass* 

Aira caryophyllea* 

Soft Brome* 

Bromus hordeaceus* 

Anthoxanthum odoratum* -- 

X 


Sweet Vernalgrass* 

Toad Rush 

Juncus bufonius 

Tufted Hairgrass 

Deschampsia cespitosa 

Western Rush 


-- 

X 

-- 

6 

5 

1; 3 

5; 6 

1 

X 

1 

Mosses 

Red Bryum 


Broom Moss 

Electrified Cat’s-tail Moss 

Flat Moss 

Grey Rock-moss 

Juniper Hairy-cap Moss 

Lanky Moss 

Oregon Beaked Moss 


Small Flat Moss 

Step Moss 


FUNGI 

Ascomycota 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

Oak Leaf Curl 

Bryum miniatum 

Entosthodon fascicularis 


Rhytidiadelphus triquetris 

Plagiothecium undulatum 

Racomitrium spp. 

Polytrichum juniperum 

Polytrichum piliferum 

Rhytidiadelphus loreus 

Kindbergia oregana 


Pseudotaxiphyllum elegans 

Hylocomium splendens 

Syntrichia laevipila (old name: 

Tortula laevipila) 

Syntrichia ruralis (old name: 

Tortula ruralis) 

Coccomyces arbutifolius 

Coccomyces quadratus 

Cytospora spp. 

Diplodia maculata 

Erysiphe graminis 

Fusicoccum arbuti 

Hyponectria lonicerae 

Lophodermium cladophylum 

Microsphaera berberidis 

Microsphaera penicillata 

Taphrina caerulescens 

4 

3 

3; 7 

2; 8 

8 

1; 3; 4 

1; 3 

3 (?) 

8 

8 

3 

8 

8 

1; 2 

1; 2 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

N/A 

N/A 

? 

? 

? 

? 

? 

? 

? 

N/A 

? 

? 

N/A 

? 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

Basidiomycota 

Armillaria Root Disease 

Armillaria gallica 

Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 

Hericium erinaceus 

Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 

Phragmidium rosae-californicae Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

None 

Pucciniastrum goeppertianum Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 

10-70 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 


None 

Uromyces heterodermus Unknown 

N/A 

None 


Unknown 

N/A

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 


Unknown 

N/A 



Unknown 

N/A 



Unknown 

Unknown 

N/A 

N/A 

Phragmidium rosae-californicae 





Pucciniastrum goeppertianum 



Uromyces heterodermus 


Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

Birds 


Barn Owl 



Horned Lark, 




population) 

Northern Pygmy Owl, 




Purple Martin 


Vesper Sparrow, 

affinis subspecies 



population 



Yellow-billed Cuckoo 

Columba fasciata (Patagioenas 

fasciata) 

Tyto alba 


Eremophila alpestris strigata 


Glaucidium gnoma swarthy 

Falco peregrinus anatum 

Progne subis 

Asio flammeus 

Pooecetes gramineus affinis 


Megascops kennicottii kennicottii 

(Otus kennicottii kennicottii) 


8 

1; 2 

1; 5 

5 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7; 8 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7; 8 

7 

Unknown 

1 

3 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7 

8 

Extirpated species 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

Insects (non butterfly) 

Blue Dasher 

English Name 

Black Slug* 

Pachydiplax longipennis 


Arion ater* 

Restoration 

Unknown 

Ecosystem Unit 1 

Propagation 

N/A 

Method 2 


Jumping Gall Wasp* 

(leaf bug) 

Oak Leaf Phylloxera* 

(plant bug) 

(robber fly) 

(robber fly) 

(scentless plant bug) 

(seed bug) 

(shield-backed bug) 


Butterflies 



Neuroterous saltitrius* 

Ceratocapsus downesi 

Phylloxera glabra* 

Clivenema fusca 

Nicocles rufus 

Scleropogon bradleyi 

Harmostes dorsalis 

Scolopostethus tropicus 

Camirus porosus 


Unknown 




3 

-- 

Unknown 

-- 

Unknown 

1; 2; 5; 8??? 

3 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

Unknown 

N/A 

X 

N/A 

X 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

10-71



Jumping Gall Wasp* 

Neuroterous saltitrius* 

Ceratocapsus downesi 

Unknown 

N/A 


(leaf bug) 

Oak Leaf Phylloxera* 

Phylloxera glabra* 

(plant bug) 

Clivenema fusca 

(robber fly) 

Nicocles rufus 

(robber fly) 

Scleropogon bradleyi 

(scentless plant bug) 

Harmostes dorsalis 

(seed bug) 

Scolopostethus tropicus 

(shield-backed bug) 

Camirus porosus 



3 

N/A 

-- 

-- 

Unknown 

N/A 

1; 2; 5; 8??? 

N/A 

3 

N/A 

Unknown 

N/A 

Unknown 

N/A 

Unknown 

N/A 

Unknown 

N/A 

X 

X 

Butterflies 




Cabbage White* 

Common Ringlet, insulana 

subspecies 

Common Woodnymph, incana 

subspecies 

Dun Skipper 

European Skipper* 

Great Arctic 

Gypsy Moth* 

Island Blue 



Large Yellow Underwing* 

Lesser Yellow Underwing* 

Moss’ Elfin, mossii subspecies 



Western Branded Skipper, 

oregonia subspecies 


Georgia Depression population 


Winter Moth* 

Zerene Fritillary, bremnerii 

subspecies 


Icaricia icariodes blackmorei 

(Plebejus icarioides blackmorei) 

Pieris rapae* 

Coenonympha california 

insulana (Coenonympha tullia 

insulana) 



Thymelicus lineola* 


Lymantria dispar* 

Plebejus saepiolus insulanus 

Euchloe ausonides insulanus 

Noctua pronuba* 

Noctua comes* 


(Callophrys mossii mossii) 


Euphydryas editha taylori 

Hesperia colorado oregonia 

Sturnella neglecta pop. 1 


Operophtera brumata* 

Speyeria zerene bremnerii 

Unknown 

4? 

-- 

5; 7 

5; 7 

4?; 6? 

-- 

3 

-- 

4?; 6? 

1; 2 

-- 

-- 

3 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7 

5 

5; 7 

1 

3 

-- 

3 

N/A 

N/A 

X 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

X 

N/A 

X 

N/A 

N/A 

X 

X 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

X 

N/A 

Mammals 

Columbian Black-tailed Deer 

Eastern Cottontail* 

Eastern Grey Squirrel* 

Ermine, anguinae subspecies 

European Rabbit* 

Roosevelt Elk 

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat 

Odocoileus hemionus 

columbianus 

Sylvilagus floridanus* 

Sciurus carolinensis 

Mustela erminea anguinae 

Oryctolagus cuniculus 

Cervus canadensis roosevelti 

Corynorhinus townsendii 

1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8 

5 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7 

8? 

-- 

1; 2; 8? 

1; 3 

N/A 

X 

X 

N/A 

X 

N/A 

N/A 

Reptiles 

10-72 Gopher Snake, 

Pituophis catenifer catenifer Extirpated species N/A 




Contia tenuis 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7; 8 

N/A

Mammals 

Columbian Black-tailed Deer 

Odocoileus hemionus 

columbianus 


Eastern Cottontail* 

Sylvilagus floridanus* 

Eastern Grey Squirrel* 

Sciurus carolinensis 

Ermine, anguinae subspecies Mustela erminea anguinae 

European Rabbit* 

Oryctolagus cuniculus 

Roosevelt Elk 

Cervus canadensis roosevelti 

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat 

Corynorhinus townsendii 

1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8 

5 

N/A 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7 

X 

8? 

N/A 

-- 

X 

1; 2; 8? 

N/A 

1; 3 

N/A 

X 

Reptiles 

Gopher Snake, 



Pituophis catenifer catenifer 

Contia tenuis 

Extirpated species 

1; 2; 3; 5; 7; 8 

N/A 

N/A 

1 Refer to list of Restoration Ecosystem Units in Table 2.2 in Chapter 2: Distribution and Description 

2 For vascular plants, refer to “Key to Propagation Methods” below 

3 There are both native and introduced forms of Red Fescue. 

Key to Propagation Methods 

1. Seed 

2. Vegetative Propagation 

2.1 Herbaceous cuttings – tip, root and rhizomes 

2.1.1 Tip cuttings 

2.1.2 Root cuttings 

2.1.3 Rhizome cuttings 

2.2 Stem cuttings – softwood, semi-ripe and hardwood cuttings 

2.2.1 Softwood cuttings 

2.2.2 Semi hardwood cuttings 

2.2.3 Hardwood cuttings 

3. Division of herbaceous perennials and shrubs 

4. Division of bulbous perennials 

5. Other methods 

5.1 Suckers 

5.2 Leaf petiole cuttings 



10-73


References for English and Scientific Names 

Plants 

Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification Program. British Columbia plant species codes and 

selected attributes: version 6. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hre/becweb/resources/codes-standards/ 

standards-species.html (Accessed 2011). 

Birds 

American Ornithologists Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh 

edition. American Ornithologists’ Union. Washington, D.C. http://www.aou.org/checklist/ 

north (Accessed 2011). 

BC Species and Ecosystems Explorer. www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/toolintro.html (Accessed 2011). 

Amphibians and reptiles 

Center for North American Herpetology. www.cnah.org/index.asp (Accessed 2011). 

Invertebrates 

Butterflies 

Opler and Warren 2003. Butterflies of North America. 2. Scientific Names List for Butterfly 

Species of North America, north of Mexico. www.biology.ualberta.ca/old_site/uasm/ 

Opler&Warren.pdf (Accessed 2011). 

Flies 

Cannings, R.A. 1994. Robber Flies (Diptera: Asilidae) new to Canada, British Columbia, 

Yukon, and the Northwest Territories with notes on distribution and habitat. Journal of the 

Entomological Society of British Columbia. 91, pp. 19-26. 

Robberflies 

Cannings, R.A. 2009. A checklist of the robber flies (Diptera: Asilidae) of British Columbia. www. 

royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/Natural_History/Insects-and-Relatives.aspx?id=2435 (Accessed 2011). 

True bugs 

Maw, H.E.L., R.G. Foottit, K.G.A. Hamilton and G.G.E. Scudder. 2000. Checklist of the Hemiptera 

of Canada and Alaska. NRC Research Press, Ottawa. 220 pp.; For North America see: Henry, 

T.J. and R.C. Froeschner (eds.). 1988. Catalog of the Heteroptera, or True Bugs of Canada and 

the Continental United States. E.J. Brill, Leiden. 

Fungi 

Index Fungorum. www.indexfungorum.org/index.htm (Accessed 2011). 

10-74 


Chapter 11 Conclusion and Glossary 





Chapter 11 

Conclusion and Glossary 

Part V Conclusion and Glossary 


11-1


11-2 



Chapter 11 

Conclusion 

Brittany Dewar, GOERT co-op student, cuts Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) out of the vicinity of rare plants. 

Photo: Chris Junck 

Garry Oak ecosystems are among the rarest in Canada, and because the area 

that they occupy continues to decline, their loss adversely affects many animal 

and plant species. In addition, the loss of these beautiful ecosystems has 

degraded quality of life for many people. While the need for restoration of 

Garry Oak ecosystems is urgent, caution is warranted. Before the restoration 

process can be initiated, an understanding (to the extent possible) must 

be gained regarding the ecosystem, the species that it supports, and the 

associated natural processes. This knowledge can then be used to create a 

clear and consensus-based restoration plan. 

Garry Oak (Quercus garryana), or Oregon White Oak, is restricted to the 

western portion of North America, generally along the Pacific coast. In British 

Columbia, the natural extent of Garry Oak and associated ecosystems has 

been greatly reduced due to agricultural and urban development. Garry Oak 


ecosystems are 

among the rarest 

in Canada, and 

because the area 

that they occupy 

continues to 

decline, their loss 

adversely affects 

many animal and 

plant species. 



11-3


ecosystem plant communities in B.C. include Garry Oak woodlands, maritime meadows, vernal 

pools, vernal seeps, coastal bluffs, and Douglas-fir plant communities. Several authors have 

described ecosystem classification of Garry Oak in B.C.; however, not all plant communities in 

associated ecosystems have been classified. In this publication, Restoration Ecosystem Units 

were developed to help restoration practitioners create new plant communities on sites that no 

longer have a significant cover of native flora. These units provide information that can be used at 

a broad scale; for further details, the other classification systems can be referenced (e.g., Roemer 

1972, Erickson 1998). As well, successional information can be used to determine which vegetation 

communities or stages could occur on the site that is undergoing restoration. Various successional 

stages often exist in mosaics across the landscape, depending on disturbance history. Because 

Garry Oak communities are dynamic, considering processes and stages of succession can shed 

much light on the restoration process for these ecosystems. 

Dynamic natural processes and disturbances such as fire, disease, herbivory, and climate 

change are important to consider when restoring a Garry Oak ecosystem site. The first step 

towards integrating natural processes and disturbances into restoration is to understand the 

processes that affected the site historically, and those that are currently occurring. Since the 

present conditions and community composition differ from the historical state, re-introducing 

disturbance may not produce the desired restoration results. Garry Oak ecosystems are defined 

largely by their open savannah structure, which historically was maintained by a variety of 

disturbances, including fire, harvesting of bulbs, disease, weather events, and environmental 

conditions. Tree and shrub encroachment on deeper soil Garry Oak habitat in Canada has been 

linked to a disruption in the historical fire regime, which has led to an increase in Garry Oak and 

Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) trees, and both native and introduced shrubs. However, reintroducing 

fire will not produce the same results as it would have historically because the current 

conditions and plant community composition are different. Understanding the important role 

of natural processes and disturbances will improve the success of your project by helping you 

develop a restoration goal that is well-suited to the site and its conditions. 

Long-term commitment and planning are required for all ecological restoration. This 

maxim is especially true when restoration efforts could affect species or ecosystems at risk. 

Species at risk, where present on federal lands, are protected under the federal Species at Risk 

Act (SARA). Although the Province of British Columbia provides some protection, no single 

piece of legislation protects species at risk or their habitats. Municipal or regional government 

legislation for the protection of species at risk may also exist. Permits are likely required when 

conducting work in the vicinity of species at risk. Expert advice should be obtained from a 

qualified specialist when planning any restoration project. A detailed species inventory should 

be conducted and completed by a qualified biologist. All threats to the rare species or ecosystems, 

and other special considerations (e.g., natural limitations on the species) should be identified. 

Moreover, species and/or ecosystem monitoring protocols should be considered right from the 

planning stage and should reflect the goals of the restoration project. Restoration goals should 

fit with the long-term goals and/or objectives of the recovery strategy for the species. Recovery 

actions should include mitigating threats to the species and to suitable available habitat. 

Every restoration project can benefit from having a plan; a restoration plan is essential for 

medium- to large-scale projects. To be effective, a restoration plan needs to be developed before 

any on-the-ground work is performed but after the goal is identified. This allows time to fully 

11-4 



establish the context, goals, and objectives for the site in consultation with any interested parties. 

Setting clear and realistic goals for the restoration project is essential for success because 

these goals will set the direction for the project. Once the direction is established, information 

about the site should be gathered through site inventories. The data collected during these 

inventories will inform the next stage of restoration planning: writing the plan. The plan will serve 

as the basis for further discussion with any interested parties. There may be further refinements 

prior to conducting on-the-ground work. The restoration plan will consist of a list of goals, 

objectives, and tasks to be carried out; a schedule; a budget; and a monitoring plan. Once 

the restoration plan is written and agreed upon, the on-the-ground work can begin with clear 

direction. 

Successful restoration depends on the support and values of the public and community. A 

project that includes the community in its vision, goals, and objectives from the start is much 

more likely to have success and long-term stability. The benefits of public involvement are many: 

stewardship, funding, volunteers, environmental education opportunities, efforts on adjacent 

properties. To capitalize on this involvement, it is important to build a strong communications/ 

outreach strategy into the restoration plan from the very beginning. In preparing this strategy, 

you must carefully consider the desired and possible level of public participation; do not offer 

participation opportunities you are not prepared to follow up on. Once the level of participation 

has been decided upon, there are a variety of tools and approaches to use in gaining that 

participation. Engaging youth is particularly important because restoration is a long-term 

process which must involve the next generation. It is important to celebrate successes because 

this reaffirms the reasons for conducting the restoration and builds strong community support, 

which is essential to the long-term success of the project. 

Inventory and monitoring are other keys to long-term success in restoring Garry Oak 

ecosystems. Inventory documents the current status of a site and identifies what species are 

present and their abundance. Inventory is also the essential first step in the monitoring process: 

without a baseline, change cannot be measured. Inventory is important for characterizing 

reference ecosystems, which allows the specification of restoration targets and assessing 

restoration progress. Monitoring is the process of making repeated measurements of habitat 

metrics to detect change over time; this data allows progress to be measured and is the 

foundation of adaptive management. Four key principles guide inventory and monitoring: (1) 

setting clear objectives, (2) ensuring reliability, (3) matching effort with outcomes, and (4) 

adopting an ecosystem-based approach. 

Ecological restoration is the process of assisting the recovery of ecosystems that have been 

degraded, damaged, or destroyed. How can we assist the recovery of Garry Oak ecosystems? The 

first step in the development of an effective restoration plan is to determine the factors that 

have caused, or continue to cause, the degradation or damage. In simple cases, this might entail 

removal of alien invasive species. However, most Garry Oak sites are suffering from a variety 

of degrading elements: in particular, the loss of fire used in the traditional management of 

these ecosystems has had a profound effect. Some alien invasive species may have changed soil 

chemistry and micro-biota. Creating conditions that reverse these changes can be difficult. In 

fact, even identifying all of the ecological, social, and cultural attributes that have contributed to 

the development of Garry Oak ecosystems can be difficult. However, recognizing that there is a 

variety of elements that influence these ecosystems, and that these elements may change across 



11-5


a site, allows us to establish restoration treatments that re-create the conditions that initially 

allowed these ecosystems to develop. 

We hope that this 

will be a living 

document that 

is updated with 

new information 

as the practice 


within Garry Oak 


ecosystems 

continues. 

With the increase in international trade, world travel, and a changing 

climate, new alien species will continue to enter Garry Oak ecosystems. The 

management of alien invasive species in Garry Oak ecosystems tends to 

revolve around alien invasive plants; however, alien species consist of a wide 

variety of organisms. Alien invasive species management strategies focus 

on preventing the introduction of such species, early detection of newly 

introduced alien species, developing a rapid response to eliminate these 

species, and managing those species that become established. 

Obtaining appropriate native species for restoration can be challenging 

because many species may not be available. Maintenance of genetic 

integrity is important when planning the restoration project, and ethical 

guidelines are available for collecting native plant materials. Most native 

plant species can be propagated readily through either standard sexual or 

asexual propagation methods, and with enough lead time, will be ready for 

outplanting on the restoration site in less than a year or two. Along with the 

establishment of production schedules, overall record keeping is an important aspect of species 

propagation and supply. Record-keeping should begin at the initial collection stage, and continue 

through all growing phases to outplanting and afterwards for monitoring of the success of the 

restoration project. 

This publication is meant to be a comprehensive, clear, and reliable source of information 

that will assist restoration practitioners in the process of restoring Garry Oak ecosystems. It is 

intended to provide a synthesis of current knowledge and practice that will contribute to the 

successful restoration of these endangered ecosystems. However, restoration is large field of study 

which is rapidly growing and quickly evolving; therefore, no document can cover all topics or 

remain current for long. We hope that this will be a living document that is updated with new 

information as the practice of restoration within Garry Oak and associated ecosystems continues. 

We can all make a difference! Let us know how your restoration project has progressed, how this 

publication has assisted you in your project, and how it could be improved (send an email to 

info@goert.ca). 

References 

Erickson, W. 1998. Garry Oak (Quercus garryana) plant communities and ecosystems in 

southwestern British Columbia. BC Ministry of Forests, Range Section, Victoria, B.C. 

www.for.gov.bc.ca/hre/becweb/resources/classificationreports/garryoak/index.html. 


Ph.D. Thesis, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/library/documents/ 

bib1024.pdf. 

11-6 



Partial Glossary of Terms as used in this Publication 

Acclimation: physiological adaptation of plant material to a new climate or environment 

Adaptive management: a problem-solving approach which takes existing knowledge, 

explores alternatives, makes predictions of their outcomes, selects actions to implement, 

and monitors to determine if the outcomes match the predictions; these results are then 

used as a learning exercise and a basis to adjust future management plans and policy. 

Adjacency arrangements: configuration of a patch of habitat and its adjoining elements 

Aftercare: any cultivation requirements such as watering or fertilizing once young plants or 

seedlings have been removed from their growing containers and planted in the ground 

Agro-forestry: land-use involving the integrated production of trees, other forest plants, 

agricultural crops, and animals, usually in a manner compatible with the cultural patterns 

of the local population 

Agronomic: pertaining to agriculture 

Airflow: speed of air over a surface 

Alien species: species that have been moved outside of their natural home range (= nonindigenous 

species) 

Allele: a discrete form of a gene due to a mutation 

Anthropogenic: caused by humans 

Apical meristem: a meristem is the tissue in most plants consisting of undifferentiated cells 

(meristematic cells), found in zones of the plant where growth can take place. An apical 

meristem is in the buds and growing tips of roots in plants. Its main function is to begin 

growth of new cells in young seedlings at the tips of roots and shoots (forming buds, 

among other things). 

Asexual [propagation]: propagation of plants or animals without a sexual phase. For plants, 

vegetative method of propagating by non-sexual means and from a single parent that 

does not involve the exchange of genetic material, e.g., cuttings or division. 

Aspect: facing in a particular direction 

Autecology: the study of relationships of individual organisms or species to environmental 

conditions 

Axil [leaf]: angle formed by a main stem and the leaf that is borne on it 

Ballast water: water taken on by ships and used for stability during a voyage, usually purged 

upon reaching destination 

Basal plate: bottom part of a bulb (base of the modified stems) that growth originates from 

Baseline study / survey: an inventory of the flora, fauna, and other components of a site’s 

ecosystems before a project begins, to serve as a benchmark against which trends and 

changes in the site’s characteristics can be measured 

Basidiocarp: fruiting body with basidia (clublike structure that produces spores) in fungi 

belonging to the family Basidiomycotina 

Bedrock: solid rock, either exposed at the land surface or underlying surficial deposits 



11-7


Best Management Practices [BMPs]: methods, measures, or practices designed to prevent 

or reduce damage or harmful alteration to species or ecosystems. Usually, BMPs are 

applied as a system of practices. 

Biodiversity: the variety, distribution, and abundance of different plants, animals, microorganisms, 

the ecological functions and processes they perform, and the genetic diversity 

they contain at local, regional, and/or landscape level 

Bioengineering: a multi-disciplinary, applied science that uses living plant material as a 

component of site engineering and landscape construction in order to stabilize and 

conserve soils 

Biogeography: the study of the geographical distribution of living or dead organisms 

Biogeoclimatic zone: the Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification (BEC) is a land 

classification system that groups together ecosystems with similar climate, soils, and 

vegetation. This classification was developed in British Columbia and is widely used 

as a framework for resource management as well as for scientific research. In British 

Columbia, there are 14 biogeoclimatic zones identified, which are further refined into 

subzones and variants. 

Biological diversity: (see biodiversity) 

Biomass: total dry weight of biological matter on a site 

Biota: all living organisms 

Biotic agent: a living organism 

Bentonitic clay slurry: a slurry of bentonitic clay that expands when wet to seal cracks and 

seepage in bedrock 

Biltmore stick: metre stick marked with approximate diameter of a circle when held against a 

tree approximately 60 cm from the observer’s eye. [Observer lines “0” end of stick on one 

edge of stem and reads the number on the stick best matching the other edge. Developed 

and named by the Biltmore Forestry School in the U.S.A.] 

Blue List: a listing of elements of special concern, as determined by the BC Conservation 

Data Centre. The Blue List includes any ecological community, indigenous species, and 

subspecies considered to be of special concern (formerly vulnerable) in British Columbia. 

Elements are of special concern because of characteristics that make them particularly 

sensitive to human activities or natural events. Blue-listed elements are at risk, but are 

not Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened. 

Bole: the stem of a tree 

Bonemeal: ground animal bones used as a plant fertilizer 

Bottom heat: propagation heating mat used to increase germination of seeds as well as rooting 

of stem cuttings 

Broadcast: a technique for sowing seeds which involves scattering or spreading the seeds 

widely, with or without the use of a mechanical spreader 

Brown rot: wood decay caused by fungi that utilize cellulose and hemicellulose for food 

leaving brown-coloured lignin compounds in the remaining wood 

11-8 



Bryophytes: e.g. mosses, hornworts, and liverworts; primitive plants in the plant phylum 

Bryophyta, lacking a vascular system (the xylem and phloem that transport water, 

nutrients, sugars, and minerals) 

Bulblets: small bulbs produced between the stem and top of the soil 

Bulbous: having a bulb 

Bunchgrass: grasses that grow as singe plants with several stems clustered from one root 

system in clumps, tufts, or bunches, rather than forming a sod or lawn 

Callus: mass of unorganized plant cells usually formed after injury (such as at the base of a stem 

cutting) to seal off the wound; this area eventually gives rise to organized cells such as 

roots in the case of a stem cutting. 

Cankers [fungal]: an area of diseased cortical (bark) tissue with a sharply delimited margin on 

a branch or the stem of a tree 

Capillary action: attraction of water in to soil pores, causing the water to move through the 

soil 

Capitulum: a flowering inflorescence with sessile (stalkless) flowers 

Capsules: dry fruit of angiosperms (flowering plants) that open up (dehisce) when ready to 

release seeds 

Captive-reared: the collection of animals or insects from the wild to produce offspring that will 

be returned to the wild; a method sometimes used for the recovery of endangered species 

Cellulose: the complex carbohydrate that is the principal chemical constituent (with lignin and 

hemicellulose) of the cell walls of higher plants 

Claypan: a layer of clay (fine-textured material less than 0.002 mm) that is nearly impermeable, 

formed by the cementation of soil particles, which holds water at or near the surface of 

the soil 

Chaff: thin membranous parts surrounding seeds, such as wings, husks, etc., separated from 

seeds during processing of collecting seed 

Cheesecloth: loosely woven gauze-like cotton cloth 

Climax ecosystem / community: the culminating, self-perpetuating seral stage in plant 

succession that is relatively stable and persists for long periods relative to other seral 

stages. 

[Coarse] perlite: a natural soil amendment used to hold water; derived from volcanic glass 

which is heated to expand; can be used for starting horticultural cuttings 

Coarse sand: sharp sand derived from non-saline environments used in horticulture as a soil 

amendment or propagation medium 

Cold frame: small roofed structure built low to the ground and having either a glass or plastic 

cover that is used to protect plants from winter conditions 

Colluvial: pertaining to colluvium, which are materials that have reached their present position 

as a result of direct, gravity-induced mass movements 

Community composition [plant]: proportion of species relative to total in a given area; can 

be expressed as a percentage of relative cover, or cover and frequency of occurrence 



11-9


Conks (fungal): the spore-producing structure of a fungus, causing wood decay 

COSEWIC: Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada; a committee of experts 

that assesses and designates which wildlife species are in some danger of disappearing 

from Canada 

Corm(s): type of underground plant storage organ that is composed of swollen stem bases 

Cormels: small corms produced from the basal area of new corms 

Critical habitat: according to the Species At Risk Act, critical habitat is the habitat that is 

necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed species and that is identified in the 

recovery strategy or action plan for the species 

Cross-pollinate: pollination between two genetically-different plants of the same species; 

transfer of pollen from the anther (male reproductive organ) of one plant to the stigma 

(female reproductive organ) of another plant 

Cryptogamic: cryptogams include fungi, lichens, mosses, liverworts and algae; a cryptogamic 

crust is a thin layer consisting of these nonvascular species that forms on soil in dry 

grasslands 

Culturally maintained dis-climax ecosystems: ecosystems that are maintained in 

a specific condition by some cultural activity. Deep soil Garry Oak ecosystems were 

maintained as camas harvest meadows by First Nations burning, preventing them from 

shifting to Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests. 

Damping-off: fungal-induced death of seeds or seedlings 

Deciduous [trees and shrubs]: shedding leaves; usually meaning all leaves each year, in the 

autumn season 

Degraded ecosystem: an ecosystem that has suffered a degrading activity (e.g. cattle grazing 

or control of fire or ploughing) that has led to a decrease in natural composition, 

structures, and processes such that population levels, structural complexity, and diversity 

of organisms have been changed in an unnatural manner 

Dendrochronological analysis [dendrochronology]: the study of growth ring 

patterns in trees to determine the age and prevailing environmental factors (e.g. drought, 

fire) that affected the specimen during its lifetime 

Dehiscence: natural opening of a fruit or other seed-bearing structure of a plant to release seed 

Dis-climax ecosystems: ecosystems that are maintained at an earlier seral (successional 

state) by some activity, either natural or cultural (see culturally maintained dis-climax 

ecosystems). Areas along rivers that are subjected to flooding and ice scouring or ocean 

shorelines that may show a particular vegetation cover (e.g. Sitka Spruce) due to salt spray 

are examples of dis-climax ecosystems. 

Desiccant: drying agent used to remove humidity; used to keep seeds at low moisture content 

during storage (e.g. silica gel) 

Diapause [insect]: suspended growth in response to adverse environmental conditions 

Dibble: pointed garden tool used to make holes in the soil for seeds or seedlings 

Direct sowing: the sowing of seeds, by hand or with machinery, directly onto a substrate 

instead of into containers 

11-10 



Distribution [species]: the spatial arrangement of a species within its range; the manner, 

pattern, or relative frequency with which individuals and populations of a species are 

distributed over the landscape 

Disturbance [ecological disturbance]: any relatively discrete event in time that 

disrupts ecosystem, community or population structure and changes resource, substrate 

availability, or the physical environment. (Pickett and White 1985). Disturbance can 

be from natural causes (e.g. fire, wind, earthquake, insect outbreak) or can be humancaused 

(e.g. invasive species, a bulldozer, or preventing a natural disturbance such as 

fire). 

Disturbance-based ecosystem: an ecosystem that exhibits high levels of disturbance and in 

which disturbance is critical to the system 

Disturbance regime / pattern: the spatial and temporal arrangement of disturbances 

Divide/division: the propagation of plants by separating the parent plants (i.e. not by seed or 

cuttings) such as through simple dividing of herbaceous perennials 

Dormancy/dormant[of seed]: method by which a plant storage organ, in this case the seed, 

fails to grow even though environmental conditions are favourable; for seeds there are 

two types: physical and embryo dormancy; [of plant] period when a healthy plant is not 

growing 

Drainage holes: containers for plant propagation need holes in the base to provide drainage 

for water 

Drupes: a fleshy fruit usually with a hard stone inside, e.g. plum or cherry 

Early seral: ecosystems that establish soon after a disturbance. These may consist of 

herbaceous species in ecosystems that would eventually become forests, e.g. Fireweed 

(Epilobium angustifolium) after a forest fire. 

Ecological disturbance: see Disturbance 

Ecological filters: the things that prevent the full establishment of the ecosystem. 

Compaction or excessive erosion may serve as filters that prevent ecosystem recovery. 

Ecological gradients: ecological gradients occur along transitions from dry areas to wet 

areas or from areas with sandy soil to areas with silty soils 

Ecological restoration: the process of assisting the recovery of ecosystems that have been 

damaged, degraded or destroyed 

Ecological succession: a series of dynamic changes in ecosystem structure, function and 

species composition over time as a result of which one group of organisms succeeds 

another through stages leading to a potential natural community or climax stage. Primary 

succession (pioneering) occurs when organisms colonize a previously empty area (e.g. 

bare soil) and secondary succession occurs on sites that had previously been colonized 

but then disturbed in some manner. Note that succession theories are still being debated 

by ecologists. 

Ecoregion [ecological region]: an ecologically and geographically defined area that is 

smaller than an ecozone and larger than an ecosystem 



11-11


Ecosystem: a complex system of living organisms (plants, animals, fungi, and microorganisms), 

together with their abiotic environment (soil, water, air, nutrients) that function together 

to circulate nutrients and create a flow of energy which creates biomass, structure in the 

living community, and a change in ecosystem form and function over time 

Ecosystem-based approach: a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and 

living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way 

Ecosystem engineer: an organism that creates or modifies habitats (alien invasive species are 

often ecosystem engineers) 

Edaphic factors: edaphic pertains to the biological influence of soil conditions, such as 

moisture or texture, on the surrounding natural plant community 

Edaphically controlled dis-climax ecosystems: dis-climax communities that arise 

because of soil conditions; soil salinity may cause an edaphically controlled dis-climax 

community 

Embryo: dormant immature plant within a seed, or earliest diploid stage of an animal post 

sexual combination 

Endangered: a species facing imminent extirpation or extinction 

Endemic: native; indigenous to a particular area, and often with a restricted geographic range 

Encroachment (forest/conifer): progressive expansion of plant species into another 

ecosystem, e.g. Douglas-fir expansion in to a Garry Oak woodland, converting an open 

ecosystem into a closed forest 

Ephemeral: lasting only a short time; in the case of streams or ponds, flowing or full only briefly 

in direct response to recent precipitation 

Excise [embryo from a seed]: method by which the embryo within a seed is carefully 

removed to determine the viability 

Exotic species: exotic species are those that have been moved outside of their natural home 

range (= alien or non-indigenous species) 

Extirpated: a species that no longer exist in the wild in Canada, but does occur elsewhere 

Extinct: a species that no longer exists anywhere in the world 

Facultative [parasite]: a species that lives under certain conditions or in certain habitats, 

but does not require them; that is, it could also live in other conditions or habitats. A 

facultative parasite can live either as a parasite or not. In fungi, it is a fungus which can 

develop in living host tissue but is capable of spending part of its life cycle in dead host 

tissue. 

Filter: (see Ecological filter) 

Fibrous-rooted [perennials]: plants that have small fine roots that are easily divided and 

lack major structural roots (e.g. grass vs. oak tree) 

Fire-adapted vegetation: plants that evolved and persisted in fire-maintained ecosystems 

and possess various structural adaptations and life history strategies that enable them to 

tolerate frequent, low-intensity fires 

Fire regime: the pattern of fire that occurs over time e.g., the average interval between fires and/ 

or fire severity when fires occur 

11-12 



Fire suppression: active human intervention to prevent fires from occurring or at least 

restricting them to small areas through fire fighting activities 

Flailing: a method to collect fruit, usually from trees or shrubs, whereby the branches are struck 

with a stick so that the fruit falls onto tarps spread underneath 

Flat: a type of container used for plant propagation that is usually made of black plastic and 

measuring 25 by 50 cm and 6 cm deep [10" by 20" and 2.4" deep] 

Florets: a small or reduced flower such as in grasses 

Forb: an herbaceous plant with broad leaves, excluding the grasses and grass-like plants 

Fragmented landscapes/ fragmentation: alteration or breaking up of the landscape into 

discrete or tenuously connected ‘islands’ as a result of modification or conversion of the 

landscape by management activities (e.g. logging, development) 

Gene pool: the collective genetic information within a population, that is, the totality of genes 

and alleles in an organism’s local population 

Genetic integrity: the ability of a breeding population or group of breeding populations to 

remain adapted to its natural environment 

Genetically homogenous: all individuals of a population containing the same genetic 

information (i.e. not genetically diverse) 

Genotype: the entire genetic constitution, expressed or latent, of an organism (which differs 

from the physical appearance) 

Germinate: emergence of plant part(s) from a seed; when the dormant seed begins to grow, 

eventually producing a seedling 

Girdling: a technique used to kill live trees without cutting them down, by cutting a continuous 

all the way around the trunk, thus preventing the movement of fluids and causing death 

Glaciomarine clay: fine-textured sediments pertaining to processes, sediments, and 

landforms associated with glaciers developed in marine waters. Marine shells or shell cast 

may be present. 

Glaciomarine clay-loam: processes, sediments, and landforms associated with glaciers 

developed in marine waters containing between 28 and 40 percent clay mixed with 20 

and 45 percent sand 

Graminoid: grass-like plants including grasses, sedges, and rushes 

Growth chamber [plant growth chamber]: temperature, light, and humidity controlled 

environmental chamber 

Habitat: the specific environmental conditions which an organisms needs, either directly or 

indirectly, to survive and carry out its life processes 

Habitat fragmentation: alteration or breaking up of habitat into discrete or tenuously 

connected ‘islands’ as a result of modification or conversion of the landscape by 

management activities (e.g. logging, development) 

Hand-mashed: manual method for removing the seeds from fleshy fruits by simply crushing 

or macerating the fleshy pulp off the seeds vs. a mechanical method such as a household 

blender 



11-13


Hand-picking: removing fruits from a plant by hand, as opposed to flailing or mechanical 

methods 

Hand-rubbed: manual method to remove the seeds from macerated fleshy fruits by placing 

the pulp and seeds on a screen and then pressing down and rubbing to force the seeds 

through a screen and leaving the pulp on top 

Harden-off [plants]: method by which young plants or seedlings that have been propagated 

in cold frames or greenhouses are gradually exposed to the outdoor elements. This is 

usually over a week to two weeks whereby the plants are given a short time outdoors each 

day, and returned to the cold frame, gradually lengthening the time outdoors each day. 

Hardpan: a distinct layer of soil, nearly impermeable, formed by the cementation of soil 

particles with organic matter, silica, calcium carbonate, or iron oxides 

Hemicellulose: a carbohydrate constituent (with cellulose and lignin) of woody cell walls 

Herb layer: the herb layer includes all herbaceous species, regardless of height, and some low 

woody plants less than 15 cm tall 

Herbaceous: vegetation that is usually forbs, grasses, or leafy plants 

Herbivory: consumption of plants or parts by grazers, e.g. deer 

HistoricAL range: range of a species at a point in time in the past; in Garry Oak ecosystems 

this often refers to the period immediately prior to settlement by Europeans 

Holistic Ecological Restoration: Defined by Clewell and Aronson (2007) as restoration 

programs that include personal and cultural values as well as ecological and socioeconomic 

values. 

Holoparasite: parasitic plants which lack chlorophyll and are therefore wholly dependent on 

their host plant for the supply of water, nutrients, and fixed carbon 

Host plant: plants used by butterflies (and other insects) for laying eggs which then provide 

food for the larvae after hatching 

Humus: well-decayed organic matter near the soil surface (beneath the litter layer but above the 

mineral soil) 

Hydrology: the study of water, its properties and movement (cycling), over and under land 

Hydrologic regime: changes with time in the rates of flow of rivers and in the levels and 

volumes of water in rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and marshes. The hydrologic regime is 

closely related to seasonal changes in climate. 

Hygric: wet 

[Impermeable] seed coat: the outer covering of a plant seed, that has become hardened 

so that it is impermeable to water (which is needed for germination to occur); type of 

physical dormancy in seeds 

Inbreeding depression: reduced reproductive success resulting in a decreased ability [of 

a population] to adapt to environmental stress; may be caused by a reduced genetic 

diversity within the population 

Increment borer: a mechanized or hand tool for removing a small diameter core of wood from 

the stem of a tree for measuring of growth or assessing soundness of the wood 

11-14 



Indigenous species: species that occur naturally in an area 

Inflorescence: flower cluster or the arrangement of flowers on a stem 

Ingrowth (forest/shrub): gradual increase in numbers of a species on a site, filling in an 

opening 

Inventory: generally, the collection (as a verb) or a collection (as a noun) of information to 

describe the state of an ecosystem or ecosystem characteristics at a particular point in 

time. Typically includes a list of organisms and/or their numbers and health, vigour, etc. 

Inoculate: deliberately placing a pathogen in contact with a host; trees are sometimes 

inoculated with fungal pathogens to create wildlife trees 

Invasive species: invasive species are those whose introduction or spread threatens the 

environment, the economy, or society; invasive species can be either alien (exotic) or 

indigenous 

Ladder fuel: fuel that provides a vertical connection between surface fuels and crown fuels 

in a forest stand (e.g. tall shrubs, small trees, branches, tree lichens), thus potentially 

enabling a ground fire to rise and become a crown fire 

Landscape cloth/fabric: weed barrier usually made of woven polypropylene 

Lath house: type of wooden-open screened house used to provide shade for protecting new 

plants 

Leaf node: location on the plant stem from which the leaves originate 

Leaf petiole: leaf stalk; “stem” of a leaf, which attaches it to the branch 

Litter: the top layer of the forest floor that is composed of relatively undecomposed organic 

material in the form of leaves, twigs, and branches shed from plants and below-ground 

inputs from the death of fine-root material 

Lignin: one of the principal constituents (with cellulose and hemicellulose) of woody cell walls 

Loam: a soil containing a mixture of sand, silt, and clay 

Macerate: make soft and separate into constituents by soaking. Seeds of fleshy fruits are 

separated from the pulp by soaking to soften, then mashing and squeezing by hand, 

or machine, or rubbing through a screen, or floating (seeds sink and pulp rises to the 

surface). 

Malaise trap: a large, tent-like structure used for trapping flying insects 

Mast-fruiter: plant that produces seeds in abundance at irregular intervals of more than a 

single year. Garry Oaks are mast-fruiters. 

Matrix or fabric: the background ecological system of a landscape with a high degree of 

connectivity. The dominant component in the landscape. 

Mesic: a term meaning intermediate; describes an environment that has moderate moisture 

levels, neither too wet nor too dry. Water removed somewhat slowly in relation to supply; 

soil may remain moist for a significant, but sometimes short period of the year. A plant 

requiring a moderate amount of moisture. 

Microhabitat: an small, identifiably different portion of a larger discrete habitat. A small, 

localized habitat within a larger ecosystem used by an organism. 



11-15


Micronutrients: seven nutrients essential to plant growth and health that are only needed in 

very small quantities. These are manganese, boron, copper, iron, chlorine, molybdenum, 

and zinc. 

Microsite: an area where very local conditions—moisture, temperature, light exposure, or 

nutrients—create suitable habitat for species not found in the wider habitat type 

Mineral soil: any soil composed of mineral materials. Mineral soil characteristics reflect their 

creation by weathering processes rather than biological processes. 

Mist/mist bench/mist nozzle: An intermittent mist system will, in many cases, speed up 

the rooting process and allow the rooting of normally difficult-to-root species. Mist is 

used to maintain a film of water on the cuttings without saturating the medium. System 

requirements vary in the size of desired droplets, amount of water used, mist pattern, 

duration of intermittent spray, and maintenance needs. The droplet size should be in the 

range of 0.002 to 0.004 inch. Small droplet size allows the mist to remain suspended as a 

cloud for a few seconds before landing on the surface of the cutting. 

Moisture regime: the aggregate of phenomena responsible for the entry, movement, 

consumption, and utilization of soil moisture by plants. It is the most important factor in 

soil formation and fertility. 

Monitoring: the systematic collection of ecological data in a standardized manner at regular 

intervals over time designed to provide information on the characteristics of the 

ecosystem and their changes with time. 

Mycelial strands: Mycorrhizal fungi often produce mycelial strands which grow out from 

the root into the surrounding soil. Rootlike strands of the diffuse, indefinite body of a 

multicellular fungus, which is composed of many fine, branching tubes called hyphae. 

Mycorrhiza: a mutualistic association between a fungus and a plant, occurring primarily in 

the roots. A mycorrhiza is a symbiotic association between a fungus and the roots of a 

vascular plant allowing nutrient exchange between plant roots and fungi. 

Natural processes: dynamic interactions between abiotic and biotic elements 

Necrotic (as in necrotic spots representing fungal disease symptoms): 

prematurely dead cells and living tissue. Necrosis is caused by factors external to the cell 

or tissue, such as infection, toxins, or trauma. 

Nicking: mechanical breaking of the seed coat to overcome physical seed dormancy by cutting, 

drilling or filing a small hole in the coat of each seed before sowing. Usually applied to 

large, hard-coated seeds. 

Non-local genotype: natural selection, driven by local conditions, can determine which 

genotype is successful and can change the makeup of the local population gene pool. A 

non-local genotype is one that has developed over time in a different geographic location. 

Non-indigenous species: species that have been moved outside of their natural home range 

(= alien, exotic) 

Novel Ecosystems: ecosystems that, due to invasive species or some level of intervention, have 

not occurred before 

Nutrient-rich: nutrient rich growing medium contains an adequate supply of all the macro and 

micro nutrients in the correct balance required for the successful production of plant life 

11-16 



Nutrient transfer and/or export: movement of nutrients from one ecosystem to another. 

Salmon bringing marine nutrients to the forests along spawning rivers would be one 

example of nutrient transfer. 

Obligate [parasite]: A species that is restricted to a very narrowly defined environment. An 

obligate parasite can only be a parasite and often only on one host species. An obligate 

fungal parasite can live and complete its life cycle only in the living tissues of the host. 

See also Facultative 

outbreeding depression: decreased reproductive success due to introducing plants of the 

same species from different populations [e.g. through seed collection] resulting in less 

genetically adapted offspring than either parent and than offspring of crosses between 

individuals from the same population 

Outplanting: refers to planting of propagated stock into a restoration site 

Oviposit: the process of laying eggs. 

Packrat midden: nest of a packrat, often built in small caves, which may contain organic 

material that can provide clues about an ecosystem in the past 

Parent material: the unconsolidated and more or less weathered mineral or organic matter 

from which a soil profile develops 

Patchiness: a characteristic of discontinuous and heterogeneous environments consisting 

of a ‘patchwork’ of rather different habitats, resources, and ecosystems, as opposed to 

homogeneous or uniform environments 

Pathogen: a biological agent that causes disease or illness to its host or range of hosts 

Pathways analysis: identifying the main pathways that facilitate a pest’s movement and 

dispersal 

Pathways of invasion: the ways in which alien invasive species are introduced or spread 

Perennial: lasting more than one year; of plant duration, a plant whose life span extends over 

more than two growing seasons 

Perlite: volcanic glass that expands greatly when heated. It is an industrial mineral and a 

commercial product useful for its light weight after processing. In horticulture perlite 

is used in soilless growing mixes for aeration and retention. For rooting cuttings, 100% 

perlite is used. 

Petiole: the stalk of a leaf, i.e. that part below the blade or, if the leaf is compound, below the 

point of insertion of the leaflets 

Phenology: the timing of developmental events such as flowering, germination, seed set, etc. 

Phenotype: the physical appearance of an organism (morphology, physiology, biochemistry, 

behaviour) due to both underlying heritable genetic variation and variation driven by 

environmental conditions 

Phytotoxin: refers to a substance that is harmful or lethal to plants 

Pinch: to pinch the growing tip, which will include the terminal set of leaves, between thumb 

and forefinger twist, and remove it. It will then branch from below. 



11-17


Plant association: a plant community represented by areas of vegetation occurring in 

places where environments are so closely similar that there is a high degree of floristic 

uniformity in all the layers—that is, the same species are present in similar proportions 

and age/size classes 

Plunge: for cuttings, to thrust into rooting medium to ensuring firm contact of the stem to the 

medium without leaving gaps or pockets under the surface 

Population: refers to all of the organisms that both belong to the same species and live in the 

same geographical area such that inter-breeding is possible between any pair within the 

area 

Population viability: the probability that a population will persist across its range despite 

normal fluctuations in population and environmental conditions 

Porous mixture: porosity is a measure of the void (i.e., “empty”) spaces in a material. A porous 

growing medium has empty spaces that allow for the movement of water and air. 

Pot-bound: a pot-bound or root-bound plant is one whose roots have filled all of the available 

space in its container. A pot-bound plant will be unable to properly take up moisture and 

nutrients. 

Potting-up: the action of re-potting a plant into a larger container once its root system has 

grown to the maximum capacity of its present one. 

Pre-contact: prior to European settlement in North America 

Pre-diapause: the developmental stage of an insect immediately before a normal suspension in 

growth in response to adverse environmental conditions (diapause) 

Pre-treatment: treatment of seeds prior to sowing in order to improve germination. The 

condition of a site prior to restoration treatment. 

Prescribed burning: fires deliberately set by managers to produce disturbances or conditions 

that are beneficial to an ecosystem or that achieve management objectives 

Pricking-out: the transplantation of seedlings from germination trays to containers for growing 

on. Seeds germinated in open flats may need to be separated to allow room for them 

to grow. Pricking out is done just as seedlings develop first true leaves and before root 

development is too tangled together. 

Propagule: any structure with the capacity to give rise to a new plant, e.g. a seed, a spore, or 

part of the vegetative body capable of independent growth if detached from the parent. 

Provenance: the place of origin of a plant or propagule 

Pupa: the life stage, following larva and before adult, of those insects that undergo a complete 

metamorphosis—four life stages. 

Quarantine: compulsory isolation, typically to contain the spread of something considered 

dangerous. There are three quarantine Acts of Parliament Acts_of_Parliament in Canada: 

Quarantine Act (humans) and Health of Animals Act (animals) and Plant Protection 

Act (vegetations). The first legislation is enforced by the Canada Border Services Agency 

after a complete rewrite in 2005. The second and third legislations are enforced by the 

Canadian Food Inspection Agency. If a health emergency exists, the Governor in Council 

can prohibit importation of anything that it deems necessary under the Quarantine Act. 

11-18 



Random sampling: sampling without bias by, e.g., using a random-number generator to 

choose among items or locations to assess or measure; every possible sample has an equal 

probability of being selected 

Range: of a species—the geographical area where a species occurs 

Reconnaissance surveys: quick surveys that proved initial data that can be used for 

planning more in comprehensive surveys 

Recovery Strategy: Canada’s Species at Risk Act requires recovery strategies for all 

endangered species. A recovery strategy is a planning document that identifies what 

needs to be done to arrest or reverse the decline of a species. It sets goals and objectives 

and identifies the main areas of activities to be undertaken. Detailed planning is done at 

the subsequent action plan stage. 

Recovery Team: a technical committee charged with developing a national recovery plan for 

nationally threatened and endangered species 

Recruitment: generally, the addition to a population from all causes (reproduction, 

immigration, stocking). Recruitment may refer more specifically to numbers born, 

hatched, germinated, or sprouted but may also refer to non-living components, e.g. 

recruitment of snags or of coarse woody debris. 

Red List: listing of elements of special concern, as determined by the BC Conservation Data 

Centre (www.env.gov.bc.ca/atrisk/red-blue.htm). The Red List includes any ecological 

community, and indigenous species and subspecies that is extirpated, endangered, or 

threatened in British Columbia. Extirpated elements no longer exist in the wild in British 

Columbia, but do occur elsewhere. Endangered elements are facing imminent extirpation 

or extinction. Threatened elements are likely to become endangered if limiting factors 

are not reversed. Red-listed species and sub-species may be legally designated as, or may 

be considered candidates for legal designation as Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened 

under the Wildlife Act (see www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/faq.htm#2). Not all Red-listed taxa 

will necessarily become formally designated. Placing taxa on these lists flags them as 

being at risk and requiring investigation. 

Reference ecosystems: an ecosystem that can serve a reference for restoration activities 

Reemay cloth: a proprietary brand name for thermally spunbond, non-woven polyester fabrics 

used as covers in horticultural applications for their ability to transmit light, insulate, 

allow air circulation, and stop insect and weed-seed intrusion 

Resilience: refers to the ability of a plant or community to withstand environmental stresses 

such as drought, disease, and herbivory 

Resistograph instrument: An instrument that measures and records the resistance to 

penetration of a small diameter drill as it passes through wood. Resistance decreases 

when decay is encountered. 

Restoration [ecological]: the process of assisting the recovery of ecosystems that have been 

damaged, degraded or destroyed 

Restoration target: the prescription for what your site should look like and how it should 

function after restoration 



11-19


Rhizome: a root-like stem in the ground: a slender to much swollen underground stem that 

grows more or less horizontally 

Rhizomorph: a compact strand of fungal hyphae with a dark outer coat that is capable of apical 

growth through soil and assists in spread of the fungus from a host to a suscept 

Riparian: pertaining to anything connected with or immediately adjacent to the banks of a 

stream or other body of water 

Risk assessment (of invasive alien plants): the process by which potential alien invasive 

plants and plant pests are identified and evaluated. It includes pathways analysis and pest 

risk assessment 

SARA: Canada’s federal Species at Risk Act (2003). SARA is the federal government commitment 

to prevent wildlife species from becoming extinct and secure the necessary actions for 

their recovery. It provides for the legal protection of wildlife species and the conservation 

of their biological diversity. The purposes of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) are to prevent 

wildlife species from being extirpated or becoming extinct, to provide for the recovery of 

extirpated, endangered and threatened species, and to manage species of special concern 

to prevent them from becoming endangered or threatened. The Act establishes Schedule 

1, as the official list of wildlife species at risk. It classifies those species as being either 

extirpated, endangered, threatened, or a special concern. Once listed, the measures to 

protect and recover a listed wildlife species are implemented. 

Salvage: salvage plants are those recovered for translocation from a site which is to be destroyed 

by construction or development to another site undergoing restoration 

Sampling: the collection of material or data about a portion (the sample) of a population for 

measurement in order to make estimates or inferences about the entire population 

Saprophyte: a fungus that obtains its nutrients by decaying dead organic matter 

Saturation: the point at which all pore spaces in a growing medium are filled with water and 

no air remains 

Savannah: generally classified as a state between open prairie or meadow and closed-canopy 

woodland 

Scale: bulb scales are the reduced leaves that make up the layers of bulbs such as Lilies and 

Alliums 

Scarification: the process of pre-treatment of seeds to overcome physical seedcoat dormancy 

by softening, puncturing, wearing away or splitting the seedcoat in order to render it 

permeable, without damaging the embryo and endosperm within. Includes physical and 

biological methods, dry heating and soaking in water or chemical solutions. Destruction 

of impermeability at a single point in the seedcoat is normally sufficient to allow 

imbibition and gas exchange and hence embryo growth (germination). 

Seasoil: a proprietary name for a composted fish and forest fines soil from Vancouver Island, 

created by composting a mixture of fish (waste product) and forest fines (a logging 

industry term for bark and the organics that fall off of logs during the sorting process); 

contains abundant amounts of macro-nutrients, micronutrients and trace elements to 

produce healthy plants; has weed-free status. 

11-20 



Secateurs: a small pair of shears for pruning, designed to be used one-handed, having a pair 

of pivoted handles, sprung so that they are normally open. Usually compose of a either a 

single cutting blade that closes against a flat surface (anvil pruners—used for hard, woody 

stems), or one blade that crosses another fixed blade, with a scissor action (scissor or 

cross-cut pruners—for general use and soft stems) 

Seedcoats [Seed coat dormancy/embryo dormancy are defined in the text]: 

outer protective covering of a seed. The seed coat develops from the integument of the 

ovule. Also called testa. 

Seedlot: refers to seeds of a particular crop gathered at one time and likely to have similar 

germination rates and other characteristics 

Seep: an area where minor groundwater flows out onto the land surface or into a stream channel. 

Seeps do not produce runoff at a visible rate. 

Seepage zones: areas where water seeps from the slope causing a specific vegetation assemblage 

Self-pollination: refers to the transfer of pollen from a male reproductive structure (an anther 

or male cone) to a female reproductive structure (a stigma or female cone) of the same 

plant or of the same flower 

Selective sampling: samples are deliberately chosen by using a sampling plan that screens 

out materials with certain characteristics and/or selects only material with other 

relevant characteristics; for example, a sampling plan that selects certain microhabitats 

for sampling, e.g. vernal pools, to ensure that they are not over-looked by a random or 

stratified sampling technique 

Semi-hardwood: mature stems from the current season’s growth of a woody plant collected 

before the plant goes dormant. Semi-hardwood cuttings are still flexible, bending before 

breaking. Hardwood cutting snap if bent. 

Semi-shade: refers to dappled sunlight, where the full force of the sun is broken by a partial 

canopy of overhead foliage or screening but not all direct light is absent 

Senescence: generally, the process of ageing; in deciduous plants, the process preceding leaf 

shedding 

Seral community: a stage in a successional sequence 

Shade/lath house: a constructed shelter which screens part of the sun from plants held 

within. In older structures the shading is provided by a grid of wooden lath. In new 

structures shading is usually provided by a synthetic ‘shade cloth’ which can be purchased 

in different weaves which provided specific percentages of shade. 

Silt: a soil textural class (between 0.004 and 0.062 mm in diameter) in which silt particles are 

very abundant 

Soil amendments: refers to a substance added to soil to increase its nutritive value, friability, 

moisture retention, or some other aspect 

Soilless: a growing medium that uses sand, bark, and/or other ingredients, but not any actual 

soil. Soilless mixes are usually sterile and free of weed seeds 

Soil horizon: a layer or zone of soil or soil materials lying approximately parallel to the land 

surface with physical, chemical, and biological properties or characteristics that are 

distinct from the adjacent, genetically related layers 



11-21


Special concern: a species that may become threatened or endangered because of a 

combination of biological characteristics and identified threats 

Species diversity: the fundamental unit in which to assess the homogeneity of an 

environment; refers to both a) the number of different species found on a site, and b) 

diversity within a species, both phenotypic and genetic 

Species’ residence: according to Canada’s Species At Risk Act, the specific dwelling place, such 

as a den, nest or other similar area or a place that is occupied or habitually occupied by 

one or more individuals during all or part of their life cycles, including breeding, rearing, 

staging, wintering, feeding, or hibernating 

Species-true: plants which are genetically the same as plants in your target restoration area/ 

reference site. Hybrids are not species-true; selections and cultivars may be. 

Sporophore: a fungal structure producing and bearing spores 

Stand dynamics: both apparent changes in plant population over time AND factors affecting 

the preceding 

Stool bed: refers to a nursery bed where stock plants are held for the production of cuttings. 

Plants are ‘stooled’ back, cut back annually to near the crown to force production of new 

wood suitable for use as cuttings in the next season. 

Stratification: a method of artificially overcoming seed dormancy by placing seeds in layers 

of moisture-retaining media and keeping under generally cool and moist conditions 

for a period of time (or alternating cold and warm conditions), so as to simulate winter 

conditions. 

Stratified sampling: samples are selected after the population has been divided into parts 

(stratified); stratification is usually done by dividing the survey area into sub-areas on a 

map or through on-site interpretation and classification 

Strike cuttings: a cutting ‘strikes’ when it grows roots. By extension, to strike cuttings is to 

prepare and place them in a rooting medium 

Styroblock: a proprietary name for Styrofoam growing containers, primarily used in forestry. 

The blocks are approximately 600 x 350cm and vary in depth from 50mm to 200mm. 

Blocks have from 8 to 540 cylindrical cells, partially open at the bottom depending on the 

species to be grown. They allow for relatively easy removal of seedlings with minimal root 

damage. 

Subhygric: moist or imperfectly drained; water removed slowly enough to keep soil wet for a 

significant part of growing season; some temporary seepage and possibly mottling below 

20 cm. Water source is from precipitation and seepage 

Sub-population: a definable subdivision of a population, whether created artificially or 

naturally, with common, distinguishing characteristics 

Subspecies: a naturally-developed and recognised division of a species, either morphologically 

or genetically, that usually arises as a consequence of geographical isolation within a 

species 

Sucker: a secondary shoot produced from the base or roots of a woody plant that gives rise to a 

new plant 

11-22 



Suckering shoot: a strong shoot that arises in a mature plant from a root, rhizome, or the base 

of the main stem 

Succession: a series of dynamic changes in ecosystem structure, function and species 

composition over time as a result of which one group of organisms succeeds another 

through stages leading to a potential natural community or climax stage. Primary 

succession (pioneering) occurs when organisms colonize a previously empty area (e.g. 

bare soil) and secondary succession occurs on sites that had previously been colonized 

but then disturbed in some manner. Note that succession theories are still being debated 

by ecologists. 

Successional stages: see Seral Communities 

Successional trajectory: the pathway an ecosystem takes from a bare site (pioneering) to 

a late successional (mature) state. This pathway is considered to occur within a defined 

framework of seral stages for a particular disturbance regime and ecosystem type, that is, 

it is a mostly predictable sequence of communities. 

Suitable habitat: habitat that meets the species’ requirements but does not contain the 

species 

Swale: a slight depression in generally level ground that may be slightly swampy 

Swamping: a) suppression of a species by rapid invasion by one or more other species; b) 

[genetic]domination of introduced genetic material into a natural population, potentially 

causing outbreeding depression and reduce genetic diversity in the original (smaller) 

population. 

SWOT analysis: a strategic planning method used to evaluate the Strengths, Weaknesses, 

Opportunities, and Threats involved in a project. It involves specifying the objective 

of the project and identifying the internal and external factors that are favorable and 

unfavorable to achieve that objective. 

Talus: angular rock fragments accumulated at the foot of a steep rock slope and being the 

product of successive rock falls; a type of colluvium 

Tamp: to pack down [soil media] with repeated, even blows to firm before sowing seeds or 

inserting cuttings 

Tetrazolium test: a chemical test which provides a quick estimate of seed viability by staining 

with tetrazolium chloride. Viable embryos will stain reddish in colour. 

Threatened: a species that is likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed 

Till: material deposited by glaciers and ice sheets without modification by any other agent of 

transportation 

Tolerant: able to withstand stress and function suitably 

Transect: a line followed across a study area while assessing its attributes 

Transitional ecosystem: a) a geographic boundary or transition zone between two different 

ecosystems. The term has been used to denote transitions at different spatial scales or 

levels of analysis, and may refer to any one of several attributes of the organisms involved. 

Also called an ‘ecotone’; b) a mid-successional state or ecosystem (i.e., between two seral 

stages) 



11-23


Translocation [including augmentation, introduction and re-introduction]: the capture and/ 

or collection, transport and release, or introduction or reintroduction of plants, animals, 

or habitat from one location to another 

Transplant: to lift and reset a plant in another soil or situation 

Understorey: canopies of trees and other woody species growing under larger adjacent trees 

and woody growth 

Unfilled seed: a seed that is lacking an embryo and so cannot grow. Usually resulting from not 

being fertilized. 

Ungulate: hoofed grazing animals 

UTM: Universal Transverse Mercator, a geographic coordinate system that is based on a 

2-dimensional Cartesian coordinate grid used to specifying locations on the surface of the 

Earth 

Variance: numerical expression of variability in a data sample 

Vascular: those plants that have lignified tissues for conducting water, minerals, and 

photosynthetic products through the plant. Vascular plants include the clubmosses, 

horsetails, ferns, gymnosperms (including conifers) and angiosperms (flowering plants). 

Vegetation structure: the various horizontal and vertical physical elements of the 

community, i.e. the different sizes, branching structures, shapes 

Vermiculite: a natural mineral that expands with the application of heat and used in 

horticulture as a soil conditioner for its ability to increase porosity of a growing medium 

Vernal pool: small pools appearing in the winter or early spring caused by winter rains, that 

dry out later in the summer 

Viable: capable of sustaining life; in plants, viable seed has the ability to germinate; see also 

Population viability 

Vigour: the capacity for survival or strong healthy growth in a plant or animal 

Virulence: a quantitative measure of the amount of disease caused by a parasite 

Voucher specimen: a specimen that serves as a basis of study, for expert identification, and is 

retained as a reference; a voucher specimen should be archived in a permanent collection 

(usually in a museum, an institution with a mandate to preserve materials indefinitely). 

It serves as physical evidence of occurrence at time and place and of any identifications 

and descriptions based on it, always assuming that it is archived with adequate collection 

data. (Even if it is not stored in an accessible, permanent collection, a specimen collected 

for identification or analysis remains a voucher specimen). 

Vulnerable: a vulnerable species is one that may be close to extirpation or extinction 

White rot: wood decay caused by fungi that utilize mainly lignin, leaving white cellulose 

compounds 

Whip: a slender, unbranched shoot or plant used to vegetatively propagate deciduous woody 

shrubs 

Whip cuttings: dormant cuttings taken from slender, straight, unbranched stems of deciduous 

woody shrubs 

11-24 



Whole tree failure: the tree is alive, with foliage, but because many of its structural roots are 

dead and decayed, there are not enough roots to support the weight of the above-ground 

parts. The tree falls over with or without help from wind. 

Wildlife Habitat Areas: In British Columbia, the Identified Wildlife Management Strategy 

(IWMS) establishes two categories of wildlife which require special management 

attention to address the impacts of forest and range activities on Crown land. These two 

categories are the Category of Species at Risk and the Category of Regionally Important 

Wildlife. Wildlife habitat areas (WHAs) are mapped areas that are necessary to meet the 

habitat requirements of an Identified Wildlife element. WHAs designate critical habitats 

in which activities are managed to limit their impact on the Identified Wildlife element 

for which the area was established. 

Winnowing: to clean debris (chaff) from seed by a current of air; to blow seed coats, remains of 

flowers, and other light debris from heavier seed 

Winter annual: a plant that germinates in autumn or winter, lives through the winter, then 

blooms in winter or spring 

Woody cutting: cutting taken from a mature, woody stem 

Woody debris: a term used for fallen dead trees and the remains of large branches on the 

ground in forests 

Woody plant: with the stems and limbs containing lignin 

Woody stem: mature stem, hardened and usually with bark 

Xeric: Water removed very rapidly in relation to supply; soil is moist only for brief periods 

following precipitation. For a plant, of, or adapted to, an extremely dry habitat. 

Yellow List: species and ecosystems in British Columbia that are considered secure as 

determined by the BC Conservation Data Centre 



11-25


11-26 


Parks 

Canada 

Parcs 

Canada 

Environment 

Canada 

Environnement 

Canada 

Restoring British Columbia’s Garry Oak Ecosystems: 

Principles and Practices is available as a free download 

at www.goert.ca/restoration. 

Please contact GOERT for more information: 

Email: info@goert.ca 

Phone: 250-383-3427 

Website: www.goert.ca 

100%

whole book (37 MB PDF) - Garry Oak Ecosystems Recovery Team

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?