Tag: plants

North Carolina’s Weird & Wonderful: Carnivorous Plants

North Carolina is home to many unique species, including 36 species of carnivorous plants. These plants consume small, unsuspecting invertebrates that fall into their traps. Now, you might be wondering, why do these plants eat meat? Don’t they get their food from sunlight through photosynthesis? Well, yes, these plants do photosynthesize, and are able to produce sugars from that process. However, these species live in wet areas with nutrient-deficient soils, thus they have adaptations that allow them to get nutrients from insects, arachnids, and aquatic prey items. There are five groups of carnivorous plants in North Carolina: butterworts, sundews, bladderworts, pitcher plants, and, of course, the Venus flytrap.

Common Butterwort, Pinguicula vulgaris, photo courtesy of Stuart Anthony and the North Carolina Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox

Butterwort species are in the genus Pinguicula, and these plants, found throughout the southeastern United States in very sunny, wet locations, have small leaves with sticky hairs. Often appearing greasy in texture, the leaves form the trap, and insects get stuck in the residue. The struggling of the insect triggers the butterwort to release more of the sticky fluid; once the residue has fully encased the food item, special cells in the leaves will begin releasing digestive enzymes. Believe it or not, this process gets even cooler! Butterworts also release a strong chemical that kills bacteria. This prevents the dead insect from rotting while it is slowly being digested.

A sundew species, photo courtesy of Phil Champion and the North Carolina Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox

Sundews, which are in the genus Drosera, are one of the largest groups of carnivorous plants. In addition to species native to North Carolina, there are sundews found all over the world, found in bogs, fens, and marshes ranging from tropical climates to colder climates. Sundews are similar to butterworts in that their leaves, which are pad-like, are covered in sticky hairs. More struggling results in the fluid stickiness increasing; but instead of fully encasing the insect in a residue, the leaf pads will slowly curl up around the insect before digestion begins. Due to their small size, sundews’ prey items are very tiny, often small gnats and ants.

Swollen Bladderwort, Utricularia inflata, photo courtesy of Robby Deans and the North Carolina Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox

The genus Utricularia contains the bladderworts, and it is the largest genus of carnivorous plants. Aquatic species of bladderworts grow fully submerged, except for the stem and blossom, and they may float freely in the water or attach themselves to a surface. Other bladderwort species that are more tropical are epiphytic, and still other species grow in very wet soil. The bladderworts are unlike any other carnivorous plant in that they have a unique bladder system. These bladders have a trap door covered in tiny hairs. When a prey item touches the hairs, it triggers the trap door to open in a millisecond and the bladder sucks in the prey, closing in about 2.5 milliseconds! So, in about 3.5 milliseconds, the bladderwort has caught its food. How weird and wonderful is that?

Purple Pitcher Plant, Sarracenia purpurea, photo courtesy of David Midgley and the North Carolina Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox

Now pitcher plants, in the genus Sarracenia, are probably some of the more recognizable carnivorous plants in the world. In North Carolina we have the purpurea species, so named because of the color of the flowers and the pitchers themselves. This species is often found in marshes and bogs but is also right at home in wet forest floors and pinelands. The purple pitcher plant’s leaves form pitchers that are open to the sky and collect rainwater. Insects are attracted to little droplets of nectar that are produced along the rim of the pitcher, and as they crawl inward, they encounter tiny hairs that point downwards. This results in a surface that is very easy to climb down, but impossible to climb up! Eventually the insects fall into the pool of water, which also contains digestive enzymes that the plant has produced. What is really cool about the purple pitcher plant is that it is pollinated by a member if the pitcher plant fly genus, Fletcherimyia. The larvae of these flies live in the fluid inside of the pitchers, feeding on some of the insects that have gotten trapped!

The Venus Flytrap, Dionaea muscipula, photo courtesy of Lucy Bradley and the North Carolina Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox

There is only one more carnivorous plant to discuss: North Carolina’s official state carnivorous plant, the Venus flytrap. Venus flytraps, Dionaea muscipula, are mainly found in southeastern North Carolina, though some small populations have been found in northeastern South Carolina. This plant has specialized, folded leaves covered in large and small hairs. When an insect touches those hairs, it triggers the two halves of the leaf to close around the insect, trapping it. Like the butterwort, special cells on the leaves release digestive enzymes, and in about two weeks, the leaf will reopen and be ready to catch another insect. We North Carolinians love Venus flytraps so much that, not only has it been declared the state carnivorous plant, but there is also a house bill to authorize the Venus Flytrap Specialty License Plate! If House Bill 734 passes, some of the proceeds from each license plate renewal will go towards the Friends of Plant Conservation and the North Carolina Botanical Garden Foundation, which will use the money to fund plant conservation education and research.

The Venus flytrap, and many of the other carnivorous plant species, are endangered. Habitat destruction and overharvesting are the two major threats facing these plants today. These species require specific habitat conditions in which to grow and thrive, and if even one of those conditions is thrown off, the plants will start to decline. Gardening and houseplant fever unfortunately results in wild plants of all kinds, not just carnivorous ones, being poached in order to meet the demand. If you have to have a carnivorous plant, purchase one from a reputable nursery. There are many other amazing plants that share the same habitat needs as the meat-eaters, so consider creating a small bog or marsh garden in your backyard. In North Carolina, nurseries such as Carolina Habitats and Plant Delights can be excellent resources for learning how to recreate plant communities in a garden setting. State cooperative extension offices and their Master Gardeners programs would be a good resource for region-specific knowledge. Finally, if you want to see carnivorous plants in action, plan a trip to Carolina Beach State Park, south of Wilmington, North Carolina. These weird and wonderful plants are sure to make a lasting impression.

Special thanks to the North Carolina Extension Gardener Plant Toolbox and all of their amazing photographers for the photographs in this blog and for being a source of great information on the many carnivorous plant species in the state. https://plants.ces.ncsu.edu/

Celebrating Nature’s Palette: A Deep Dive into Three Exquisite Wildflowers

In the vast tapestry of the natural world, wildflowers stand as vibrant testaments to the beauty and resilience of flora. Among the myriad of species that grace landscapes worldwide, three particularly captivating varieties capture the hearts of nature enthusiasts and botanists alike: the Cardinal Flower (Lobelia cardinalis), Oswego Tea (Monarda didyma), and Mountain Mint (Pycnanthemum virginianum). These botanical treasures, each with its unique charm and ecological significance, offer a glimpse into the intricate web of life that sustains our planet.

The Cardinal Flower: A Splash of Fiery Red

The Cardinal Flower, scientifically known as Lobelia cardinalis, is a perennial herbaceous plant that belongs to the bellflower family. Its striking red flowers, which resemble the vivid robes of Roman Catholic cardinals, are not just a feast for the eyes; they play a crucial role in the ecosystem. The plant thrives in wet environments along streams, rivers, and swamps across North America.

One of the most remarkable features of the Cardinal Flower is its pollination strategy. The plant’s nectar-rich flowers attract hummingbirds, which are among the few creatures capable of navigating their deep, tubular blossoms. This mutualistic relationship underscores the intricate connections within ecosystems, where each organism plays a role in sustaining others.

The Cardinal Flower’s ecological value extends beyond its beauty and role in pollination. It serves as an indicator species for healthy wetland habitats, which are vital for water filtration and flood mitigation. Preserving these areas is crucial for maintaining biodiversity and ecological balance.

Oswego Tea: A Historical and Aromatic Marvel

Oswego Tea, or Monarda didyma, is another gem of the wildflower world. This perennial, belonging to the mint family, is distinguished by its vibrant red flowers and aromatic leaves. Native to North America, it thrives in moist, rich soils in woodlands and along stream banks. The plant’s common name pays homage to the Oswego Native Americans, who introduced it to European settlers as a medicinal and culinary herb.

Beyond its striking appearance, Oswego Tea has a rich historical significance. It was used as a substitute for tea after the Boston Tea Party, during a time when American colonists boycotted British tea. Its leaves, rich in thymol, have antiseptic properties and were used medicinally by Native Americans to treat a variety of ailments.

Today, Oswego Tea continues to be valued for its beauty and aromatic qualities. It attracts bees, butterflies, and hummingbirds, playing a pivotal role in pollination. Its presence in a garden not only adds a splash of color but also supports local wildlife and promotes biodiversity.

Mountain Mint: The Unsung Hero of the Wildflower World

Pycnanthemum virginianum, commonly known as Mountain Mint, might not boast the bold colors of the Cardinal Flower or Oswego Tea, but its understated elegance and ecological importance are undeniable. This perennial herb, native to North America, flourishes in prairies, woodlands, and along stream banks. Its leaves and stems are covered in a fine, white pubescence, giving the plant a frosty appearance.

Mountain Mint is a powerhouse of ecological benefits. Its tiny, white or pale purple flowers are a magnet for a wide variety of pollinators, including bees, butterflies, and wasps. The plant’s ability to attract such a diverse range of insects makes it a keystone species in its habitat, supporting not only pollinators but also the birds and mammals that feed on them.

Moreover, Mountain Mint is prized for its medicinal properties and aromatic qualities. Its leaves contain pulegone, a natural insect repellent, making it a valuable plant for natural pest control in gardens and agricultural fields.

Conservation and Appreciation: The Way Forward

As we delve into the wonders of the Cardinal Flower, Oswego Tea, and Mountain Mint, it becomes clear that wildflowers are more than just decorative elements in our landscapes. They are vital components of ecosystems, providing essential services from pollination to pest control, and supporting a diverse array of wildlife.

Conservation efforts are crucial to protect these and other wildflower species from threats such as habitat destruction, pollution, and climate change. By preserving natural habitats and practicing sustainable gardening and landscaping, we can help ensure that these botanical treasures continue to thrive for generations to come.

Wildflowers, with their beauty and ecological significance, remind us of the intricate connections that sustain life on Earth. By appreciating and protecting them, we celebrate the richness of biodiversity and the resilience of nature. Let the Cardinal Flower, Oswego Tea, and Mountain Mint inspire us to cherish and safeguard the natural world, recognizing that in its health and vitality lies our own.

2016 National Wetland Plant List Update

The Swamp Stomp

Volume 16, Issue 18

39179966

On Monday, April 18, 2016 the US Army Corps of Engineers published (Federal Register Vol.  81, No.  74) the final 2016 National Wetland Plant List (NWPL). The NWPL is used to determine whether the hydrophytic vegetation parameter is met when conducting wetland determinations under the Clean Water Act and the Wetland Conservation Provisions of the Food Security Act. Other applications of the list include wetland restoration, establishment, and enhancement projects. The list will become effective on May 1, 2016 and will be used in any wetland delineation performed after this date. Delineations received prior to May 1, 2016 may still use the 2014 NWPL, or you may choose to use the 2016 list.

The latest review process began in 2015 and included the review by Regional Panels (RPs), the National Panel (NP), and the public, whom provided input on changes to the wetland indicator status of 1,689 species. Four groups of species were examined during this update. The first group consisted of rating changes for 25 species (including six new additions) that the public requested on the NWPL Web site (November 10, 2014 to January 31, 2015) and during the Federal Register Comment Period (September 14, 2015 to November 13, 2015). The second group consisted of 166 species with highly variable ratings spanning more than three ratings categories nationally (e.g., rated FACW in the Arid West and UPL in the Caribbean).  The third group consisted of five nationally problematic species. Initially, the public requested a rating change for these five species in one region. However, their ratings were re-examined in all regions where they occur, based on a NP request (a total of 21 ratings). Seven species occurred in more than one of these three groups. The fourth group consisted of input received on the wetland ratings of 1,500 species that occur in the South Pacific Islands (SPI) subregion. In group one, based on public requests for rating changes, 88% of the wetland ratings for 25 species were changed on the 2016 NWPL. In group two, species with highly variable ratings, the ratings of all of the species were changed to some degree. In group three, the nationally problematic species, 76% of the 21 ratings were changed for five species. In group four, the SPI species, 12.6% of the ratings were changed.

The 2014 update contained 8,061 species (Lichvar et al. 2014). Four were rated UPL in all regions where they occur, so there were a total of 8,057 species that occur in wetlands. This update contains 8,092 species, a net change of 35 more species (39 species added in the SPI, six new species in the Continental U.S. (CONUS), and removal of ten UPL species). These 8,092 species have 27,984 unique ratings since each can occur in more than one of the ten regions.

The 2016 list includes changes in plant indicator status (OBL, FACW, FAC, FACU and UPL designations) from the 2014 list for 186 species found in the CONUS. Since these 186 species can occur in multiple Corps delineation regions, each having a unique rating, there were a total of 306 rating changes. The indicator status (rating) represents the likelihood that a particular plant occurs in a wetland or upland. The specific breakout of the 306 rating changes was: 49 percent (150 ratings) were assigned wetter indicator ratings and 51 percent (156 ratings) species were assigned drier indicator ratings. Ratings for 41 species were wetter in one region and drier in another region and ratings of three species did not change. In the SPI, there were 189 ratings changes, for a grand total of 495 rating changes in the entire list.

In response to the September 14, 2015, Federal Register notice, a total of 18 comments were received and reviewed on 50 species from eight Corps wetland delineation regions and one subregion. The Corps received seven written comments in response to the September 14, 2015, Federal Register 80 CFR number 177.

The comments were mostly related to species specific rating changes.  There were also comments about invasive species, habitat descriptions and the difficulty and cost of the comment process.  One commenter was concerned about the inclusion of non-governmental, private- sector and academic experts on the NWPL panels, stating that government- only membership prevents the public from benefiting from expertise of botanists and other experts who are not federal employees. The Corps responded that they do not feel that private sector or academic representatives should serve on the
interagency regional or national panels as voting members. They further encourage outside entities to provide input into the ratings process by providing scientific information, field data, literature reviews, and the like during the Federal Register notice process and by providing comments on the NWPL Web site.

The last bit of news relates to the ratings themselves.  The Corps has updated the interpretation of the wetland indicator ratings in the table below.  Be sure to update your wetland reports to reflect these descriptions.  We are not using the US Fish and Wildlife percent occurrence in wetlands (1988, Reed) any longer.

2016 Indicator Status Ratings

Indicator Status Symbol Definitions – Short Version

( ERDC/CRREL TN-12-1 )
Obligate OBL   Almost always occur in wetlands.
Facultative Wetland FACW   Usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in non-wetlands.
Facultative FAC   Occur in wetlands and nonwetlands.
Facultative Upland FACU   Usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands.
Upland UPL   Almost never occur in wetlands.

Do you want to read more articles like this one?

Then Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter

2619604

Japanese Honeysuckle—Effects on Wetland Delineations in AGCP and EMP Regions

The Swamp Stomp

Volume 14, Issue 41

In 1988 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published the National Wetland Plant List (1988 NWPL), which not only listed all the plants common to wetlands in each region, but also classified them based on how frequently they occurred in wetlands under natural conditions. This 1988 listing classified Lonicera japonica, commonly known as the Japanese Honeysuckle, as a Facultative-minus (FAC-) species. Facultative (FAC) species generally have a similar likelihood of occurring in both wetlands and non-wetlands; the (+) and (–) modifiers indicate species that have a higher probability of occurring in one habitat over the other—the (+) modifier indicates species more likely to appear in wetlands, and the (–) modifier is given to species less likely to occur in wetlands. Therefore, the Japanese Honeysuckle was classified as a species that may appear in wetlands, but was unlikely to do so. As a result, it became extensive within the transitional zone between wetland and non-wetland habitats.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), however, updated the list in 2012. The 2012 NWPL changed the specification of the Japanese Honeysuckle in the Eastern Mountains and Piedmont (EMP) Region and in the Atlantic Gulf Coastal Plain (AGCP) Region from FAC- to FAC. This shift meant that the Japanese Honeysuckle was then classified as a wetland plant instead of a non-wetland plant.

Furthermore, this change in classification had the possibility of changing the delineation of wetlands in the EMP and AGCP regions. When the Japanese Honeysuckle occurred as a dominant species in a wetland area, there was a strong possibility of a positive dominance test for hydrophytic, or wetland, vegetation, which may have resulted in the expansion of the wetland’s boundaries.

The 2014 NWPL once again saw a change in the classification of the Japanese Honeysuckle. The Japanese Honeysuckle shifted from FAC to Facultative-Upland (FACU) in the AGCP Region. FACU species sometimes occur in wetlands—less frequently than FAC-, however—but generally occur in non-wetland habitats. Therefore, the Japanese Honeysuckle is no longer categorized as a wetland plant in the AGCP Region. Subsequently, this may result in the reduction of wetland boundaries in that region.

The Japanese Honeysuckle maintained its FAC classification in the EMP Region for a longer time than in the AGCP Region, however, its classification was altered earlier this year. March 31, 2014 saw the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) submit a request that the classification of the Japanese Honeysuckle be changed from FAC to FACU in the EMP region. The COE responded on May 22 by listing the Japanese Honeysuckle on their website as FACU, effective immediately. The change in classification will be reflected on the 2015 NWPL, but the 2014 NWPL will remain unaltered. Now that the Japanese Honeysuckle is considered a non-wetland plant in the EMP Region, wetland delineations have the possibility of changing as the boundaries of wetlands may decrease.

The COE publishes changes to species classifications on their website, however, provides no formal public notification when revisions are made. Until such a process is implemented, the only way of finding out about classification changes is to periodically check the COE website.

Mid-Year Wetland Plant Challenges

Swamp Stomp

Volume 14, Issue 33

Twice a year the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) accepts challenges to its National Wetland Plant List (NWPL). Challenges from the public can be made between January 1 through March 31 and again from June 1 through August 31 of each year.

This is the procedure outlined by the COE.

Individuals or institutions may challenge or request a change to a plant species’ wetland rating if they believe it is incorrect. This three-stage challenge process, which involves an exchange of information among the Requester, the National Technical Committee on Wetland Vegetation (NTCWV), and the National Panel (NP) and Regional Panels (RP) of the NWPL, is designed to increase our knowledge of wetland plant distribution and disseminate that information to all.

In the first stage of each challenge, the Requester submits a recommendation and rationale with supporting documentation. If both the NP and RP agree with the Requester’s suggested rating, the plant’s wetland rating will be changed during the next annual update of the NWPL. If the NP does not agree with the Requester’s recommendation, the Requester may continue the process by testing their recommendation with a field study.

In Stage Two, Requesters submit a study proposal based on a study design template to be developed by the NTCWV. The NTCWV and the NP will work with the Requester to adjust these templates for a particular plant species or wetland type, including the appropriate spatial scale. Once the design is approved, Requesters may collect the data.

In Stage Three, the Requester submits the data to the NP for analysis. Alternatively, the Requester may enter and analyze the data they collect using a pre-formatted spreadsheet. All data and results generated during a challenge to a species wetland rating will be posted on the NWPL web site. Ultimately, the NP will determine the change in indicator status and the spatial scale at which the change is warranted.

Earlier in the year the National Home Builders Association submitted four challenges to the NWPL for the following species for the listed regions.

Lolium perenne – Perennial/Italian Rye Grass [Arid West]
Baccaris salicifolia – Mules Flat [Arid West]
Poa pratensis – Kentucky Blue Grass [Mid West]
Lonicera japonica – Japanese Honeysuckle [EMP & AGCP]

All four of these species are listed as FAC in the latest published NWPL.

Lonicera japonica had been re-evaluated in the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain region prior to the release of the 2014 NWPL update. It had been changed only in that region from FAC to FACU. On May 22, 2014 The Eastern Mountains and Piedmont (EMP) Regional Panel reviewed a challenge request, for Lonicera japonica (Japanese Honeysuckle) and Juglans californica (California Walnut),submitted by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB).

The Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Panel unanimously agreed to rate Lonicera japonica (Japanese Honeysuckle) as FACU after reviewing the challenge request package submitted by the National Association of Home Builders’.  The National Panel discussed the outcome of these results and also reached the consensus that Lonicera japonica should be rated FACU.

The voting results from the Arid West Regional Panel for Juglans californica (California Walnut) were tied at the regional level after reviewing the challenge request package submitted by the National Association of Home Builders’; 2 FACU and 2 FAC. The National Panel discussed these results and unanimously agreed to rate Juglans californica FACU.

The ratings listed above for Lonicera japonica (FACU) and Juglans californica (FACU) are effective immediately for 2014. The changes will be reflected on the NWPL with the next published version of the list in 2015.

One other species was updated. On July 15, 2014, the National Panel re-examined the rating of Phacelia distans Benth. ( Distant Scorpion-Weed ) and agreed to change it to UPL in the Arid West and in the Western Mountain Valleys and Coast Regions. A request for re-evaluation was submitted by Tony Bomkamp of Glenn Lukos Associates. This rating is effective immediately for 2014. The change will be reflected on the NWPL with the next published version of the list in 2015.

Please make sure to update your lists especially in the EMP region. Lonicera japonica has always been a problematic species and its presence in wet areas is not always representative of that area being a wetland. This is especially true when you find it in a floodplain. It seems to be climbing out of the water trying to keep its feet dry. Changing the indicator status of this plant does reflect its nature of not really being a wetland plant.

Have a great week!

Marc

USACOE Changes National Wetland Plant List (again)

Swamp Stomp

Vol 13, Number 40

Sometime between July 17 and July 22, 2013 the US Army Corps of Engineers published the 2013 National Wetland Plant List (NWPL) update. If you did not hear about this you are not alone. For the record the 2013 list was not published in the Federal Register. The previous list was published in the Federal Register for the 2012 NWPL. I only found 2013 list by pursing the NWPL website and saw a new link for the 2013 list.

This is a significant change especially in light of this “fact sheet” dated July 22, 2013.  The last statement is significant.

“Implementation: The Federal agencies will use the 2013 NWPL on all new Jurisdictional Determinations after September 1, 2013. Any delineations underway using the current list will be accepted, please just reference which list was used in your documentation.”

So what has changed?

2013NWPL

In short these are the numbers. The new list contains 7937 plant species, which is a reduction of 263 from the 2012 list. The majority of deletions were the removal of some upland species, taxonomic splits, merged species, and three errors. There were 12 requests for re-evaluation of indicator statuses and in seven of those species, the indicator status changed. All of these modifications accounted for 327 indicator status changes.

Now this may not sound like a big deal however the use of the list is a concern. The implementation statement above could be construed as a “rule.” I assume it is as your delineation will not be accepted if you do not use the new list.

Webster defines a rule as:

  1. a prescribed guide for conduct or action
  2. the laws or regulations prescribed by the founder of a religious order for observance by its members
  3. an accepted procedure, custom, or habit
    1. a usually written order or direction made by a court regulating court practice or the action of parties
    2. a legal precept or doctrine
  4. a regulation or bylaw governing procedure or controlling conduct

So can we assume if we are directed to use the new list that would constitute a rule? The veiled threat that the Corps will not review your delineation seems to constitute a reprimand if you do not follow the rule.

According to the “A Guide to the Rulemaking Process”, prepared by the Office of the Federal Register in 2011, a rule is:

“The proposed 
rule, or Notice of Proposed
 Rule Making
 (PRM), is the official
 document that announces and explains the agency’s plan to address a problem or accomplish a goal. All proposed rules must be published in the Federal Register to notify the public and to give them an opportunity to submit comments. The proposed rule and the public comments received on it form the basis of the final rule.”

Following the announcement that a new rule is proposed the public is the afforded the opportunity to comment on the rule. This can vary from 30-60 days.

The 2012 list went through the entire rulemaking process. The public comments were published and the draft list was finalized and published in the Federal Register as a final rule on May 9, 2012 (Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 90).

The 2012 Federal Register notice does address the issue of updates to the 2012 list.

“The updating and maintenance of the NWPL will continue annually. Updates will include changes in nomenclature and taxonomy obtained from Biota of North America (BONAP), newly proposed species, changes as needed based on the results from challenges made to species wetland ratings, dataset analyses for regional and national-scale evaluations of wetland ratings, reevaluations of wetland ratings based on GIS and floristic provinces analyses, considerations of any new subregions, and several continuous quality control steps. These types of updates and maintenance steps will follow the same protocols used in the development of the 2012 NWPL update. Coordination will occur between the national and regional panels, the public and others, and the National Technical Committee for Wetland Vegetation as needed.”

At issue is the “using the same protocols…” and “Coordination will occur between …the pubic…”

What was put forth in July was a mandate not coordination. Who is the National Technical Committee for Wetland Vegetation and why do they get independent control over this list? I do not believe the intent of the 2012 publication was to give the Corps perpetual and unilateral control over what is and what is not a wetland plant species without any public involvement.

Perhaps you are wondering why I am getting so mad about this list. The issue is that vegetation identification is the most difficult of wetland assessment skills to master. The annual need to keep changing the names and indicators of the plants without any public input adds to the confusion of wetland plant identification. This translates into bad delineations. Virtually none of the commercially published and university published field guides contain the same names of many of the species listed in the 2013 list. Want proof? Look up poison ivy.

For your convenience we have posted all of the Wetland Plant Lists for each Regional Supplement on our Facebook Page. If you would like to download any of these just “like us”, fill out the form and download away. These documents are stored on the Swamp School servers so government shutdown or not you can always get them. Plus, they are FREE!  Well they are not really free.  You paid for them with your tax dollars, but I am not going to charge you for them.  😉

facebook-like