Tab K 45SW ISMP.pdf

Draft Invasive Species Management Plan 45th Space Wing

45TH SPACE WING DRAFT INVASIVE PLANT

SPECIES CONTROL PLAN (2006-2010)

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Patrick Air Force Base, Malabar Tracking Annex and Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex i

ACRONYM LIST

AFCEE Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence AFSPC Air Force Space Command APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service BMP Best Management Practice CCAFS Cape Canaveral Air Force Station CEQ Council on Environmental Quality dbh diameter at breast height DOD Department of Defense DODI Department of Defense Instruction EO Executive Order ESRS Exotic Species Ranking System FLEPPC Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council GPS Global Positioning System INRMP Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan JDMTA Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex MTA Malabar Tracking Annex NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NPS National Park Service USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USC United States Code 45 SW 45th Space Wing AI Active Ingredient EIAP Environmental Impact Analysis Process AF Air Force USAF United States Air Force USN United States Navy NOTU Naval Ordnance Test Unit KSC Kennedy Space Center USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service MINWR Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge BP Brazilian Pepper CG Cogon Grass USDA United States Department of Agriculture

Table of Contents ACRONYM LIST .................................................................................................... i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................... iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTIONS

2.1 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS)

2.2 PATRICK AIR FORCE BASE

2.3 Malabar Transmitter Annex

2.4 Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex (JDMTA)

3.0 INVASIVE AND NOXIOUS PLANT SPECIES ON 45th SPACE WING

INSTALLATIONS

3.1 Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius)

3.2 Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia)

3.3 Cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica)

3.4 Giant Reed (Arundo donax)

3.5 Torpedo Grass (Panicum repens)

3.6 Melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia)

3.7 Mimosa (Fabaceae Leucaena leucocephala)

3.8 Hydrilla (Hydrocharitaceae, Hydrilla verticullata)

3.9 Earleaf Acacia (Acacia auriculiformis)

4.0 CONTROL PRIORITIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Recommendations for the Control of Predominant Invasive Plants

4.2 Recommendations for the Control of Other Species

4.3 Recommendations for Minimizing Movement of Exotic Species

4.4 Location of Exotic Species on 45 SW Mainland Florida Properties

5.0 PREFERENCES

6.0 DEFINITIONS

Table of Figures Figure 1: Aerial view of Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida Figure 2: Aerial view of Patrick AFB, Florida Figure 4. Brazilian pepper tree Figure 5. Brazilian pepper leaves and fruit Figure 6. Brazilian pepper along a road Figure 7. Brazilian pepper infestation at an abandoned launch facility Figure 8. Australian pine trees Figure 9. Australian pine needles Figure 10. Cogon grass Figure 11. Cogon grass flowers Figure 12. Giant Reed ii

Figure 13. Giant Reed Rhizome Figure 14. Torpedo grass (Hitchcock 1950) Figure 15. Mimosa flower Figure 16. Hydrilla Figure 17. Earleaf Acacia, UF Center Aquatic and Invasive Plants Figure 17. Feasibility of control versus significance of impact based on the NPS

ESRS

Figure 18: CCAFS Invasive Vegetation Grid Locations Figure 19; Invasive Vegetation at Patrick AFB

List of Tables Table 1. Recommended herbicides and application methods for partial control of Brazilian pepper Table 2 CCAFS Invasive Treatment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The 45th Space Wing Environmental Conservation (45 CES/CEVP) staff devised the first draft of the Invasive Species Control Plan in 2006/2007 to update the Plan provided by AFSPC contract (North Wind Inc.) in 2005. This Plan is a living document and will be regularly revised to update data for existing invasive species with the latest available information, as well as incorporate information on any new invasive species identified. Several species of invasive vegetation were included in this revised plan to account for those species that were not identified or delineated by the AFSPC contractor. The basic formatting of the 2005 reports has been retained for continuity and will be used for future revisions unless a new format is developed. This report covers invasive and noxious plant species of concern on 45th Space Wing mainland Florida properties, control priorities and recommendations, and prevention and control methods.

iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Federal agencies are required under Executive Order (EO) 13112 of February 3, 1999 - Invasive Species, the Sikes Act, as amended (16 United States Code [U.S.C.] 670), and various other federal and state regulations and policies to control invasive species on their properties and to reduce their ecological and economic impact.

EO13112 directs federal agencies “to prevent the introduction of invasive species and provide for their control and to minimize the economic, ecological, and human health impacts that invasive species cause”. The EO defines an “invasive species” as “an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health”. The EO further identifies Federal Agency Duties (Section 2 (a)) as;

“Each Federal agency whose actions may affect the status of invasive species shall, to the extent practicable and permitted by law,

(1) identify such actions;

(2) subject to the availability of appropriations, and within Administration budgetary limits, use relevant programs and authorities to: (i) prevent the introduction of invasive species; (ii) detect and respond rapidly to and control populations of such species in a cost-effective and environmentally sound manner; (iii) monitor invasive species populations accurately and reliably; (iv) provide for restoration of native species and habitat conditions in ecosystems that have been invaded (v) conduct research on invasive species and develop technologies to prevent introduction and provide for environmentally sound control of invasive species; and (vi) promote public education on invasive species and the means to address them; and

(3) Not authorize, fund or carry out actions that it believes are likely to cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species in the United States or elsewhere unless, pursuant to guidelines that it has prescribed, the agency has determined and made public its determination that the benefits of such actions clearly outweigh the potential harm caused by invasive species; and that all feasible and prudent measures to minimize risk of harm will be taken in conjunction with the actions.”

Invasive plants may replace native plants by spreading aggressively and successfully competing for light, water, and nutrients. In cultivated environments, invasive species reduce crop yields and quality. In natural environments, invasive species may alter the forage regime of wildlife, choke waterways, alter soil resources, reduce the quality of a recreational experience, and/or modify the fire regime.

• Most invasive plants are pioneer species that colonize disturbed areas such as roadsides, cleared areas, construction sites, Right-of-ways, utility corridors and landfills. These plants generally possess attributes that contribute to their ability to replace native plants including, rapid growth, regeneration from seed and/or vegetative propagation, early maturation, prolific reproduction, and some may even have allelopathic (producing toxins that prevent establishment of rival species). Invasive plants with origins far from the site of their introduction may lack natural predators and spread aggressively. Invasive species may create a monoculture, replacing all other species in an area and preventing the establishment of native tree and shrub species. Even though invasive plant species are sometimes deliberately introduced, an abundance of invasive plants in an area will usually reduce the value of the land for agricultural and wildlife resources.

This management plan describes the invasive plant species present at four 45SW installations in Florida, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Patrick Air Force Base (PAFB), and two associated sites – Malabar Tracking Annex (MTA), and Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex (JDMTA). The Plan also details management techniques that will be employed to control and one day eradicate them.

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTIONS

2.1 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS)

CCAFS was established in early 1949 and is located approximately one mile north of the city of Cape Canaveral, Florida. It is bounded on the west by the Banana River, on the east by the Atlantic Ocean, on the north by Kennedy Space Center (KSC), and on the south by Port Canaveral which is used by the United States Navy (USN), commercial cruise lines and a number of shipping services, Figure 1, Aerial view of Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. The topography of the site is relatively flat, with sandy beaches along the eastern border with the Atlantic Ocean.

Figure 1: Aerial view of Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida

CCAFS encompasses approximately 15,800 acres that consist of developed areas for missile and launch support, industrial use, port and airfield operations, as well as undeveloped areas managed for native flora and fauna. The undeveloped areas have been classified into eleven community types; beach dune, coastal grassland, coastal strand, coastal interdunal swale, scrub, xeric hammock, hydric or maritime hammock, shell mound, estuarine marsh or swamp. Many of the developed areas are routinely mowed and maintained. A swath approximately 30 feet wide along all of the major roadways is also routinely maintained by mowing to preserve a safe zone for motorists, to provide a good line of site, and to establish a fire break. Select areas throughout the installation have been treated mechanically and burned to restore habitat to its desirable height and vegetative composition. An added benefit of treating with fire is the suppression of undesired weedy vegetation such as Brazilian pepper and the reduction of fuel loads, which aids in prevention of uncontrollable wild fires.

The dominant vegetative community within the base is scrub, which can be further classified into coastal oak, oak, or rosemary scrub. Historically, stands with a short fire return interval maintained an evergreen oak (Quercus spp.)

canopy and saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) understory while stands that had a less frequent fire return interval maintained a sand pine (Pinus clausa) overstory.

Well-drained sites generally have more of the shrubby evergreen oak component while moister sites tend to be dominated by saw palmetto. These two scrub types can intermingle in lagoon locations (Schmalzer 1995). Coastal scrub stands are important as they serve as habitat for a variety of rare and endangered species including the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), Southeastern beach mice (Peromyscus polionotus niveiventris), Indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) and the Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus).

Most of the areas on the base that have been disturbed, including roads, utility corridors, and launch complexes, have an invasive species component predominated by Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius). The dominant vegetation in developed industrial areas is comprised of turf grasses and landscape trees and shrubs. Melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia) is also found in isolated areas around facilities on base as they were used as landscape trees in the past. The areas located adjacent to the north and south of CCAFS contain the same vegetative species as those found throughout the undeveloped areas on the station. Vegetation on the south side of CCAFS changes due to the presence of a developed port and residential development.

The soils on CCAFS are predominantly comprised of the Canaveral Series.

These soils consist of nearly level and gently undulating, moderately well drained sandy soils mixed with shell fragments. The Canaveral urban land complex is dominated by human development including roads, buildings, parking lots, etc.

The water table for all of the soils on Cape Canaveral varies between 10 to 60 inches below ground level (USDA NRCS 1974). There is a well developed drainage network that has been established on CCAFS that is made up of multiple canals, ponded wetlands, and a curb and gutter system in the heavily developed areas. To provide support to the launch facilities, areas known as lines-of-sight have been developed by mechanically cutting the vegetation between the launch control and active launch facilities.

2.2 PATRICK AIR FORCE BASE

Patrick AFB is located in Brevard County, Florida two miles south of Cocoa Beach and north of Satellite Beach. The Atlantic Ocean borders the eastern boundary of the base and the Banana River forms the western boundary.

Average summer temperature is 90°F and average winter temperature is 71° F.

Annual precipitation area averages 50 to 60 inches.

Construction of the Banana River Naval Air Station (BRNAS) began in 1939 and the base was commissioned in 1940. It initially served as a Seaplane Base for the United States Navy but was closed in 1945. In 1948, the old BRNAS was transferred to the United States Air Force, which established the Long Range Proving Ground Division. On 1 August 1950, the LRPG Base was renamed Patrick Air Force Base in honor of Major General Mason M. Patrick. The base covers approximately 2,108 acres. The majority of the real estate at the base consists of improved or semi-improved grounds, which includes private housing, buildings, support installations, concrete runways and taxiways, parking lots, roads, and mowed areas. Family housing occupies much of the northern portion of the base.

Central Florida is a vacation and retirement destination due to its mild climate and proximity to beaches and theme parks. Vacationing and retired military from all over the United States enjoy Patrick AFB’s golf course and marina. These facilities are located south of the airfield, while the also popular family campgrounds and picnic area are found along the Banana River on the west side of the base. Four designated recreation areas operate on the Atlantic Ocean side of the base, which the local community is also authorized to utilize.

Figure 2: Aerial view of Patrick AFB, Florida

2.3 Malabar Transmitter Annex

Malabar Transmitter Annex encompasses approximately one square mile (640 acres) and is completely surrounded by a residential subdivision, Figure 2, Aerial view of the Malabar Transmitter Annex. The annex is used to support collection, processing, and delivery of test-related data to user agencies conducting tests or space launches from the CCAFS, KSC, or submarine test launches conducted in offshore waters. The majority of MTA has been developed. The center of MTA is comprised of abandoned runways and taxiways once used for training by the United States Navy during World War II. Antenna fields, areas around scattered facilities, roadsides, and the fence perimeter are cleared, grassy areas that are regularly mowed. The remaining natural areas are comprised of mesic flatwoods, wet flatwoods and some small depression marshes. These areas have been disturbed to some degree and exotic vegetation is distributed throughout. The annex contains a network of drainage structures that includes shallow swales, ditches and two canals, which drain into the Melbourne-Tillman Canal on the south boundary of the annex (USAF 2001).

Figure 3: Aerial view of the Malabar Transmitter Annex

2.4 Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex (JDMTA)

JDMTA is located 95 miles south of CCAFS, near Jupiter, Florida. This state-of-the-art site includes four telemetry units to monitor the launch vehicle’s performance, electronics, and associated subsystems during flight. The site also employs radar, flight test support systems, a microwave relay to CCAFS, and a command destruct system remotely activated from the Cape if and when it becomes necessary to protect life and property should a launch vehicle veer off course. JDMTA is situated on 11 acres of land that was a part of the Jonathan Dickinson Florida State Park. JDMTA was constructed during 1985-86 and was certified to provide launch support on January 15, 1987 (Global Security 2004).

Most of the residential area around JDMTA is landscaped vegetation while the State Park is comprised of xeric uplands, mesic to dry flatwoods, and forested/herbaceous wetlands. JDMTA has some rosemary scrub and sand pine islands scattered within its boundaries. Invasive species found on JDMTA include BP, CG, and Earleaf acacia scattered throughout the station.

3.0 INVASIVE AND NOXIOUS PLANT SPECIES ON 45th SPACE WING

INSTALLATIONS

This section describes the identification, origin and distribution, for each of the invasive plant species found on 45SW installations in Florida..

3.1 Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius)

Brazilian pepper is the dominant invasive plant species found at all 45SW mainland (Florida) installations. At most installations it has dominated roadsides and disturbed areas. Along the roadsides the plant forms a dense perimeter that gives way to native vegetation within 50 to 100 feet of the mowed area along the roadways. In the disturbed areas the species is found as both isolated individuals and more extensive infestations. According to the protocol in the Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management and Control, the significance of impact for Brazilian pepper is the highest of those invasive and noxious plant species found on the 45SW (Hiebert and Stubbendieck 1993).

This species is also one of the most difficult invasives to control.

3.1.1 Description

Brazilian pepper is a member of the Anacardiaceae (cashew/sumac) family.

Other common names include pepper tree, Florida holly, and Christmas berry.

Brazilian pepper is an evergreen shrub or small tree up to 33 feet tall with a short trunk usually hidden in a dense head of contorted, intertwining branches (Figure __). The leaves have a reddish, winged midrib, with three to 13 sessile, oblong or elliptic, finely toothed leaflets that are one to two inches long (Figure __). The plants have male and female flowers. Each sex occurs on a separate plant with flowering occurring any season (mostly September through November). The flower clusters are two to three inches long. The male and female flowers are similar; both are white, and are made up of five parts with ten stamens in two rows of five. The flowers also have a lobed disc within the stamens. The fruits are in clusters which are glossy, green, and juicy at first, becoming bright red when ripe. The red skin dries to become a papery shell surrounding the seed, which is dark brown and 0.01 inches in diameter.

Figure 4. Brazilian pepper tree. Figure 5. Brazilian pepper leaves and fruit.

Brazilian pepper originated from Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay. It has naturalized in most tropical and subtropical regions and can be found in South and Central America, Bermuda, the Bahamas, the West Indies, Guam, Mediterranean Europe, North Africa, southern Asia, and South Africa. It was imported to the United States in the 1840s as an ornamental and has invaded fallow farmland, pinelands, hardwood hammocks, roadsides, and mangrove forests. In the United States, Brazilian pepper can be found in Hawaii, California, southern Arizona, and Florida. In Florida, it reaches as far north as Levy and St.

Johns Counties and as far west as Santa Rosa County.

Brazilian pepper can readily invade areas with a high degree of disturbance or natural areas that have had little or no disturbance (Francis 2002). On the 45SW, this species has readily invaded abandoned launch sites, the sides of roadways, utility corridors, Lines of Sight and other disturbed areas (Figures __ and __).

Figure 6. Brazilian pepper along a road. Figure 7. Brazilian pepper infestation at an abandoned launch facility.

Brazilian pepper forms dense, tangled thickets that completely shade out and displace native vegetation. Seeds are spread by wildlife, especially birds, through consumption and deposition. The pepper sprouts easily from the trunk and roots even when undamaged. In Florida, it flowers every month of the year but most intensely in the fall from September through November.

Brazilian pepper and poison ivy are both members of the Anacardiaceae family.

The Brazilian pepper may produce allelopathic agents that can suppress other plants’ growth and irritate human skin and respiratory passages. Contact with most parts of plant can cause an itchy skin rash. Sometimes inflammation and swelling of the face and eyes occurs. The flowers and fruits can cause respiratory irritation and ingestion of the berries causes vomiting. Proper protective gear should be used when attempting control of this species.

3.1.2 Management Options

Physical Control - Manual/Mechanical Methods Heavy equipment such as bulldozers, front-end loaders, root rakes, cutter heads, and other specialized equipment may be used for mechanical control of Brazilian pepper. Mechanical control works well along ditch banks, utility right-of-ways, and other previously disturbed areas. However, this is not an ideal method for control in a natural environment due to extensive soil disturbance. On the 45SW it is more effective to cut the large areas of Brazilian pepper and then burn the cut material and apply herbicides to stumps to prevent regrowth. A follow-up application of herbicide is usually required at 3 and 6 month intervals to treat plants not previously killed and new plants that may have germinated from seeds dropped from the plant. A chain saw or a Vee blade attached to a bulldozer should be used to cut the trunk as close to the ground as possible. Proper protective gear should be used when attempting control of this species (e.g., thick leather gloves, long sleeve shirts, long pants). The best time to cut the trees is when they are not fruiting, March through October. If Brazilian peppers have seeds (red berries) attached, they should not be disturbed until they have been treated with the appropriate herbicide (systemic) and allowed to die.

Information about herbicides is provided in a subsequent section.

Physical Control - Prescribed Burning Brazilian pepper does not burn readily (FSL 2002), therefore, prescribed burning would not be an effective means of control. This species forms dense thickets that fire rarely penetrates. It produces new leaves throughout the year and the high moisture content of the leaves and wood make it difficult to burn. When it does burn, the aboveground parts are killed, but the tree promptly re-sprouts from the base. Brazilian pepper is able to regenerate after burning by sprouting from the root or root collar resulting in more stem production than originally existed prior to the burn (Ewel 1986).

Brazilian pepper forests alter natural fire regime. Research has shown that burning is not an effective method for controlling mature stands, but may affect Brazilian pepper seeds, seedlings, and saplings. Five-year fire intervals appear to increase mortality in limestone-rockland pine forests in southern Florida. Fire management programs that kill seedlings less than three feet tall can keep a forest relatively free of Brazilian pepper. In addition, Brazilian pepper belongs to the same family as poison ivy, so the sap and smoke from burning may irritate or cause an allergic reaction.

Biological Control - Insects/Pathogens As of 2003, over two hundred insects have been identified in the pepper tree’s native land. These may be useful for control of Brazilian pepper but no biological controls have been released for use in the United States (Vandaveer 2003).

University of Florida (UF) scientists have identified two insect species that may prove to be effective biological control agents, a sawfly and a thrips. The sawfly causes defoliation and the thrips feeds on new shoots, however, their effectiveness for controlling Brazilian pepper in Florida is as yet unknown (Gioeli and Langeland 2003; UF 2004). A wasp has also been identified (Brazilian pepper-tree seed chalcid Megastigmus transvaalensis) that may help with control of Brazilian pepper. A new-to-Florida wasp was found in Palm Beach County emerging from pepper-tree fruits in 1988 (Cuda et al. 2004). The female wasp lays one or two eggs in a fruit shortly after the tree has flowered; as a result the seeds of infested fruits do not germinate. At this time this is not a feasible control method for use on Brazilian pepper at the 45SW.

Biological Control - Grazing Herbivorous animals are not known to feed on Brazilian pepper and grazing is not a recommended control method for this species.

Herbicide Control Herbicides are available that will control Brazilian pepper (Table 1). Only those herbicides labeled for Brazilian pepper control should be used. In addition, all pesticides used on 45SW installations must be approved by the U. S. Air Force Space Command.

Brazilian pepper can be controlled by cutting them down and treating the stumps with herbicide. A saw should be used to cut the trunk as close to the ground as possible. Within twenty minutes of cutting, an herbicide that contains the active ingredient glyphosate or triclopyr should be applied as carefully as possible to the freshly cut stump. These herbicides are what is referred to as systemic, which means it is taken up by the plant and distributed throughout the plant effectively killing the whole plant. Care should be taken to avoid touching the fresh cut area as a skin rash may result. Triclopyr is registered for use in Florida, and is approved for use on the 45SW through a waiver from Air Force Space Command. Glyphosate is on the Department of Defense (DOD) and AFSPC approved list of herbicides (DOD 2004).

Table 1. Recommended herbicides and application methods for partial control of Brazilian pepper.

Active ingredient (based on the acid)

Products Application Methods Comments

Glyphosate (four pounds per gallon or spray-to-wet

1.5 percent solution)

Rodeo® Aquamaster™ Glypro™ Plus

Cut stump when not flowering, or spray-to-wet seedlings with

1.5 percent solution in hand-held equipment

Available from agricultural suppliers. May be applied directly to water. Provides partial control

Glyphosate (3.7 pounds per gallon)

Roundup® Weed & Grass Killer Super Concentrate

Cut stump when not flowering, or foliar spray-to-wet seedlings with hand-held equipment

Available from retail garden suppliers. May not be applied directly to water. Provides partial control.

Glyphosate (three pounds per gallon, or broadcast two to five quarts per acre, or spray-to-wet 1.5 percent solution)

Roundup Pro® Glyfos® Pro

Cut stump when not seeding, or spray-to-wet seedlings with

1.5 percent solution in hand-held equipment

Available from agricultural suppliers. May not be applied directly to water. Provides partial control

Triclopyr amine (three pounds per gallon)

Garlon 3A Renovate

Cut stump Foliar

Available from agricultural suppliers. May be applied directly to water.

Triclopyr amine (0.59 pounds per gallon)

Enforcer Brush Killer

Cut stump Foliar

Available from retail garden suppliers. May not be applied directly to water.

Triclopyr amine (0.54 pounds per gallon)

Ortho Brush-B- Gon

Cut stump Foliar

Available from retail garden suppliers. May not be applied directly to water.

Triclopyr ester (four pounds per gallon) Garlon 4

Cut stump Foliar Basal bark

Available from agricultural suppliers. May not be applied directly to water.

Triclopyr ester (0.75 pounds per gallon) Pathfinder II

Cut stump Basal bark

Available from agricultural suppliers. May not be applied directly to water.

Triclopyr ester (0.75 pounds per gallon) Vine-X

Cut stump Basal bark

Available from retail garden suppliers. May not be applied directly to water.

(Sources: Gioeli and Langeland 2003 and product labels)

*Triclopyr is not approved for use on North American Air Force bases but has been granted a waiver for 45 SW (DOD 2004).

The best time to cut the trees is when they are not fruiting/seeding. Fruiting trees can be controlled using a basal bark herbicide application. An herbicide product that contains triclopyr ester, such as Garlon 4® with a penetrating oil or Pathfinder II® pre-mixed with penetrating oil, should be applied to the Brazilian pepper’s bark between six inches and one foot from the ground. Since the herbicide will pass through the bark, girdling the tree’s trunk is not necessary and may reduce the effectiveness. After treatment, it may take several weeks before there is evidence that the tree has been treated. Defoliation and the presence of termites is an indicator that the treatment has been successful.

Basal bark treatments are most effective in the fall when Brazilian pepper flowers. Fruiting occurs during winter and Brazilian pepper trees that have been herbicided using a basal bark treatment may retain their fruit. The area will need to be checked for the germination of seeds, producing seedlings, on a regular basis.

Foliar herbicide application can be used on Brazilian pepper seedlings and smaller plants. An herbicide containing triclopyr or glyphosate can be applied directly to the tree’s foliage. The leaves will wilt and the herbicide will be translocated to other parts of the tree. Foliar applications require considerably more herbicide. However, a relatively new technique called “Lacing” employs the use of herbicides Triclopyr and Imazapyr in very low concentration (1.5% and 0.5% respectively). The chemicals are blended with water and a carrier which is an animal rendered oil and mixed in a unit that operates much like a food processor. The oil surrounds the water mixture and is sprayed out in a heavy goo that adheres to the leaf surface with little if any over spray. The material has been tested by the University of Florida IFAS on non-target native species which have a thick waxy cuticle layer with little or no harm to these species.

An alternate method involves applying hexazinone or tebuthiuron in narrow bands. Banding (also called streaking) applies concentrated solution to the soil in a line or band spaced every two to four feet. This type of application can be used to kill large numbers of trees. Hexazinone should be used as a line or streak application on soils containing >85 percent sand, or on soils with less than one percent organic matter, that are not gravelly or rocky. This method should not be used in irrigation ditches or next to areas having desirable trees or shrubs.

These chemicals are not currently approved for use on North American Air Force bases (DOD 2004).(then it shouldn’t be included here as an “alternate method, should it?)

3.2 Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia)

Australian pine was found at CCAFS throughout the installation in small populations (usually not greater than 1.5 acres in size). According to the protocol in the Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management and Control, the significance of impact for Australian pine is medium and this species is moderately hard to control (Hiebert and Stubbendieck 1993).

3.2.1 Identification

Australian pine is a member of the Casuarinaceae Family (Beefwood family).

Other common names include ironwood, beefwood, she oak, Polynesian ironwood, and horsetail tree. The tree is deciduous with a soft, wispy, pine-like appearance that can grow to 100 feet or more in height (Figure 13). It bears a superficial resemblance to the conifer genus Pinus because of its small, round, cone-like fruits. The branchlets of scale-like leaves also look like pine needles, however, they are made up of individual segments, which make them readily identifiable in the field (Figure 14). The flowers are tiny, brown, and wind-pollinated. The fruit is a nutlet about ½ inches in diameter that contains winged seeds (Swearingen 1999; Dommergues 1990).

3.2.2 Origin and Distribution

Australian pine trees were observed by botanists in Mexico prior to 1852. They were introduced into Barbados about 1870, Hawaii before 1895, and naturalized in the West Indies and Florida before 1920. Australian pine is also established in Puerto Rico, the Bahamas, and many Caribbean islands (Elfers 1998).

Figure 8. Australian pine trees. Figure 9. Australian pine needles.

Australian pine is probably one of the most invasive species in south Florida. It freely self seeds in disturbed areas, and once established, may inhibit the growth of native species. It occurs throughout south Florida, from Orlando south, on sandy shorelines, pinelands, and in the Everglades, above the water table or mean high waterline. It frequently colonizes disturbed sites, such as filled wetlands, road shoulders, cleared land, and vacant lots. Although Australian pine cannot tolerate prolonged flooding, it is extremely resistant to salt spray, and grows rapidly during hot weather. It is rarely seen in northern Florida since it is intolerant of long periods of cold weather.

3.2.3 Management Considerations and Options

Australian pine is an extremely aggressive and densely rooted species that freely self seeds in disturbed areas. Once established this species may inhibit the growth of native species by forming dense stands that smother its competitors under a heavy blanket of needle-like litter. Monocultural stands will displace sand-binding native dune and beach vegetation. This increases coastal erosion, causes changes in soil chemistry and degradation to wildlife habitat, and in general, can drastically alter coastal environments. Few animals can survive in the ecologically barren shelter of an Australian pine forest. The Plant Conservation Alliance names this species as an Alien Invader. It is listed as a Category I invasive exotic species by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC). This means that it is known to be “invading and disrupting native plant communities in Florida” (FLEPPC 2004).

Australian pine has a phenomenal growth rate that outpaces most other plants.

It can reproduce by thousands of windborne seeds per plant or by coppicing.

This produces close, impenetrable, monotypic stands that harbor few native plants or animals. Present eradication methods are costly and require many man-hours for implementation. Invasion opportunities can be reduced by avoiding disturbance of natural habitats or replanting natural vegetation as quickly as possible when areas have been disturbed. Maintaining natural fire regimes and allowing periodic flooding can help to combat this invasive species.

Australian pine has no natural enemies in North America and no biological controls are currently available for management. Manual removal of Australian pine seedlings and saplings is recommended for new or small infestations. Heavier infestations will require an application of a systemic type herbicide to bark, cut stumps, or foliage for effective management. Prescribed burning has worked for large infestations in fire-tolerant communities.

Physical Control - Manual/Mechanical Methods Manual removal is best for new or small infestations of seedlings, saplings, and young trees. Raking and removal of leaf litter, cones, and seeds should be done whenever possible. After removal the vegetation may be piled together and burned or disposed of offsite.

Physical Control - Prescribed Burning Prescribed burning has been used for large infestations in fire-tolerant communities. It is most effective only in dense stands with sufficient dry fuel on the ground. Burning is found to be effective on trees larger than three to four inches diameter at breast height (dbh) without any incidence of resprouting.

Trees smaller than three to four inches dbh have been observed to re-sprout from the lower stump and root area (Elfers 1998).

Biological Control - Insects/Pathogens No biological control of Australian pine has been approved in the United States.

There has been a high rate of root rot in Florida Australian pine caused by the fungus Clitocybe tabescens. This has occurred primarily on higher, well-drained, light sandy soils where oak and other hardwood trees were predominant before clearing activities. Root diseases have also been caused by Pseudomonas solanacearum, Trichosporium vesiculorum, and Rhizoctonia spp. Pests that attack the Australian pine include crickets and grasshoppers (Chondracis rosea, Schistocera gregaria), defoliators (Lymantria xylina), stem borers (Apate momachus), and sap feeders (Icerya spp.).

Biological Control - Grazing Australian pine is not a candidate for this type of control measure.

Herbicide Control Applying a systemic type herbicide to bark, cut stumps, or foliage appears to be the most effective management tool for heavy infestations of Australian pine. A two percent mixture of triclopyr ester (e.g., Garlon 4) in diesel oil applied using the basal bark method is the most common treatment to eradicate Australian pine. The basal bark method applies the herbicide with a small sprayer in an 18-inch band around the tree, six to 12 inches above the ground. A second treatment may be necessary for large trees. Another herbicide frequently used is triclopyr amine (e.g., Garlon 3A). It is generally applied by injection or spraying in an undiluted form on freshly cut stumps. These herbicides are not on the DOD approved list of herbicides.

A mixture of isopropylamine salt of imazapyr (e.g., Arsenal®) and glyphosate (e.g., Roundup® Pro) can also be sprayed using the basal bark method. These herbicides are both preapproved for use on North American Air Force bases (DOD 2004). Four to six pints of Arsenal® and two to five quarts of Roundup® Pro should be used per acre. Application should occur after full leaf expansion, and seven or more days should elapse before removal of the plants.

Supplemental isopropylamine salt of imazapyr instructions for Florida should be adhered to when using this herbicide. Imazapyr is highly active in soil and has a potential for leaching into groundwater; it should only be used when groundwater impacts can be eliminated or minimized.

Tebuthiuron (e.g., Spike™ 80DF) will also control Australian pine as a spot application at 7½ pounds per acre. Caution needs to be taken when applying tebuthiuron because even a small amount will kill desirable plants if it comes in contact with the roots, which may extend far beyond the dripline. Tebuthiuron is preapproved for use on North American Air Force Bases (DOD 2004).

3.3 Cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica)

Cogon grass was identified on CCAFS, roughly four small areas at PAFB, approximately eight small patches at MTA, and a small patch at JDMTA. Most often the populations identified at CCAFS were found as dense patches along roads and other disturbed sites.

The patches at MTA are dispersed with the majority being on the west side of the annex.

Cogon grass on PAFB is found along the southwest side of the airfield and behind the firing range with some within the closed landfill behind the range as well. The small patch at JDMTA was located SW of the west side of the parking lot. According to the protocol in the Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management and Control, the significance of impact for cogon grass is high and this species is hard to control (Hiebert and Stubbendieck 1993).

3.3.1 Identification

Cogon grass belongs to the Poaceae/Gramineae Family (grass family). Other common names include Japanese blood grass, satintail, and blady grass. Cogon grass is a bright, chartreuse green, perennial grass that grows 2 to 4 feet tall and forms dense stands, excluding other plant species (Figure 15). The leaf blades are erect, about 0.5 inches wide, and have a prominent whitish off-center midrib and a sharp tip. The leaves are flat with saw-like edges lined with sharp microscopic silica crystals. The round leaf bases are sheathed and attached to short round stems. The upper part of the leaf blade is hairy near the base with a smooth underside. As the plants go dormant, the leaves turn brownish-gray from the tips downward. The dead leaves remain standing and resist decay. Cogon grass roots are sharp pointed, white barbwire-like rhizomes. The roots branch readily, aggressively shooting out from one plant to form another, sometimes piercing the roots of intervening plants. Most of these rhizomes are interwoven in a dense mat within about a foot of the soil surface, but may reach as deep as 3-6 feet. Cogon grass flowers are borne in conspicuous cylindrical silky white spikes 1-16 inches long and 0.25-1 inches in diameter (Figure 16). Each individual flower spikelet has two stamens and two feathery stigmas attached to a fuzzy plume. This plume assists the wind-dispersed seed in drifting through the air. In temperate areas cogon grass usually flowers from late winter through May or in the fall after the first frost but in more tropical areas it may flower year-round (MacDonald et al. 2001; Langeland and Craddock Burks 1998).

3.3.2 Origin and Distribution

Cogon grass originated in Southeast Asia in the Philippines, China, and Japan.

It is found on every continent, although it does not tolerate cool temperatures, and is now distributed throughout the tropical and subtropical regions of the world. Over the past 50 years, cogon grass has become widely established in the southeastern United States extending as far north as South Carolina and west to Texas.

Cogon grass first appeared in the United States around Grand Bay, Alabama escaping from Satsuma orange crate packing in 1912. In 1921, it was intentionally introduced from the Philippines into Mississippi as possible forage.

Cogon grass was introduced into Florida in the 1930s and 1940s as forage and for soil stabilization. It has little economic (forage) benefit and has become a serious pest. Consequently, it is on the noxious weed list, which prohibits new plantings of this species. Unfortunately, cogon grass has spread by illegal plantings and inadvertent transport in forage and in soil during roadway construction and by lawn mowers during roadside maintenance. It is now found throughout Florida from the panhandle region into south Florida (Johnson and Schilling 2004).

Cogon grass usually occurs on highly leached acid soils with low fertility and minimal organic content. It invades a wide variety of habitats including swamps, floodplains, dry scrubs, and sand dunes. It is most commonly found in disturbed areas such as sand hills, roadsides, pastures, utility rights-of-way, and mined lands. Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida have extensive acreage of roadway and pasture infested with cogon grass. In Florida, cogon grass also infests ditch banks, golf courses, and forests. In central Florida, monocultures of cogon grass have become established on hundreds of acres of reclaimed phosphate mining areas. It does not survive in cultivated areas.

Figure 10. Cogon grass. Figure 11. Cogon grass flowers.

3.3.3 Management Considerations and Options

Cogon grass ranks as one of the ten most undesired weeds in the world. It is an extremely aggressive species that will invade healthy natural communities, established pastures, and disturbed sites. The Plant Conservation Alliance lists it as an Alien Invader, the USDA considers it a Noxious Weed, and FLEPPC lists it as a Category I Invasive Exotic Species. It is illegal to transport cogon grass into or within the United States and several states, including Florida, have laws forbidding growing or selling the plant.

Currently there is no single treatment that effectively eliminates cogon grass infestations. This species will not persist in areas that are frequently cultivated, so frequent tillage can be used for control in certain sites. Mowing or burning will remove above-ground vegetation, but opens the plant canopy for emergence of seedlings and new stems from rhizomes.

Pathogens have been isolated but none have been developed for effective control. Cogon grass does not tolerate dense shade; it dies back upon canopy formation in rubber tree plantations in India. In Florida, reports of invasion into old growth forests suggest that a more shade-tolerant ecotype has developed.

Extensive research has been conducted in Africa, Southeast Asia, and the United States for the control of cogon grass. Burning, cultivation, cover crops, and herbicides have been used with varying degrees of effectiveness. To eliminate cogon grass, the rhizomes must be destroyed to avoid regrowth.

Cultivation and herbicides have been the two control strategies used most often.

Although tillage and herbicides will provide some control and suppression of the grass, long-term eradication is seldom achieved. It has been shown that an integrated approach that combines burning, tillage (mechanical disturbance), and herbicide applications provide the best solution for cogon grass management.

Once good control of cogon grass has been achieved, it is essential to introduce desirable vegetation as quickly as possible to prevent cogon grass from re-infesting the area. Cogon grass will eventually begin to re-infest, regardless of control. Therefore, diligence and persistence are essential to treat re-infested areas before this grass regains a foothold. Selective herbicide choices are limited and research is continuing in this area.

Physical Control – Manual/Mechanical Methods Cultivation and herbicide use have been the two control strategies used with the best results. One of the oldest and most successful methods is to deep plow or disk several times during the dry season, desiccating the rhizomes and exhausting the food reserves. Cutting to a depth of at least 6 inches ensures that most, if not all the rhizomes have been cut. The success of this method of control can be seen where cogon grass grows up to the edge of a cultivated field without spreading into the field itself. Repeated cultivation is needed to totally desiccate the rhizomes and exhaust food reserves, or a follow-up herbicide application can be used to kill off any individuals that resprout.

An integrated approach for successful, long term cogon grass management includes herbicide use and mechanical and cultural methods. Effective management has been achieved by the following combined mechanical-herbicide protocol. First, the infested area is mowed or burned in late spring/early summer to remove last year’s growth and accumulated thatch layer.

About six to eight weeks later, when about eighty percent of the cogon grass has re-sprouted to a height of 6 to 12 inches, the site needs to be disked as deeply as possible. Disking may not be possible in all areas, due to the sensitive nature of some ecosystems. When adequate regrowth of the cogon grass has occurred, systemic herbicides should be applied.

Physical Control – Prescribed Burning Cogon grass is capable of converting vast acreages of biologically diverse landscape into monocultures of low quality grasslands. Its aggressive rhizomatous roots, secretions of allelopathic toxins, and the ability to smother surrounding vegetation with a dense thatch allow it to choke out competition.

Cogon grass displaces native plants and reduces faunal diversity. When cogon grass invades a new habitat, it increases fire frequency, intensity, and flame height, drastically magnifying fire hazards. Cogon grass is extremely fire tolerant and can resprout vigorously following burning. It is taller than many native grasses in fire driven ecosystems, such as longleaf pine forests, and large infestations may cause more frequent and more intense fires than the native grasses in those systems.

Burning can be included as part of an integrated management approach.

Initially, cogon grass should be burned or mowed to remove excess thatch and older leaves. This initiates regrowth from the rhizomes, thereby reducing rhizome biomass. It also allows herbicides to be applied to only actively growing leaves, maximizing herbicide absorption into the plant. Ideally, burning should take place in the summer. A one-to-four month regrowth period has been shown to provide a sufficient level of leaf biomass for herbicide treatment. Herbicide applications should be made in the late summer/early fall.

The herbicides glyphosate (e.g., Roundup) or imazapyr (e.g., Arsenal, Chopper) have been shown to provide control. If tillage can be incorporated, using a disking treatment directly following a burn is the best approach. This further depletes the rhizome reserve through desiccation and increases the number of shoots per given area. A one-to-four month regrowth period is recommended before herbicide treatment.

Biological Control – Insects/Pathogens No releases have been made of any natural enemies to cogon grass. There is a general absence of attempted, and thus of successful, biological control projects against grasses. Existence of closely related grasses of economic or ecologic value challenge the variety of insect controls studied. There is little information on the pathogens of cogon grass and their potential as biological control agents, even though pathogens often exhibit specific host associations.

It is possible that fungi associated with cogon grass are more diverse and abundant than indicated by herbarium records. Twelve pathogenic fungi have been identified on cogon grass in Alabama. From 1994 to 1997, field surveys looking for diseased cogon grass or related grasses in Florida collected 70 fungal isolates.

The only insect enemy of cogon grass that has been subjected to host range testing is the gall midge (Orseolia javanica). O. javanica was studied on corn, sorghum, five species of rice, and two other grasses, and found to be specific to cogon grass. More testing is necessary. (Van Loan et al. 2002).

Biological Control – Grazing Cogon grass has been utilized in Southeast Asia as forage since it is the dominant vegetation on over 300 million acres.