The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09/05/2024 Meeting Location: Municipal Center City of 7100 147th Street West Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 September 5, 2024 PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE INFORMAL MEETING TENTATIVE AGENDA 6:00 p.m. 1.Parks Referendum Update 2.Misc. Committee / Staff Communications PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGULAR MEETING TENTATIVE AGENDA 7:00 p.m. 1.Call to Order and Pledge 2.Approval of the Agenda 3. Audience –10 Minutes Total Time Limit – For Items Noton this Agenda 4. Approval of the June 2024Minutes 5. Agenda Items A.Update onParks Amenity Plan Process B. Update on Family Aquatic Center and Rebranding Efforts C. Youth Baseball/Softball Complex Concept D.Alimagnet Natural Resource Management Plan 6. Committee / Staff Discussion Items A.Parks Referendum Update 7. Input from Committee Members on Next Agenda A. Future Meeting Item – Update on Park Dedication 8. Adjourn NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS - Tentative: Thursday, October 3, 2024 6:00 p.m. (Informal) and 7:00 p.m. (Regular) Regular meetings are available on Spectrum Cable Channel180 and on the City’s website at www.applevalleymn.gov ITEM: 4. PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY City of September 5, 2024 COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: SECTION: Regular CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE September 5, 2024 Minutes of the June 6, 2024, Apple Valley Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee. PRESENT: Committee Chair Lisa Hiebert; Committee Members Mark Schori, Dave Freed, Craig Long, Noel Hammill, and Jess Smith; Parks and Recreation Director Eric Carlson; Parks Superintendent Steve Rother; Recreation Superintendent Nate Rosa; and Administrative Coordinator Kayla Hechsel. ABSENT: Recreation Facilities Manager Brian Christianson; Golf Course Manager Jim Zinck; and Committee Member Randy Bailey ITEM 1. Call to Order Chair Hiebertcalled the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Everyone took part in the Pledge of Allegiance. ITEM 2. Approval of Agenda MOTION: by Freed, seconded by Long, approving the Agenda as presented VOTE: Yes – 6, No – 0 ITEM 3. Audience – 10 Minutes Total Time Limit – For Items Not on the Agenda No one present tospeak. ITEM 4. Approval of the May 2024Minutes. MOTION:by Hammill, seconded by Schori, to approve the May 2024 minutes as presented. VOTE: Yes – 6, No – 0 ITEM 5.A. Agenda Items – 2024 Pool Season Preview Recreation Superintendent Nate Rosa provided a recap of numbers from the 2023 pool season, including average attendance, days open, private rentals, operating hours, and staffing levels for both the Apple Valley Family Aquatic Center and the Redwood Community Pool. Superintendent Rosa also gave a preview of the 2024 pool season, which officially began on the same day as this meeting—June 6. He highlighted that we have an CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE September 5, 2024 80% return rate for staffing, which is outstanding. Staff are very pleased with the staffing levels we have this season. Superintendent Rosa also emphasized the new offerings and special events we are having at the pools this year, including Tot Swim, Twilight Swim, the season kick-off and ending events, men-only and women-only open swim nights, as well as the Final Farewell to Redwood Pool Celebration on Wednesday, August 21. Committee Member Schori asked if we have considered implementing a non-resident rate, and Superintendent Rosa expressed that we have but that we wouldn’t make any changes until the launch of the new pool in 2026. Chair Hiebert confirmed that the staff working at the men-only and women-only swim will be of the same gender as the event participants. Committee Member Schori also asked if there are plans for the island in the middle of the lazy river at the Aquatic Center, and Recreation Superintendent Rosa expressed that we are looking at adding theming to the island to dress it up. ITEM 6. Committee/Staff Discussion Items Parks & Recreation Director Eric Carlson gave an update on the 2023 Parks Referendum projects. He shared that the City Council will be approving contracts for the Construction Manager we are planning to hire for the Redwood Park and Kelley Park projects. He highlighted that we are quickly moving forward on plans to improve the Family Aquatic Center, with construction planned to begin in September. Finally, Director Carlson mentioned that we hope to tackle the expansion of the Johnny Cake Ridge Park pickleball courts in 2025. ITEM 7. Input from Committee Members on Next Agenda Director Carlson acknowledged that the Committee has asked for more information about the Park Dedication process, which we will provide at a later meeting. No additional input on future items was given. ITEM 8. Adjourn There being no further business, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting was adjourned. MOTION: by Freed, seconded by Hammill, to adjourn the meeting at 7:23 p.m. VOTE: Yes – 6, No – 0 - 2 of 3 - CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE September 5, 2024 Respectfully Submitted, Kayla Hechsel, Administrative Coordinator Approved by the Apple Valley Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Lisa Hiebert, Chair on September 5, 2024. - 3 of 3 - ITEM: 5.A. PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY City of September 5,2024 COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: SECTION: Regular ITEM DESCRIPTION: Update on Parks Amenity Plan Process STAFF CONTACT: DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Eric Carlson, Director Parks and Recreation Department Action Requested N/A – informational item Summary The City hired HKGi as a consultant to assist in the development of a park amenities plan for the Apple Valley park system. The planning process included reviewing some of the following information: Inventory of existing amenities and their respective service areas Condition/age assessment of park amenities Demographic data Walkshed data Benchmark data in comparison to neighboring communities Street Light data (cell phone data) The park amenities that have received the most planning include playgrounds, tennis courts, and basketball courts. After reviewing data,aDraft Parks Amenity Planwas developed, which provides a plan for amenity replacement over the next five years. The Draft Parks Amenity Plan was posted on the City website in July for the public to review.We placed signage at each playground in the city to encourage residents to log into our website to learn more information, provide comments, and participate in the process. To gather as much community feedback as possible, we hosted meetings in 49 parks between July 29 and August 29, and as of August 29, we have received 423 comments on our social pinpoint site. The site will remain open to public comment until Friday, September 13. Over the next few weeks, we will be reviewing all of the feedback we’ve received, and we will update the Draft Parks Amenity Plan to best reflect what we have heard. An updated Plan will be posted on the City website by mid-October so residents can review and comment. Our goal is to adopt the plan by the end of the year so that we can begin making improvements in 2025. Background In November 2023, Apple Valley residents approved a parks referendum authorizing a total of $73.25 million to invest in parks, trails, natural resources, Kelley Park, Redwood Park, Hayes Arena, the Apple Valley Community Center and Senior Center, a youth baseball/softball complex at Hayes Park, and a community pool at Redwood Park. Of this total, $18,750,000 is dedicated to the improvements of parks, which includes playgrounds, trails, lighting, irrigation, tennis/basketball/pickleball courts, skate park, and parking lots. ITEM: 5.B. PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY City of September 5,2024 COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: SECTION: Regular ITEM DESCRIPTION: Update on Family Aquatic Center and Rebranding Efforts STAFF CONTACT:DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Eric Carlson, DirectorParks and Recreation Department Action Requested Recommend proposed improvements to the Apple Valley Family Aquatic Center and support the rebranding efforts. Summary As a part of the 2023 ParksReferendum,we are planning improvements to the Apple Valley Family Aquatic Center. These improvements include: New pool filtersNew HVAC equipmentConcession stand improvements Refurbished slidesRefurbished pool shellBathhouse improvements ADA improvementsAdditional shadeConcrete deck improvements Signage improvementsLandscaping improvementsGames area improvements Use of solarEmergency Gates/FenceSplash Valley Waterpark (Branding) Additionally,we have worked to rename and rebrand the facility, andthat recommendation is: We will provide additional information regarding costs and project budgets at the meeting as this information was not available at the time this packet was created. Background In November 2023, Apple Valley residents approved a parks referendum authorizing a total of $73.25 million to invest in parks, trails, natural resources, Kelley Park, Redwood Park, Hayes Arena, the Apple Valley Community Center and Senior Center, a youth baseball/softball complex at Hayes Park, and a community pool at Redwood Park. Of this total, $8,200,000million is dedicated to the improvements of the Apple Valley Family Aquatic Center, which includes updating mechanical equipment, renovating the bathhouse and concession stand, adding shade structures, renaming/rebranding the facility, and more.The tentative project schedule is as follows: Sept. 2024–May 2025 –Construction June 2025 –Open for Use ITEM: 5.C. PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY City of September 5,2024 COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: SECTION: Regular ITEM DESCRIPTION: Youth Baseball/Softball Complex Concept STAFF CONTACT: DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Eric Carlson, Director Parks and Recreation Department Action Requested RecommendConcept for Project 2024-116, Youth Baseball/Softball Complex Construction Summary After extensive engagement with our local youth associations, residents, and ISD 196, City staff have worked with Confluence, Inc., the project’s landscape architect, to develop a concept for the youth baseball/softball complex that will be constructed at Westview Elementary/Hayes Park. The concept includes the following elements: Four (4) new fields in a wheel with new backstops, fencing, and dugouts Irrigated natural turf Athletic field lighting and scoreboards Additional parking Paved trails Stormwater retention basin Irrigated flexible field space appropriate for football, soccer, and lacrosse No outdoor ice skating/hockey on the site Relocation of the VAA Building Construction of a small maintenance garage Staff are seeking the Committee’s support to approve this concept so that we can continue to work on the details of our design, plans, and specifications, and move the project forward to solicit for construction bids. Staff are in the process of working with ISD 196 to establish a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for the construction of the complex and future usage and maintenance parameters. Staff will present the JPA to the Committee for review when the final version has been developed. Background In November 2023, Apple Valley residents approved a parks referendum authorizing a total of $73.25 million to invest in parks, trails, natural resources, Kelley Park, Redwood Park, Hayes Arena, the Apple Valley Community Center and Senior Center, a youth baseball/softball complex at Hayes Park, and a community pool at Redwood Park. Of this total, $5,200,000is dedicated to the construction of a youth baseball/softball complex at Westview Elementary/Hayes Park. ITEM: 5.D. PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY City of September 5,2024 COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: SECTION: Regular ITEM DESCRIPTION: Alimagnet Natural Resource Management Plan STAFF CONTACT: DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Eric Carlson, Director Parks and Recreation Department Action Requested Recommend City Council Adopt the Alimagnet Park Natural Resource Management Plan Summary Through the process leading up to the passage of the Parks Referendum, staff repeatedly heard how important preserving and improving our natural resources is to our residents. Alimagnet Park contains one of our largest wooded areas, and considerable work is needed to promote future natural resource health of the park. Working in partnership with Dakota County, we have developed a Natural Resource Management Plan for Alimagnet Park. The purpose of the Natural Resource Management Plan (Plan) is to describe the current and preferred natural resource conditions, goals, and activities for Alimagnet Park within the City of Apple Valley. The Plan includes information on Alimagnet Park’s historical and existing vegetative cover, noxious and invasive plants, and land cover; ecological impacts, past and present, including fire suppression, diseases, wildlife, and climate change; plant community assessment; wildlife; target vegetation communities, including management priorities, methods, and five-year workplan. The Plan also includes plant restoration goals and recommendations, a restoration process, schedule, and cost estimates. Goals of the plan include: 1.Maintain natural areas where restoration and management investments have already been made. 2. Expand ecological restoration and management into new locations based on need and City priorities. 3.Use an ecosystem approach to restore, enhance, and maintain natural areas in a cost- effective manner. 4. Monitor activities to allow for adaptive management and continual improvements in efficiency and outcomes. 5. Evaluate the pros and cons related to the future of the disc golf course in Alimagnet Park. Outcomes could be removal of the disc golf course, reduce to a 9-hole course, the continuation of the current 12-hole course, or an expansion to an 18-hole course. An additional outcome may be the relocation of existing holes to better meet the needs of protecting the park’s most valuable natural resources. Additionally, we received substantial feedback about the impact deer have in the surrounding neighborhood. Staff is researching how to move forward with the creation of a city-wideDeer Management Plan. Staff is seeking the Committee’s recommendation for City Council to adopt the revised Natural Resource Management Plan for Alimagnet Park. Background In November 2023, Apple Valley residents approved a parks referendum authorizing a total of $73.25 million to invest in parks, trails, natural resources, Kelley Park, Redwood Park, Hayes Arena, the Apple Valley Community Center and Senior Center, a youth baseball/softball complex at Hayes Park, and a community pool at Redwood Park. Of this total, $2,000,000 is dedicated to improving and protecting the natural resources in Apple Valley’s parks. . ³´± « 2¤²®´±¢¤ - ¦¤¬¤³ 0« ¥®± ³§¤ #¨³¸ ®¥ !¯¯«¤ 6 ««¤¸ !«¨¬ ¦¤³ 0 ±ª ¯±¤¯ ±¤£ ¡¸ $ ª®³ #®´³¸ $2!&4 August2024 3¨¦ ³´±¤ 0 ¦¤ LANDOWNER As the authorized representative of the landowner of the property consisting of a City park, I reviewed and approve this Restoration Plan. I agree that the City of Apple Valley will follow the guidelines included in this Restoration Plan to manage that portion of its property included in Alimagnet Park. The Restoration Planwill be used to develop a mutually acceptable Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the County to begin implementing the Restoration Plan. Other applicable local,state,and federal laws and regulations not addressed within this Restoration Planwill be followed. _________________________________ ______________ City of Apple Valley Date DAKOTA COUNTY Dakota County prepared and discussed this Restoration Plan with theauthorized representative of the Landowner. The County agrees to work with the Landowner in using this Restoration Planas the basis for creating a jointly developed Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) to implement this Restoration plan in a fair and reasonable manner. The County will assess and update this Restoration plan to assist the Landowner in managing Alimagnet Park. _________________________________________________ Land Conservation ManagerDate City of Apple Valley – Alimagnet Park Natural Resource Management Plan 1 4 ¡«¤ ®¥ #®³¤³² I.Plan Purpose and Goals...................................................................................................................................4 II.Property Ownership........................................................................................................................................5 III.Property Location and Landscape Context......................................................................................................6 IV.Historical, Current, and Adjacent Land Use..................................................................................................10 A.Historical and Current Land Use...............................................................................................................10 B.Adjacent Land Use....................................................................................................................................14 V.Land...............................................................................................................................................................15 A.Topography and Aspect............................................................................................................................15 B.Geology.....................................................................................................................................................19 C.Soil.............................................................................................................................................................21 VI.Water.............................................................................................................................................................25 A.Surface Water...........................................................................................................................................25 B.Groundwater.............................................................................................................................................26 C.Wetlands...................................................................................................................................................27 VII.Vegetation.....................................................................................................................................................30 A.Plant Community Assessment..................................................................................................................31 1.Site Evaluation........................................................................................................................................33 B.Previous Restoration Activities.................................................................................................................42 VIII. Wildlife...........................................................................................................................................................43 A.Previous Observations and Surveys..........................................................................................................45 IX. Recommendations...........................................................................................................................................46 A.Land...........................................................................................................................................................46 1. Erosion Control..........................................................................................................................................46 2. Shoreline Stabilization...............................................................................................................................47 B.Vegetation Management..........................................................................................................................47 1. Management Unit Target Plant Communities and Goals..........................................................................47 2. Suggested Future Considerations..............................................................................................................54 B.Water Management..................................................................................................................................56 C.Wildlife Management...............................................................................................................................56 1. Priority Species..........................................................................................................................................56 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan2 2. Problem Species........................................................................................................................................57 3. Indicator Species........................................................................................................................................57 4. Habitat Enhancements..............................................................................................................................57 X. Management Plan.............................................................................................................................................58 A.Prioritized Tasks........................................................................................................................................58 B.Five-Year Work Plan..................................................................................................................................58 XI. Other Considerations.......................................................................................................................................61 XII. References & Resources.................................................................................................................................64 APPENDICES..........................................................................................................................................................65 Appendix A: Plant Species Recorded at Alimagnet Park...................................................................................65 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan3 I.0« 0´±¯®²¤ £ '® «² Purpose The purpose of the Natural Resource Management Plan (Plan)is to describe the current and preferred natural resource conditions, goals, and activities for Alimagnet Parkwithin the City of Apple Valley. The Plan includes 1 information on Alimagnet Park’s historicaland existing vegetative cover, noxious and invasive plants, and land cover; ecological impacts, past and present, includingfire suppression, diseases, wildlife, and climate change; plant community assessment; wildlife; target vegetation communities, including management priorities, methods, and five-year workplan. The Planalso includes plant restoration goals and recommendations, a restoration process,schedule,and cost estimates. A Joint Powers Agreement (JPA, which will serve as a contract between the City and the County,and will be developed in conjunction with the Plan)will include:a workplan for implementing jointly agreed upon natural resource activities and priorities; the respective rolesand responsibilities of the City, the County or partners; schedules; cost estimates;and specific fundingcontributions (cash/in-kind) and fundingsources. Goals Alimagnet Park represents one of the City of Apple Valley’smost cherished natural areas. Somelimited ecological restoration and management work has been conducted within portions of the park, resulting in moderate quality native plant communities and valuable habitats for native wildlife. However, most ofthe park’s natural areashave not been managed andconsist of degraded plant communities. With intentional and strategic restoration and management efforts, Alimagnet Park could represent a much higher quality complex of upland and lowland natural areas providing significant benefits for native vegetation, wildlife, and public enjoyment. The City of Apple Valleyhas identified the following natural resources goals for the Apple Valley portion of Alimagnet Park: 1.Maintain natural areas where restoration and management investments have already been made. 2.Expand ecological restoration and management into new locations based on need and City priorities. 2 3.Use an ecosystem approachto restore, enhance, and maintain natural areas in a cost-effective manner. 3 4.Monitor activities to allow for adaptive managementand continual improvements in efficiency and outcomes. 1 Generally non-native plant species and those native plant species that grow and spread aggressively, become overabundant, and degrade habitats. 2 An approach to land and water management that considers all interacting factors in an ecosystem and designs management techniques that replicate, at the lowest practical cost, the ecological structures and processes that enable ecosystems to adapt to changing conditions. 3 Structured decision making in the face of uncertainty, with an aim to reducing uncertainty over time by a cycle of implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan4 5.Evaluate the pros and cons related to the future of the disc golf course in Alimagnet Park. Outcomes could be removal of the disc golf course, reduce to a 9-hole course, the continuation of the current 12- hole course, or an expansion to an 18-hole course. An additional outcome may be the relocation of existing holes to better meet the needs of protecting the park’s most valuable natural resources. II.P±®¯¤±³¸ /¶¤±²§¨¯ Landowner Information Name: City of Apple Valley th Address:7100147St. W, Apple Valley, MN 55124 City ParkInformation Location: 211 Ridgeview Dr, Apple Valley, MN 55124 Watershed: Vermillion River Watershed Organization: Vermillion River Joint Powers Organization Parcel Identification Numbers: 010290005010 010290004015 010290003011 010290002010 010290006010 010290040012 011170200010 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan5 III.0±®¯¤±³¸ ,®¢ ³¨® £ , £²¢ ¯¤ #®³¤·³ Several different landscape conservation planning efforts in the County have resulted in maps that designate the most important parcels to consider for permanent protection and/or natural resource restoration, based on various ecological criteria.For more context concerning these features relative to the location of the City of Apple Valley’s portion of AlimagnetPark, refer to Figures 1, 2, and 3. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan6 Figure 1. Location Map City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan7 Figure 2. Subregion and Landscape Map City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan8 Figure 3. Local Landscape Map Alimagnet Park is thesecond largestnatural area in theCity of Apple Valley(approximately 85acres, Figure 1); the Minnesota Zoo is the largest.The Alimagnet Park includes an additional 141acres to the westin the City of Burnsville. Alimagnet Park is the largest City-owned natural area in Apple Valley. Due to its sizable acreage, City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan9 large tracts of wooded areas, diverse native vegetative communities, water resources(including adjacent Alimagnet Lake), and high visibility, the park is a well-known and heavily usedcommunity resource. While some park users enjoy disc golf, integrated intothe park’s natural areas, many residents enjoy dog walking, watching wildlife, and other passive recreation. Limited restoration and management investments have been made at the park over the decades,including restoration and enhancement of the park’s oak forests and woodlands; however, most of the park’s natural areas are degraded due to invasive vegetation and lack of management. Thepark lies approximately 1.5 miles east of the junction of Interstates I-35E and I-35Wand just northeast of County Road 42. There are many nearby City and County parks, and Metro Conservation Corridors exist within approximately 1.5 miles of the park (Figure 2). In addition to smaller city parks in the immediate vicinity of Alimagnet Park,noteworthy natural areasinclude Terrace Oaks Park(a little overone mile northof Alimagnet Park), the Minnesota Zoo and adjacentLebanon Hills Regional Park(approximately two miles northeast of the park), and the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge (approximately 3 miles north).Nearby trails and greenways can be found surrounding the park,including aneast-west paved trail alongMcAndrews Road approximately one-half mile to the north(Figure 3). Ecological connectivity is significantly constrained by existing residential development; however, future analysis is recommended to determine if opportunities exist. The DNRCounty Biological Survey (DNR1997)identified the majority of the park as a Moderate quality Site of Biodiversity Significance (Figure1). A search of DNR’s Natural Heritage Information System (NHISor Biotics, DNR2023)for the parkand a 1-mile radius identified one tracked natural feature –the red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), observed near the site in 2022. Implementing the recommendations in this NRMP will improve habitat conditions for this Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN)and others. IV.(¨²³®±¨¢ «Ǿ #´±±¤³Ǿ £ !£© ¢¤³ , £ 5²¤ A.HistoricalandCurrentLandUse According to vegetation mapping by Marschner (1974), prior to European settlement (early 1800s), the generalarea aroundAlimagnet Parkwas occupiedby Oak Openings and Barrens, today referred to as Oak Savanna, with a relatively small portion of Big Woods –Hardwoods (Oak, Maple, Basswood, etc.) in the northwestern cornerof the park. This provides insight to restoration targets, but must be tempered with current conditions and site constraints. European settlement significantly changed the pre-settlementlandscape. Native prairies were plowed, forests and woodlands cut, wetlands drained, watercourses straightened, fires suppressed, and intense agricultural practices introduced, including row cropping and livestock grazing. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan10 thth Although many of the changes had already occurred in the late 19and early 20centuries, some of the best evidence of past land use is depicted in historical aerial photographs(Figures 4, 5, 6), the oldest being from 1937. Figure 4. Earliest Historical Land Use Image (1937) City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan11 Figure 5. Historical Land Use (1951-2000) City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan12 Figure 6. Current Aerial Photo The earliest aerial image available of what is now Alimagnet Park(from 1937) depictsa highly variedlandscape (Figure 4). While much of the area that is forested today was wooded in the historical aerial photograph, most of these areas were less dense, and woodlands have expanded over time.Most of the park’s wetlands City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan13 and even much of Alimagnet Lake appeared to be dry or covered with vegetation due to the severe drought that occurred in the late 1930s.Oversubsequent decades (Figure 5),the forest canopyincreasedin several locations, including along the northwesternportionof the park, and water was apparent in the site’s wetlands and Alimagnet Lake.Forest canopy increased primarily due to fire suppression and invasive species introduction. Water level increased primarily due to increased precipitation and from increased stormwater runofffrom increased residential development and impervious surfaces in the subwatershed. Residential development begins to encroach around the park by the 1970s and continues, especially southeast of the park, into the 1980s. Figure 6 presents a current aerial photograph of the park. According to the DNRCounty Biological Survey, as of 1997, only about 2.6 percent of high-quality, native plant communities remained in the County.While most of the City of Apple Valley is built out, urban development in the Countyhas increased rapidly in recent years,and the growth rate is expected to continue at a high pace. This growth continues to expand into farmland and natural areas, making natural resource protection and restoration, such as in Alimagnet Park,increasingly important. B.AdjacentLandUse City parks provide a variety of ecosystem services and are an integral component of green infrastructure in urban areas.Yet because of suburban development, green spaces have become increasinglyfragmented, negatively impacting population abundance, species richness, and genetic variation within species.The adjacency of parkland, cultivated land, open areas, and residential sub-divisions can affect vegetation and wildlife management options, may present opportunities to enlarge existing habitat areasand/orcreate corridors for wildlife movement, and may determine the characteristics of local surface water hydrology. Alimagnet Park is in the heart of suburban development in the County.The adjacent land-use setting has several ramifications for the park. Land adjacent to the Apple Valley portion of Alimagnet Parkconsists of the Burnsville portion of the park (to the west), Alimagnet Lake (to the north and northwest),and suburban residentialland use(to the north, east, and south, Figure 3). Suburban development and land use present a variety of ecological stressors experienced by the natural communities of the park, a prominent one beingin the form of “edge effects.” Edge effects experienced by Alimagnet Park’s natural areas include: noise from roads and residences, increased stormwater runoff into lakes and wetlands, air pollution from cars, microclimate changes from cleared or modified vegetation, increased predation,disturbance of wildlife by domestic cats and dogs, and sources of invasive vegetation. The park is more “buffered” by natural land covers to the north (Alimagnet Lake) and to the west(Burnsville’sforested parkland, Figure 3).Given these adjacent land cover types, it is unlikely that significant new encroachments will occur on the park’snorthern and westernperimeter; however, the suburban edge effects mentioned abovehave stressed, and will continue to stress, the ecological health of Alimagnet Park. Some minor dumping of landscapingdebris was observed along the east edge of the Park where it abuts private lots. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan14 Connectivity Habitat connectivity plays an important role in ecosystem healthand resilience to global environmental change. Enhancing connectivity of urban green spaces should be linked by corridors forming a network facilitating dispersal and movement.Ecological restoration and management within the parkwill benefit the ecological integrity and resilience of both the Apple Valleyand Burnsville’s portions of the park. These parklands together provide a large, contiguous tract of forest and woodland habitat interspersed with a variety of depressional wetlands. Large wooded habitats are required by many forest bird species, and most of the park’s wetlands are buffered by surrounding forests, increasing their ecological value and restoration potential. Existing development patterns make it challenging to restore meaningful natural corridors to other natural areas in the vicinity of the park(Figure 2); however, increased native plantings on private lands and in rights-of-way can provide increased habitat, ecological“buffers” (which reduce edge effects),and improved connectivity for birds and flying insects, including many pollinators. Cost-share programs are a good way to encourage private landowners to conduct native plantings on their own property, which benefits adjacent and nearby natural areas like Alimagnet Park. V.Land A.TopographyandAspect Topography and the orientation of slopes (aspect) relative to north, south, east, and west are important factorsin the development and formation of soil, potential for soil erosion, and the type and stability of vegetation that will grow in a given location. In general, more topographic variation will result in more complexity and diversity of vegetation communities and hydrologic features. Generally, south-and southwest-facing slopes will be drier and supportshortervegetation thannorth and northeast facing slopes. The aspect of slopes within Alimagnet Parkcan have a strong influence on soil temperature and moisture.In the northern hemisphere, north-facingslopes areoften shaded, while south-facing slopes receivemore solar radiation for a given surface area,because the slope is more often tilted toward the sun and isnotshaded directly by the earth. Aspect cansignificantlyinfluence locational climate (microclimate). Soil temperatures and soil moisture on south-facing slopes are typically warmer and drier than thoseon north-facing slopes,due in part to the increased solar radiation and direction of the prevailing winds in the summer. Likewise, soils on north-facing slopes tend to be cooler and wetter, due to diminished solar energy.The soils, topography, and aspect of slopes within Alimagnet park are represented in Figures 7, 8, and 9. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan15 Figure 7. Soils and Topography City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan16 Figure 8. Slope Aspect City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan17 Figure 9. Percent Slope Figures 7 through 9 illustrate the landform heterogeneity of the park, which includes a variety of upland and lowland settings. The majorityof the site is characterized by rolling to hilly topography, including many areas with steep slopes (Figure 9). Variations of solar aspect (Figure 8) influence the type of vegetation City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan18 communities at the park, such as themesic forests and woodlands along the park’s northwest boundary, which slopes down to Alimagnet Lake. Fire-dependent communities (e.g., dry-mesic forests, oak savannas) will be most effectively restored and maintained on relatively flat areas or south-or west-facing slopes. Steeper slopes (including the park’snorthwest boundaryand near the southern tip of Alimagnet Lake)should be managed in a manner thatconsiders their increasederosion potential. For instance, use of wheeled equipment maynot be appropriate for manyof theseareasdue to safety concerns as well as the potential for erosion. Likewise, slopes can also influencemanagement costs, with steeper areas typically being more costly to managedue to compromisedaccessibility and reduced efficiency. B.Geology Bedrock formed as a result of ancient oceans, beaches, reefs or mudflats that once existedmillions of years ago.Sand and clay and marine animals became compressed and formed a variety of sedimentary rock layers, with different depths and characteristics. The major bedrock units found in the County include the Decorah, Platteville, Glenwood Sequence, underlain by St. Peter Sandstone, Prairie du Chien Group, Jordan Sandstone, St. Lawrence Formation, and the Franconia Formation. Some of these layers may not exist at Alimagnet Parkbecause of past geologic eventsthat buried them. Bedrock in the County is typically more than 50 feet below the surface in areas north of the Vermillion River and less than 50 feet in areas south of the Vermillion River. In Dakota County, the Prairie du Chien limestone is the most common bedrock first encountered beneath the surface soil and unconsolidated sediments, but another is St. Peter Sandstone. Bedrock is important because its layers create the underground aquifers where groundwater is stored. As the primary source of drinking water for County residents, it is critical that the quantity and quality of this groundwater is managed and protected. Depth to bedrock atAlimagnet Park ranges from approximately50 to 300 feet below grade (https://koordinates.com/layer/102849-dakota-county-minnesota-bedrock-depth/),and the thickness of the uppermost bedrockformations are approximately 145 to 155 feet thick (St. Peter Sandstone, the first bedrock encountered) and 125 to 140feet thick (the underlying Prairie Du Chien)(Mossler 2013). Dakota County has very diverse surficial geology (Figure 10) that helped create a very scenic and ecologically diverse landscape. The most recent glaciers extended south into the northern portion of the County,and the resulting terminal moraines are characterized by a typical “knoll and basin” topography. South of these moraines, the rock surface is quite irregular. In some places, the softer rock (sandstone) was worn down and is much lower than the moreresistant rock layers(limestone). This has created areas with isolated,mesa-like uplands,100 to 200 feet above the surrounding land. Glacial deposits have partially concealed these uplands and covered their surfaces with only a thin layer of glacial drift.In some areas, especially the Minnesota and Mississippi River valleys, level alluvium and terrace deposits were formed by glacial rivers and contemporary floods.More level outwash plains formed from melting glaciers and characterize much of the central portions of the County. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan19 The surficial geology of Alimagnet Parkis important because it is a highly influential factor in determining characteristics, such as topography, soil type, soil drainage, and vegetationstructure and community composition, and it also protect aquifers from contamination. The surficial geology is comprised of mixed till associated with the New Ulm Formation, which formedglacial deposits rangingfrom 50 to 300feet deep at the park. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan20 Figure 10. Surficial Geology C.Soil Extensive work in identifying and classifying soils was undertaken because of its importance to management and restoration of Alimagnet Park. The “Soil Survey of Dakota County Minnesota,” issued April 1983 and City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan21 updated in May 1994, provides a generalized depiction and description of soils in the County. Soil formation is the result of the interaction of five soil-forming factors: parent material, climate, organisms, topographic position or slope, and time (Foth, 1990).Taken collectively, these factors can help determine the dominant plant and animal communities and in turn help form soils. Mapped soil units/types are importantbecause they affect the vegetativeand hydrologic features of the parkand suggest the most appropriate use and management of the land. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan22 Table 1. Soils of Alimagnet Park Depth to Soil Percent Area Hydric Highly Soil NameTaxonomic ClassDrainageWater Table CodeSlope\[acres\]Soil?Erodible? \[cm\] Fine-silty, mixed, Moderately well 150BSpencer silt loamsuperactive, frigid 30.176YesNo drained Oxyaquic Glossudalfs Course-loamy, mixed, Somewhat 155CChetek sandy loamsuperactive, frigid 32.4excessively unknownNoNo Inceptic Hapludalfsdrained Fine-silty, mixed, Auburndale silt 189superactive, frigid Mollic 0.514.9Poorly drained0YesNo loam Epiaqualfs Fine-silty, mixed, 279BOtterholt silt loamsuperactive, frigid Haplic 32.6Well drained201YesNo Glossudalfs Coarse-loamy, mixed, Kingsley sandy 342Bsuperactive, mesic Mollic 413.4Well drained201YesNo loam Hapludalfs Coarse-loamy, mixed, Kingsley sandy 342Esuperactive, mesic Mollic 206.0Well drained201NoYes loam Hapludalfs Coarse-loamy, mixed, 342FKinsley sandy loamsuperactive, mesic Mollic 253.1Well drained201NoYes Hapludalfs Fine-silty, mixed, Very poorly 344Quam silt loamsuperactive, frigid 0.51.90YesNo drained Cumulic Endoaquolls Urban: Not identifiable Urban: Varies Urban land-Kingsley complex: 861C50.3201NoNo Kingsley complexCoarse-loamy, mixed,Kingsley: Well superactive, mesicdrained Mollic Hapludalfs Urban: Not identifiable Urban: Varies Kingsley complex: Urban land- 861E202.0201NoNo Coarse-loamy, mixed,Kingsley: Well Kingsley complex drained superactive, mesic Mollic Hapludalfs Kingsley-Coarse-loamy, mixed, 895CMahtomedi-superactive, mesic Mollic 1027.7Well drained201NoYes Spencer complexHapludalfs Kingsley-Coarse-loamy, mixed, 896EMahtomedi superactive, mesic Mollic 183.5Well drained201NoYes complexHapludalfs Kingsley-Coarse-loamy, mixed, 896FMahtomedi superactive, mesic Mollic 300.4Well drained201NoYes complexHapludalfs WWaterN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A Note that all of the soils that occur at Alimagnet Park are classified as “Glossudalfs” or “Hapludalfs”, which refers to a type of ‘alfisol’, which is defined as a forest soil. This is significant, since soil formation takes hundreds to thousands of years; this indicates that the site has been forested or wooded for a long time. Soils mapping of Alimagnet Park (Figure 7) identifies ninegeneralsoilunits based on formation, relief, and drainage City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan23 (see “Soil Name” column in Table 1) and 13unique soil map unitsplus open water(see “Soil Code” column in Table 1). Eachsoil map unit hasuniquecharacteristicsthatinfluence the species compositionof plant communities, drainage class, and erosion potential. Therefore, soil type can be very useful for informing management and restoration decisions. 1.Spencer silt loam (150B):The Spencer series consists of very deep, moderately well drained soils formed mostly in loess or other silty deposits overlying loamy till on drumlins and ground moraines.This soil is typically associated with forests in undisturbed locations. In the park, thissoil exists in onesmall areain the southwest corner of the site. 2.Chetek sandy loam (155C):The Chetek series consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils which are shallow to sandy outwash. This soil is associated with mixed deciduous and coniferous forest.In the park, thissoil exists in the south-central portionof the site. 3.Auburndale silt loam (189): The Auburndale series consists of poorly drained, hydric soils.Thissoil is typically associated with wetland grasses, alder shrubs, and trees such as quaking aspen and black ash. In the park, this soil is found inseverallow-lying areas and around wetlands. 4.Otterholt silt loam(279B):The Otterholt series consists of very deep, well drained soils formed mostly in loess or other silty deposits and in the underlying loamy till on ground moraines. This soil is typically associated with forests in undisturbed locations.In the park, thissoil exists in the northeast portionof the site. 5.Kingsley sandy loam (342B, 342E, 342F): The Kingsley series consists of very deep, well drained soils that formed in loamy glacial till on glacial moraines.This soil primarily supports mixed deciduous forestsoften dominated by oaks.This soil is found primarily in the western and north-central portions of the park in existing forestsand woodlands.The highly erodible quality of these soilscombined with their steep slopes (especially 342E and 342F) underscores the importance of using appropriate management techniques to prevent erosion. 6.Quam silt loam (344): The Quam series consists of very deep, poorly and very poorly drained soils that formed in silty water-sorted sediments in flats, swales and depressions on glacial moraines and lake plains. These soils are associated with grasses, rushes, sedges, and reeds.This soil is found in the southwestportion of the park withintwo wetland basins. 7.Urban land-Kingsley complex (861C, 861E): This complex,consisting of urban land and Kingsley sandy loam,is found in a small area along thenorth-central boundaryof the park. 8.Kingsley-Mahtomedi-Spencer complex (895C): This complex of soil series is a morainal deposit found on moderate to steep slopes. This soilisthe dominant complexinthe park, occupying the majority of the park’s eastern half. The highly erodible quality of these soilscombined with their moderately steep slopesunderscores the importance of using appropriate management techniques to prevent erosion. 9.Kingsley-Mahtomedi complex (896E, 896F): The Mahtomedi series is often associated with the Kingsley series andshares several key characteristics including being well drained.This soilsupports a variety of forests, often containing oaks.In the northwest portion of the park, this soil is found along the steep slopes leading down to Alimagnet Lake.These steep slopes combined with highly erodible soils underscore the importanceof using appropriate management techniques to limit erosion. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan24 VI.Water A.SurfaceWater One of the unique and attractive features of Dakota County is the amount and diversity of its surface waters. Major riverine systems, including the Mississippi, Minnesota, Cannon, and Vermillion rivers create the borders or flow within the County. Glaciers and the deposition that resulted from their melting, sculpted the land, and caused many of the topographical and hydrological features that occur throughout the County. Several creeks, streams and brooks are found in the southern portion of the County. Numerous small lakes and hills (glacial “kames”) are found in the northern and western portions of the County. The two largest lakes, Crystal and Marion, are highly desirable for their scenic beauty and recreation. A variety of different types of wetlands are scattered throughout the County includingseveral unique wetlands, known as fens, locatedin the Minnesota River Valley. Over the last one hundred some years, most of these surface waters have been significantly degraded, due to agricultural and municipal stormwater runoff.Numerous wetlands,whichfilter and retain water and rechargethe groundwater,have been lost. In fact, Dakota County has lost approximately 85% of its wetlands since the time of statehood. Pollution,includingexcess bacteria, sediment, excess nutrients (such as nitrogen and phosphorous from fertilizer), and lack of dissolved oxygen, has taken a toll on aquatic ecosystems (e.g., the ability of fish and other aquatic organisms to live and reproduce).Although regulations and voluntary efforts have improved water conditions, protection and management of natural areas, especially those adjacent to water bodies, is averyimportant strategy for achieving water quality goals. In 2002, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) deemed Alimagnet Parkas impaired for aquatic recreation due to nutrient enrichment.In 2005, the Cities of Burnsville and Apple Valley developed a lake management plan for Alimagnet. Partners, including the Cities, Alimagnet Lake Association, and others,have worked to remove rough fish and curly leaf pondweed, dredged stormwater ponds that drain to the lake, and installed a winter aeration system. The statewide ban on phosphorus in fertilizer also helped reduce the pollutant loading.In 2015, atotal maximum daily load (TMDL)plan was approved for the Lake, and efforts continue to improve this important lake’s water quality. A summary of some of this work(including an analysis of stormwater runoff flowing into Alimagnet Lake)is provided in the Vermillion River Watershed’s brochure: “Impaired Waters in the City of Apple Valleyand the Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS)”; see: https://www.vermillionriverwatershed.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/FAQ-City-of-Apple- Valley-Impairments.pdf. A Subwatershed Assessment was also completed for Alimagnet Lake in 2016, which identified best management practices that could be implemented in the watershed. To date, a number of practices have been installed by Apple Valley and Burnsville. The two cities operate under a Joint Powers Agreements to complete in-lake management for the lake, including fisheries and aquatic plant management. The Cities have partnered with VRWJPO to complete an in-lake alum treatment study, with planned applications beginning in the Fall of 2024.The City of Apple Valley completed a Surface Water Management Plan 2018-2027 (Barr 2018), which provides much more detail on Alimagnet Lake and its watershed(see: https://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/507/2018-Surface-Water-Management- City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan25 Plan?bidId=). There are no other large surface water features in Alimagnet Park; wetlands are discussed below in Section VI.C. B.Groundwater Groundwater accumulates below the surface of the land and is stored in aquifers: complex, underground geologic layers of sand, gravel,and porous rock. If groundwater exists in suitable quantity and quality, and can be delivered for human use, it is of great economic value. This is one example of what is called “ecosystem services”, or services ‘performed’ by nature that people benefit fromfor free. In the northern portion of the County whereglacial deposits are deep, groundwater is often extracted using drilled wells that extendinto sand and graveldeposits. In the southern part of the County where the layerof glacial deposits is shallow, most drilledwells extend into the porous bedrock.Most public water supplies obtain water from one of the deeper bedrock aquifers. Due to its relative abundance, quality and reasonable access, groundwater provides drinking water for most County citizens, irrigation water for agricultural crops (especially on the sandier soils in the eastern part of the County), and water for industrial and manufacturing companies. There is concern about the long-term supply of groundwater, due to increased residential and agricultural irrigation, municipal water use, changing climate, and pollution of aquifers. The need to protect groundwater-dependent ecological systems like trout streams and fensis also paramount. Most of the County’s groundwater is “highly sensitive” to surface contamination. And once an aquifer is polluted, it is very expensive or even prohibitive to improve its quality to drinking water standards. Given groundwater’s importance and potential vulnerability, it is important to be aware of the potential for groundwater contamination from pesticide and herbicide use.In rural parts of the County, the greatest risk to health from drinking water is pesticide and nitrogen contamination. Naturallyoccurring manganese and arsenic are concerns County-wide. Important factors to consider during natural resource management activities are depth-to-groundwater and the ability of the overlying geologic materials to protect the groundwater aquifer; the more overlying material the better the underlying aquifer is protected. The DNR defines groundwater sensitivity as an area where natural geologic factors create a significant risk of groundwater degradation through the migration of waterborne contaminants.Migration of contaminants dissolved in water through sediments is affected by many things, including biological degradation and contaminant type and density.General assumptions include: Contaminants move with water Flow paths are vertical Permeability of the sediment is the controlling factor The pollution sensitivity of buried sand and gravel aquifers and of the first buried bedrock surface represents the approximate time it takes for water to move from land surface to the aquifer. Based onsoil type (see Figure 7), soil layer thickness,and the texture of surficial geology(see Figure 10), the travel time for water to infiltrate from the park’s ground surface to the underlying aquifer varies from hours to approximately a year. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan26 The Minnesota Hydrology Atlas Series HG-02 (Adams 2016) defines five relative classes of geologic sensitivity (High, Moderate, Low, Very Low, and Ultra Low).The pollution sensitivity is inversely proportional to the time of travel. In areas of higher sensitivity,contaminants may reach the groundwater within hours to months. In areas of lower sensitivity there is time for a surface contamination source to be investigated, and possibly corrected, before serious groundwater pollution develops. Based on these factors, groundwater sensitivityfor Alimagnet Parkis ranked as LowtoModerate(i.e., it would take months to a week for surface contaminants to reach groundwater, per Adams 2016). According to the Minnesota Department of Agriculture web mapper (https://mnag.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=47a342afe6654640b935c8e76023da92), thePark is not located in Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA). C.Wetlands Wetlands are important natural features in the suburban landscape of Dakota County, and of Apple Valley, as well.Some of their benefits include: reduce flood risk, filter stormwater, clean water, replenish groundwater supplies, and offer habitat to a diversity of aquatic and terrestrial plant and wildlife species.Approximately 4.0of Alimagnet Park’s 85acres are wetlands (Figure 11). The park’s wetland types include one sedge meadow, one invasive cattail marsh, and numerous basinsthat contained areas of open water with patches or fringes of herbaceous vegetation (not dominated by cattails).These lowland,aquatic habitats are important elements in the mosaic of ecosystems present in the park, althoughmost of the park’s wetlands are severely degraded due to altered hydrology and/or invasive species (primarily reed canary grass and invasive cattail). Yet patches of native species (e.g., sedges, bulrushes) exist in several of the basins, particularlyin one relatively high-qualitysedge meadow in the southwest portion of the park. The following are the definitions of the components of the codes in the NWI index (Figure 11): SYSTEM P = Palustrine. The Palustrine System includes all nontidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses or lichens, and all such wetlands that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean-derived salts is below 0.5 ppt. L = Lacustrine. The Lacustrine System includes wetlands and deepwater habitats with all of the following characteristics: (1) situated in a topographic depression or a dammed river channel; (2) lacking trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, and emergent mosses or lichens. SUBSYSTEM L2 = Lacustrine, littoral. This Subsystem includes all wetland habitats in the Lacustrine System. It extends from the shoreward boundary of the System to a depth of 2.5 m (8.2 ft) below low water, or to the maximum extent of nonpersistent emergents if these grow at depths greater City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan27 CLASS AB = Aquatic Bed. Includes wetlands and deepwater habitats dominated by plants that grow principally on or below the surface of the water for most of the growing season in most years. UB = Unconsolidated Bottom. Includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats with at least 25% cover of particles smaller than stones (less than 6-7 cm), and a vegetative cover less than 30%. EM = Emergent. Characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes, excluding mosses and lichens. This vegetation is present for most of the growing season in most years. These wetlands are usually dominated by perennial plants. FO = Forested. Characterized by woody vegetation that is 6 m tall or taller. Characterized by woody vegetation that is 6 m tall or taller. SS = Scrub-Shrub. Includes areas dominated by woody vegetation less than 6 m (20 feet) tall. The species include true shrubs, young trees (saplings), and trees or shrubs that are small or stunted because of environmental conditions. SUBCLASS 1 = Persistent. Characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes, excluding mosses and lichens. This vegetation is present for most of the growing season in most years. These wetlands are usually dominated by perennial plants. WATER REGIME A = Temporary Flooded. Surface water is present for brief periods (from a few days to a few weeks) during the growing season, but the water table usually lies well below the ground surface for most of the season. C = Seasonally Flooded. Surface water is present for extended periods especially early in the growing season, but is absent by the end of the growing season in most years. The water table after flooding ceases is variable, extending from saturated to the surface to a water table. E = Seasonally Flooded/Saturated. Surface water is present for extended periods (generally for more than a month) during the growing season, but is absent by the end of the season in most years. When surface water is absent, the substrate typically remains saturated at or near the surface. F = Semi-permanently Flooded. Surface water persists throughout the growing season in most years. When surface water is absent, the water table is usually at or very near the land surface. H = Permanently Flooded. Water covers the substrate throughout the year in all years. MODIFIER X = “Excavated”, which is a special modifier. This Modifier is used to identify wetland basins or channels that were excavated by humans. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan28 Figure 11. National Wetland Inventory Features City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan29 VII.Vegetation The vegetation foundatAlimagnet Parkis determined by several factors including, but not limited to: physical site conditions, such as topography;soils and hydrology; historic and current land use; climate; invasive species; andwildlife.Vegetation is also affected by natural processes,such as succession or natural events that create change and variation. Abrupt changes (disturbances),including wildfires, high windsand floods, can change the vegetation structure and composition very quickly and for long periodsof time.Human- induced changes,such as farming, pasturing,and tree cutting,can have similareffects. Natural succession,or the gradual change of plant communities over time,occurs as vegetation changes and respondsto changes in environmental variables (e.g., light, water and nutrients).These responses are reflected inplant community composition, structure, and distribution by differential survivaland reproduction of species. The effects of disturbance and succession can vary widely.Different areas will be at varyingdevelopmental stages,due to diverse local histories –punctuatedby acutedisturbances, such as fire and flooding.These conditionsinteractwith inherent environmental variability (e.g.,soils, climate, topography)to create a mosaic of vegetation in variousconditions across the landscape, including here at Alimagnet Park. In terms of wildlife habitat formation, this mosaic results inshifting patches of refugia, which in turn promotes biodiversity. A major consideration for developing thiscomprehensive natural resource management plan is to understand the types of vegetation found in Alimagnet Park or in the local area prior to European settlement.This can give the restorationist clues about what plants may have beenfound in the past and which ones may still thrive in the parktoday. Fortunately, during the original territorial surveys in the 1840s, field notes on vegetation were taken by the surveyors. These notes werecompiled in 1974 into a valuable information source called “The Original, or Pre-settlement,Vegetation ofMinnesota,”and is used today to help us reconstruct patternsof plant communities across the state. In general, the northern and western portions of the County consisted ofa matrix ofhardwood forests with many lakesand wetlandsinterspersed. American basswood, sugar maple, elm, red oak,and an understory of shade-loving wildflowers made upwhat the original surveyors called the “Big Woods”, which dominatedin moisterareas that were protected from fire, while bur and white oak, aspenand black cherry were the dominant in drier areas. The southern part of the County consisted primarily of prairie and savanna, with fewer lakes and more streams. Depending on soils, topography and hydrology, tall grasses measuring eight feet in height would have been common, with a diverse mix of other grasses and wildflowers (forbs). Short grasses and a wide variety of other types of forbs were found on sandy,gravellyor steepsites.Savannas, basically prairies with scattered oak trees, formed a transitional plant community between grasslands and forests;fires was intermediate in frequencyin these savannas.Forested floodplains, with cottonwood, silver maple, willow, and American elm,were found in wide river valleys.Prairie or savanna would often have been foundnear small rivers, even up to the water’s edge.A much larger number of wetlands existed in the southwestern portion of the County than are found today. In fact, it has been estimated that less than15 percent of pre-statehood wetlandsremainin Dakota County. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan30 A.PlantCommunityAssessment AlimagnetPark was divided into Land Management Units (Management Units), based oninformation derived from the following: 1) a land cover site evaluationusing field and office research,including the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS); 2) the principle of creating realistic restoration goals (taking into consideration costand available resources); 3) proposed target communities;and 4) restoration tasks. Figure 12 shows eight Management Unitsfor this site. Note that sometimes several areas, although they may be discontiguous, are designated as being in the same Management Unit, because theyhave similar management needsand goals. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan31 Figure 12: Land Management Units(green alpha-numeric labels) City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan32 1.SiteEvaluation Anevaluation of Alimagnet Park was conducted by DouglasMensing (RES PrincipalEcologist)and Michael Lopez (RES Ecologist)on October 16, 2023. The Management Units, shown in Figure 12, above,and summarized in Table 2, were developedto help describe the plant communities and define restorationand managementtasks for Alimagnet Park. There are four major (forest/woodland) Units (1 through 4), and severalsmaller Units (or portions of Units) that are encompassed within the larger forest/woodlandUnits. Detailed plant specieslistsfor each Unit, based on recent field surveys,are provided in Appendix A. Plant communities within the Management Units were evaluated using methods adapted from MLCCS quality ranking guidelines: A=highest quality, B=good quality, C=moderate quality, D=poor quality, and NN=altered/non-native. MLCCS Classifications are a snapshot of the habitat structure at the time of assessment but should not necessarily be interpreted as the most desirable endgoal for habitat restoration purposes. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan33 UNIT 1(SE forest/woodlandunit): Area: 15.5acres Dominant MLCCS Classifications: Oak forest–mesic*subtype *moderately moist within a spectrum from dry to wet soils Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 1 is located in the southeast portion of the park bordering the southeasternedge of Alimagnet Lake(Figure 12). This unit is dominated by upland forests(C to D quality). Dominant species present in the moderately Photo 1: View ofthecentral portion of Unit 1. dense(defined in DNR Field Guide)canopy/sub- canopy includewhite oak (Quercus alba),northern redoak (Quercus rubra),northern pin oak (Quercus ellipsoidalis),American elm (Ulmusamericana), andgreen ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica).Other treesoccurring less frequentlyinclude cottonwood (Populus deltoides), quaking aspen (Populustremuloides) and black cherry (Prunusserotina).The moderately dense understory/shrub layer is dominated by the non-native “common” or Europeanbuckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), butalso contains non-native honeysuckle (Lonicera spp.). Native trees and shrubs in the understory/shrub layer includeboxelder (Acernegundo), hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), green ash, quaking aspen, and blackcherry.The moderately sparse ground layer consists of an assemblage of forbs, graminoids, and woody species. Native species such assedges (Carex spp.), Virginia stickseed(Hackeliavirginiana), whitesnakeroot(Ageratina altissima),and others are present.However,this stratum also includesinvasive speciessuch asgarlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), common burdock (Arctium minus),and seedlings of common buckthornandinvasive honeysuckle.Buckthorn removals occurred between 2014 and 2016 in the southwest portion of Unit 1, but it appears that limitedsubsequent managementhas beenconducted. The park’s disc golf course encroaches on the southern edge of Unit 1 (Figure 12), resulting in areas of cleared vegetation and bare soils. Due to the unit’s steep slopes(some >25%)and highly erodible soils (dominated by Kingsley-Mahtomedi-Spencer complex, 8-15% slopes), management activities should be conducted with care, especially given the unit’s adjacency to Alimagnet Lake. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan34 UNIT 2(NE forest/woodlandunit): Area: 28.2acres Dominant MLCCS Classifications: Oak forest -mesic subtype Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 2 is located in the northeastportion of the park, northeastof Unit 1(Figure 12). Unit 2 is dominated by mesic oak woodlands and forests (C to D quality). The northeast portion of the unit features a relatively steep west-to southeast-facing slope.Drainageways with Photo 2: View of the northern portion of Unit 2. moderate erosion flow east to westnearthe shared border with Unit 1; these drainageways appear to originate at a culvert outlet on the eastern edge of the park(near Garden View Drive), flow through two depressional wetlands, and into Alimagnet Lake.The dense, continuous canopy/sub-canopy is dominated bywhite oak (Quercus alba)andnorthern pin oak (Quercus ellipsoidalis); other species includebur oak(Quercusmacrocarpa),northern red oak (Quercus rubra),paperbirch(Betula papyrifera), quakingaspen (Populustremuloides), black cherry (Prunus serotina), American elm (Ulmus americana), and box elder (Acer negundo).The moderately dense understory/shrub layer contains variable cover by invasive species including common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), andto a lesser extent,non-nativehoneysuckle (Lonicera spp.). Other understory/shrub species include box elder, hackberry(Celtisoccidentalis), riverbank grape(Vitis riparia), and prickly ash(Zanthoxylum americanum).The moderately sparsebut relatively diverse ground layer includes manyforbs, grasses, and woody species, including Virginia stickseed (Hackelia virginiana), Pennsylvaniasedge(Carexpensylvanica), Canadagoldenrod (Solidago canadensis),wild bergamot(Monarda fistulosa), andmoderatecover by common buckthorn seedlings. A dense stand of invasive Japanese knotweed (Reynoutriajaponica) can be found in the northeastportion of the unit.Buckthorn removals have occurred in recent years in the northwest portion of Unit 2, and replacement plantings have included native and some non-native/ornamental species (see Appendix A for species observed). Due to the unit’s steep slopes(some >25%)and highly erodible soils (dominated by Kingsley-Mahtomedi complex, 8-15% slopes), multiple erosion gullieshave formed. Management activities should be conducted with care, especially given the unit’s adjacency to Alimagnet Lake. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan35 UNIT 3(SW forest/woodlandunit): Area: 20.5acres Dominant MLCCS Classifications: Oak forest -mesic subtype Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 3 is located inthe southwestportionof the park,west ofUnit 1 and just east ofBurnsville’s portion of the park(Figure 12). The unit is dominated bymesic oak woodlandsand forests (almost entirely CDquality). The dense, continuous canopy/sub-canopy is dominated by Photo 3:View of the southeast portion of Unit 3. white oak (Quercus alba). Other canopy/sub- canopy species include northern pin oak (Quercus ellipsoidalis),American elm (Ulmus americana),black cherry (Prunusserotina), and green ash (Fraxinuspennsylvanica).The moderately sparse understory/shrub layer is dominated by common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica). Less common species includenannyberry (Viburnum lentago),black cherry, chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), gray dogwood (Cornus racemosa),common blackberry (Rubus allegheniensis), black raspberry (Rubus occidentalis), Missouri gooseberry (Ribes cf missouriense), and invasive honeysuckle (Lonicera sp.).The moderately sparse ground layer contains moderate cover of common buckthorn seedlings and sparse cover of several herbaceous invasive species including common burdock (Arctium minus), ground ivy (Glechoma hederacea), and Japanese hedge parsley (Torilis japonica). Native forbs, graminoids, and woody speciesincludepointed-leaf tick-trefoil (Desmodium glutinosum), false Solomon’s seal (Maianthemum racemosum), early meadow-rue (Thalictrum dioicum),Pennsylvania sedge (Carex cf pensylvanica), and scattered oak seedlings. Buckthorn removals occurred between 2014 and 2016 in the southern two-thirdsof Unit 3, but it appears limitedsubsequent management was conducted. The park’s disc golf course extends through the central portion of Unit 3 (Figure 12), resulting in areas of cleared vegetation and bare soils. As with Units 1 and 2, steep slopes(many >25%), ravines, and highly erodiblesoils (dominated by Kingsley sandy loam) require that management activities be conducted with care, especially given the unit’s adjacency to Alimagnet Lake. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan36 UNIT 4(NW forest/woodlandunit): Area: 10.1acres Dominant MLCCS Classifications: Oak forest –mesic subtype Upland soils with planted, maintained or cultivated coniferous trees Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 4 is inthe northwestportion of the park withAlimagnet Lake to the east, Burnsville’s portion of the parkto the west,andUnit 3 to the south(Figure 12). Steep, northeast-facing slopes leading down to the lake comprise the northern Photo 4: View of the northern portion of Unit 4. portion of the unit, while the southern portion contains less abrupt, largely southeast-facing slopes. The 1937 aerial photograph (Figure 4) shows most of this unit to be sparsely wooded, and the southeastern portion of the unit was treeless. Currently, theunit is dominated by mesic oak woodlands and forest(BC to CDquality). The dense, continuous canopy/sub-canopy is dominated by white oak (Quercus alba).Other trees occurring less frequently include northern red oak (Quercus rubra) and paper birch (Betula papyrifera). The moderately sparse understory/shrub layer is dominated bycommon buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica). Other woody invasives includingglossy buckthorn (Frangula alnus) and honeysuckle (Lonicera sp.) are scatteredthroughout the unit. Othernative understory and shrub species includeironwood (Ostrya virginiana) and gray dogwood (Cornus racemosa). The moderately sparse ground layer containsseedlings of invasive shrubsincludingcommon buckthorn, and less frequently, honeysuckleand glossy buckthorn.Native woody species in the ground layer include white oak seedlings, red raspberry (Rubus idaeus), riverbank grape (Vitis riparia), black cherry (Prunus serotina), and woodbine (Parthenocissus inserta). Herbaceous native ground layer speciesinclude sedges (Carex sp.),Canada mayflower(Maianthemumcanadense), pointed-leaf tick-trefoil (Desmodium glutinosum),tall hairy agrimony (Agrimonia gryposepala), and enchanter’s nightshade (Circaea lutetiana) among others. A stand of planted pinesexists in the southeastern portion of the unit(which was treeless in 1937; see Figure 4). This planted pine stand is not considered a natural community (hence it has a quality rank of “NN”). The canopy/subcanopy is dominated by mature red pine (Pinus resinosa), but also contains white pine (Pinus strobus). Sparse understory/shrub andground layerslie below the pines. This unit has not undergone management. Most of thesoilin the unitis mapped as Kingsley sandy loam (3 to 8% slopes). The remaining areas bordering Alimagnet Lakearecomprised of Kingsley-Mahtomedicomplex (15-25% slopes, highly erodible) and Auburndale silt loam. As with previously-described units, these slope and soil conditions require that management activitiesbe conducted with care, especially adjacent toAlimagnet Lake. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan37 UNIT 5(herbaceous/open water wetlands): Area: 1.9acres(all basins combined) Dominant MLCCS Classifications: Semipermanent flooded altered/non- native-dominated vegetation Mixed emergent marsh Palustrine open water Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 5is comprised of11open-water and herbaceous wetlands(5A through 5K)scattered throughout Units1 through 4.These basins Photo 5: View ofa shallow marsh within in the southern range in quality from C to NN andcontain an portion of Unit 2. assortment ofnative and invasive forbs and graminoids. The edges of these basins tend to be dominated by invasive, non-nativereed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea); however, a variety of native species are also present, including graminoids such as lake sedge (Carex lacustris), American manna grass (Glyceria grandis), and soft-stem bulrush (Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani). Common forbs across these basins include nodding bur-marigold (Bidens cernua), mad- dog skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora), and northern bugleweed (Lycopusuniflorus). Open water portions of these basins contained varying densities of two floating species: watermeal (Wolffia sp.) and common duckweed (Lemna minor). Shrubs,includinggray dogwood (Cornus racemosa), nannyberry (Viburnum lentago), and invasivecommon buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica),are common along the perimeterof these communities. Most of these basins are too small to be mapped as a discreate soil map unit, but most are found within areas mapped as Auburndale silt loam. Water quality in the wetlands was observed to be generally clear, and as mentioned in the Unit 2 description, an eroding drainageway flows through two of thesebasins on the southern edge of that unit. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan38 UNIT 6(sedge meadow): Area: 0.3acres DominantMLCCS Classifications: Wet meadow, seasonally flooded Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 6 is located in the southwest portionof the park,withinUnit 3. This wetland is a sedge meadow(BCquality) and containsadiverse assemblage of native graminoidsand forbs.The wetland is dominated by sedges including lake sedge (Carex lacustris). Forbs includenodding Photo 6:View from the southern portion of Unit 6. bur-marigold (Bidens cernua), mad-dog skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora), buttercups (Ranunculus sp.), bulbet-bearing water hemlock (Cicuta bulbifera)and others.Although native graminoids dominate the wetland, invasive species including purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) occur sparsely on the wetland’s edge. This basin is mapped asQuamsiltloam, a very deep, poorly drained soil series.Unit 6 represents a particularly high-qualityplant community within the park thatwarrants prioritized protection and management. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan39 UNIT 7(invasive cattail marsh): Area: 1.2acres Dominant MLCCS Classifications: Semipermanentlyflooded altered/non- native herbaceous vegetation Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 7is located inthe southwesternportion of the parkand is dominated by a dense stand of invasive narrow-leaved (Typha angustifolia)or hybrid (Typha x-glauca) cattail; therefore its ecological quality rank is NN. Other herbaceous Photo 7:View of the eastportion of Unit 7. vegetation includes native nodding bur-marigold (Bidens cernua) and Canadian wood nettle (Laporteacanadensis), and additional invasive species include purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea). A very sparse shrub layer consists of scatteredpussy willow(Salix discolor), black willow (Salix cf nigra),and silver maple (Acer saccharinum). The Quam silt loam underlying the management unit was formed in silty water-sorted sediments in depressions on glacial moraines. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan40 UNIT 8(shoreline wetlands): Area:0.6acres Dominant MLCCS Classifications: Saturated altered/non-native herbaceous vegetation Littoral open water Evaluation and Ecological Concerns: Unit 8consists of three shoreline wetlands along the edgeof Alimagnet Lake, adjacent to Management Unit 3. Thesewetlandsconsist of rooted herbaceous vegetation that transitions Photo 8:View of wetland 8C and Alimagnet Lake. into the shallow, littoral zone of the lake. All three wetlands are dominated by invasive reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), so they areofNN quality; however, they also contain native ground layer species such as jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), nodding bur- marigold (Bidens cernua), and bulrushes (Scirpus spp.), which indicates they might have the capacity to recover, if reed canary grass were to be controlled. Woody vegetation, mostly on the upland edges of the wetlands, includedblack willow (Salix cf nigra),quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica),nannyberry (Viburnum lentago), common elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), gray dogwood (Cornus racemosa), and invasive common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica). These wetlands are mapped asAuburndale silt loam,consisting of loess or silty alluvium,and are associated with depressions and drainageways on ground moraines. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan41 Table 2: Summary of Land Management Unit Quality Management Quality Land Management UnitMLCCS Classification DescriptionDominant Soil Type Unit Area \[acres\]Index Kingsley-Mahtomedi- Oak forest –mesic subtype UNIT 115.5C to DSpencer complex (8- 15% slopes) Kingsley-Mahtomedi Oak forest –mesic subtype UNIT 228.2C to D complex (8-15% slopes) Kingsleysandy loam(3- Oak forest –mesic subtype UNIT 320.5CDto D 8% and 15-25% slopes) Oak forest –mesic subtype Kingsleysandy loam(3- UNIT 410.1BC to NN Upland soils with planted, maintained or 8% slopes) cultivated coniferous trees Semi-permanent flooded altered/non- native-dominated vegetation UNIT 51.9C toNNAuburndale silt loam Mixed emergent marsh Palustrine open water UNIT 60.3BCQuam silt loam Wet meadow, seasonally flooded Semipermanentlyflooded altered/non- UNIT 71.2NNQuam silt loam native herbaceous vegetation Saturated altered/non-native UNIT 8herbaceous vegetation0.6NNAuburndale silt loam Littoralopen water TOTAL78.3 B.PreviousRestorationActivities Before addressing the specific priorities and activities for each Management Unit, it is important to acknowledge the past efforts to restore Alimagnet Parkundertaken by the City of Burnsvilleand its partners over many years. Past restoration work in the Apple Valley portion of the park has been limited to removal of invasive brush in 2014-2016 in the southwestern portion. It appears that little if any management followed the initial removals. Table3: HistoricalLand Management Activity Responsible Work Treatment under Year/SeasonUnitActivity PartyManagement Agreement Undesirable wood vegetationthinned City/Great River and removedover 20 acres of oak 2014-20162,3Greening/Con-None woodsincluding herbicide treatments tractor and a controlled burn City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan42 VII)ȁ 7¨«£«¨¥¤ Dakota County encompasses a variety of ecological subsections, including Big Woods, Oak Savanna, the Rochester Plateau, and the St. Paul Baldwin Plains and Moraines.Each subsection contains multiple habitats and hostsan associated suite of wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN). Coupled with an abundance of water resources, these habitats supporteddiverse plant communities and associated wildlife. However,over time,European settlement brought many changes to the landscape.The deep, fertile soils of most prairies were converted to agricultural fields. Forests were logged, wetlands were drained,and stream and river courses and flows were altered. Overhunting was also a major issue and many wildlife populations declined precipitously. Large mammal species, includingbison, elk, black bears, wolves, and mountain lionswere once found in the County. In the 1800s, early explorers and settlers,from Radisson to Hennepin,documented bison grazing the prairie terraces near Fort Snelling. By 1860, bison were nearly extirpated from all of North America. During the drought years in the 1930s, numerous elk antlers were retrieved from shallow lakes in southern Minnesota,evidence of their historicpresence on the landscape. Black bears, among other predators, were thth common throughout the 18and 19centuries, demonstrating that the animal diversity in the state and the County could support a variety of large predators. Smaller mammals were also likely more abundant in the County during the pre-settlement era. From fur traders’ records in the 1930s, it is evident that beaver, muskrat, and mink were killed for their furs;and populations of these species declined precipitously.Prairie species,such as Franklin’s ground squirrel, American badger, and several vole and mice species declined with the conversion of prairie and savanna to agriculture, though thesedeclines are mostly anecdotal. Hunting and land use changes also affected bird populations.The extinction of the passenger pigeon highlights the extreme pressure that hunting had on many of the County’s wildlife species, while species,such as prairie chickens,were locally extirpated as prairie was converted to agriculture. Waterfowl populations th declined as well, due to hunting and wetland drainage for agriculture and development. During the mid-20 century, predators such as hawks,bald eagles,and owls,were negatively impacted by hunting and human- caused pollution. Chemicals,such as DDT,caused declines in populations of species like bald eagles, as the chemical weakened eggshells and led to low brood success.This species was listed as threatened on the first state endangered species list published in 1984, but recently has been de-listed. Largely anecdotal information exists regarding the decline of reptiles and amphibians in the County. Many reptiles, such as eastern racers and six-lined racerunners, depend on prairie habitat –particularly bluff prairies –and have likely experienced precipitous declines given historichabitat conversion. Wetland drainage and pollution by fertilizers and other chemicals haveled to declines in wetland species, including amphibians,such as Blanchard’s cricket frog,and reptiles,such as Blanding’s turtles. These more amphibious species are not only tied to land and water habitats but are also often sensitive to pollution of these habitats. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan43 Soil erosion from agricultural operations and intense land use increased sediment loads to rivers and streams, negatively affecting aquatic ecosystems.Suburban development resulted in more warm water runoff into cool streams, which led to adverse thermal effects and stressed aquatic life.These land use changes had many negative effects on wildlife. Frog and salamander species, sensitive to chemicals and changes in hydrology, declined. As runoff and pollution flowed into rivers like the Vermillion, it resulted in declines in many types of aquatic species. Brook trout, for example, are sensitive to warm water;and rivers like the Vermillion saw declines in trout populations as runoff, pollution, and warm water from treatment plants flowed into the river. While there is conflicting evidence as to whether brook trout were native to the river, th having potentially been stocked in the 1800s, troutdecline throughout the 20century is a clear example of the effects of development on wildlife. Brook trout are now restricted to only three streams in the entire County. Importantly, the combination of research, public interest, education, changing attitudes, laws and regulations, and increased land protection and natural resource management have had a generally beneficial effect on wildlife during the last decades. Increased environmental regulation has benefitted wildlife populations. Beginning in the 1980s, the introduction of water quality rules at the federal and state levelshas improved water quality impacted by point source pollution (e.g.,waste-water treatment plants), and is also providing a solid framework to quantify and limit non-point sources (e.g.,field runoff), which should greatlybenefit wildlife that relies on clean water. Other pollution regulations, like the ban on the use of DDT, have resulted in increases in bald eagle and other raptor populations in the County and in the entire region.A greater focus on land conservation has also ensured that there is available habitat for County wildlife.For example, the establishment and expansion of critical protected public and private lands has protected habitat for numerous SGCN and other wildlife. Ecological restoration of these and other habitats has also ensured that quality habitat exists for these populations. And finally, an increase in public involvement in conservation has benefited a number of species. For example, the rebound of the bluebird population,from its historiclow in the mid-1900s,was due in large part to nest box campaigns involving local citizens. Unfortunately, residential and agricultural development, invasive species,and climate change continue to have significant impacts on County wildlife. Animals that require specific habitat types or habitats adversely impacted by development, agriculture,and pollution, have been most impacted.Invasive species have become one of the most significant issues for native species diversity in Minnesota.Invasive shrubs,like buckthorn,not only adversely affect native plant diversity, but have been shown to cause declines in shrub- nesting bird species.Invasive European earthwormshave also been linked to declines in forest floor dwellers like salamanders and ovenbirds. Looking forward, tree pests and diseases,like the emerald ash borer and oak wilt,have been shown to provide avenues for the introduction of invasive plant species, which could negatively affect wildlife in the future. Conversely, these tree maladies may also provide welcome habitat for species like cavity-nesting birds. Climate change effects on wildlife will depend on a number of factors and arepredicted to shift the range of many species northward and potentially out of Dakota County.Ultimately, climate change may either create or remove habitat formany native wildlife species. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan44 One of the main restoration goals for Alimagnet Park is to increase wildlife habitat.Providing improved habitat for the species present at Alimagnet Park, as well as restoring habitat for species that have vanished but may have historically used Alimagnet Park, will help increase plant and animal diversity and overall ecosystem health. Refer to Tomorrow’s Habitat for the Wild and Rare: An Action Plan for Minnesota Wildlife(DNR 2005) to determine and plan for SGCNs that could potentially use Alimagnet Park. Apart from plant community restoration, there are specific restoration tasks that could be undertaken to encourage wildlife use of Alimagnet Park.For example, red-headed woodpeckers, a Rochester Plateau and Oak Savanna subsection SGCN, depend on dead trees in mixed forests and oak savanna habitats for nesting and feeding. A long-term goal of this restoration plan is to establish a mixture of savanna and woodland habitats with different aged tree species (“mixed stand”) that will provide varied structure for wildlife. Management that retains or creates dead trees in the park could provide much-needed habitat for species like the red-headed woodpecker. The City of Apple Valley will explore partnerships with the City of Burnsville and Dakota County to perform annual aerial deer surveys, weather permitting. The City should monitor annual deer counts and trends to determine if additional actions are required to balance the needs of the natural and built environment, along with public safety and public health. A.PreviousObservationsandSurveys Formal wildlife surveys were not conducted for this restoration plan, and limited data are available from other sources.eBird records of bird observations at Alimagnet Parkindicate over 150 species use the site (https://ebird.org/hotspot/L2721283?yr=all&m=&rank=mrec). It is recommended to monitor wildlife in the park to get a better understanding of what species occupy the site, when, and their health, condition of their populations, etc. At Dakota County Parks, wildlife of a variety of taxa are regularly monitored over time. Collecting baseline data on wildlife and their populations allows ecologists to infer whether vegetation management and water resources management goals, decisions, and implementation strategies are being successful or not. If monitoring occurs for several years, trends will develop that can be analyzed. Analysis can show which management activities were most effective and help guide future management of the site, which is an important component of “adaptive management”. Wildlife surveys that would be of interest are the following: Birds, including breeding birds and secretive marsh birds Insects, including bumble bees, dragonflies, moths, butterflies Small mammals Frogs and toads Bats Fish City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan45 Turtles Beavers Snakes, skinks, reptiles If interested, wildlife survey protocols used by Dakota County staff can be shared with City of Apple Valley staff. IXȁ 2¤¢®¬¬¤£ ³¨®² A.Land 1.ErosionControl Erosion is currently not a widespreadissue at the park; however, there are a few locations of concern. Aneroding drainagewaywas observed flowing westwardon the southern edgeof Unit 2 (Figure 12). This drainageway, apparently fed by suburban stormwater discharged from the adjacent developed area, isexperiencing moderate erosion, which is detrimental to the forests the drainageway flows through, the wetlands it flows through, and its receiving water, Alimagnet Lake. A second eroded Photo 9:Eroded drainagewayalongborder of Units1 and 2. drainageway was identified in the fareastern portion of Unit 2(Figure 12). This feature originates nearGarden View Drive and is strongly impacted by stormwater drainage patterns associated with the surrounding suburban landscape. Thesetwo eroding drainagewaysshould be monitored, and opportunitiesshould be explored to reduce stormwater inputs and/or the rate of flow into thesedrainageways. Some of the trails and disc golf areas leading down towards Alimagnet Lake showed signs of erosion. This is largely due to the absence of vegetation, compacted soils, and opportunities for sheet runoff to be concentrated as it flows downslope. These areas could be improved through a combination of minor re- grading (to prevent flows from concentrating in the first place), soil decompaction and revegetation, and routing foot traffic to more stable, sustainable locations. Any managementactivities conducted onthe park’s steep slopes, especially those leading down to Alimagnet Lake or other water resources, should be approached with care. For example, wheeled or tracked equipment (e.g., skid steer)is not appropriate in most of these steep locations, and any soil disturbance should be immediately stabilized (e.g., erosion control blanket, appropriate native seeding) and monitored until erosion is no longer a concern. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan46 2.ShorelineStabilization The shoreline of Alimagnet Lake is generally quite stable(i.e., not eroding)despite the relatively steep slopes that lead down to the waterline in many areas. Therefore, regular monitoring or erosion interventions do not appear to be warranted at this time. Sediment deposition that appears to have collected over the years was observed on the lake’s shoreline at Unit 8B. This sediment appears to have originated from erosion of the trail leading down to that location. B.VegetationManagement 1.ManagementUnitTargetPlantCommunitiesandGoals The primary objective for Alimagnet Parkis to improve the plant communities to better reflect the diversity, composition, and structure that would have been present at the time of European settlement and to improve the ecological functions that the historicalnative plant communities would have provided. Target communities, particularly wetland communities, are approximate and represent a complex vegetation mosaic. Different portions of a single wetlandManagementUnit may require different management goals and techniques.Restoration and managementefforts will approximatethe target communities shown in Figure 13. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan47 Figure 13: Recommended Target Communities City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan48 Recommended target plant communities are described by the MNDNR (2005), and detailed descriptions can be found at the following links(the code at end of each link below references the plant community types shown in Figure 13): https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/fire_dependent_forest/fds37.pdf https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/upland_prairie/ups24.pdf https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/wetland_prairie/wps54.pdf https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/wet_meadow_carr/wmn82.pdf https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/marsh/mrn83.pdf https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/lake_shore/lki32.pdf https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/npc/lake_shore/lki54.pdf Goals for each of the land Management Units are described below. More detailed descriptions of Sub-unit prioritization, scheduling, and tasksis provided in Table 5. UNIT 1: Restoration goals: Work in Unit 1is not expected to occur within the next five years, but when possible in future years, target management activities include: 1.Remove and control all invasive trees (and possibly selectively thin aggressive native trees, like boxelder)to prepare the canopy/sub-canopy for native diversification and for achieving target canopy cover (70-90%) over the coming decades. Take care not to remove snags and all of the large dead or dying trees (unless they are diseased), since these are important for wildlife habitat. Heterogeneity throughout the unit is advantageous for species and habitat diversity. For instance, canopy gaps (sometimes formed naturally by oak wilt or localized blowdown)can be beneficial by providing areas with greater sunlight and increased ground layer vegetation diversity. 2.Remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetation and, if warranted, selectively thin native understory/shrub layer vegetation to increase sunlight reaching the ground layer and to improve views to the lake. Coverage goal of invasive brush will be <10%, and visual permeability goal through understory/shrub layer (leaf- 3.Where there is sufficient fine fuel (e.g., oak leaves), conduct at least one prescribed burn (to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation).In order to protect vulnerable wildlife species, unburned refugia should be left within the unit, which is typically accomplished naturally through natural heterogeneity of burn coverage due to site conditions. 4.After restoration/management is initiated in this unit, annually conduct critical cuts and/or fall foliar spraying of invasive shrubs, and spot spray invasive herbaceous vegetation as necessary to achieve <10% cover. 5.After invasive vegetation is under control, conduct native overseeding where warranted (ideally post burning) using appropriate native herbaceous species (see description of FDs37, Southern Dry-Mesic Oak (Maple) Woodland). City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan49 6.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. UNIT 2: Restoration goals: Work in Unit 2is not expected to occur within the next five years, but when possible in future years, target management activities include: 1.Remove and control all invasive trees (and possibly selectively thin aggressive native trees, like boxelder)to prepare the canopy/sub-canopy for native diversification and for achieving target canopy cover (70-90%) over the coming decades. Take care not to remove snags and all of the large dead or dying trees (unless they are diseased), since these are important for wildlife habitat. Heterogeneity throughout the unit is advantageous for species and habitat diversity. For instance, canopygaps (sometimesformed naturally by oak wilt or localized blowdown) can be beneficial by providing areas with greater sunlight and increased ground layer vegetation diversity. 2.Remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetation and, if warranted, selectively thin native understory/shrub layer vegetation to increase sunlight reaching the ground layer and to improve views to the lake. Coverage of invasive brush will be <10%, and visual permeability through understory/shrub layer (leaf- 3.Where there is sufficient fine fuel (e.g., oak leaves), conduct at least one prescribed burn (to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation).In order toprotect vulnerable wildlife species, unburned refugia should be left within the unit, which is typically accomplished naturally through natural heterogeneity of burn coverage due to site conditions. 4.After restoration/management is initiated in this unit, annually conduct critical cuts and/or fall foliar spraying of invasive shrubs, and spot spray invasive herbaceous vegetation as necessary to achieve <10% cover. 5.After invasive vegetation is under control, conduct native overseeding where warranted (ideally post burning) using appropriate native herbaceous species (see description of FDs37, Southern Dry-Mesic Oak (Maple) Woodland). 6.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. UNIT 3: Restoration goals: Work in Unit 3 is a priority, due to previous investments in invasive brush removal and its adjacency to ongoing restoration and management work in the Burnsville portion of the park. 1.Within five years, remove and control all invasive trees (and possibly selectively thin aggressive native trees, like boxelder)to prepare the canopy/sub-canopy for native diversification and for achieving target cover (70-90%) over the coming decades.Take care not to remove snags and all of the large dead or dying trees (unless they are diseased), since these are important for wildlife habitat. Heterogeneity throughout the unit is advantageous for species and habitat diversity. For instance, City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan50 canopy gaps (sometimes formed naturally by oak wilt or localized blowdown) can be beneficial by providing areas with greater sunlight and increased ground layer vegetation diversity. 2.Within five years, remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetation and, if warranted, selectively thin native understory/shrub layer vegetation to increase sunlight reaching the ground layer and to improve views to the lake. Coverage of invasive brush will be <10%, and visual permeability through understory/shrub layer (leaf- 3.Within five years, where there is sufficient fine fuel (e.g., oak leaves), conduct at least one prescribed burn(to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation).In order to protect vulnerable wildlife species, unburned refugia should be left within the unit, which is typically accomplished naturally through natural heterogeneity of burn coverage due to site conditions. 4.Annually conduct critical cuts and/or fall foliar spraying of invasive shrubs, and spot spray invasive herbaceous vegetation with spot spraying as necessary to achieve <5% cover. 5.Within five years(but only after sufficient removal and control of invasive species),conduct native overseeding where warranted (ideally post burning) using appropriate native herbaceous species (see description of FDs37, Southern Dry-Mesic Oak (Maple) Woodland). 6.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. UNIT4: Restoration goals: Work outside of the pine plantation/altered forest(i.e., outside of Sub-unit 4A) is not expected to occur within the next five years, but when possiblein future years, target management activities include: 1.Remove and control all invasive trees (and possibly selectively thin aggressive native trees, like boxelder)to prepare the canopy/sub-canopy for native diversificationand for achieving target cover (70-90%) over the coming decades.Take care not to remove snags and all of the large dead or dying trees (unless they are diseased), since these are important for wildlife habitat. Heterogeneity throughout the unit is advantageous for species and habitat diversity. For instance, canopy gaps (sometimes formed naturally by oak wilt or localized blowdown) can be beneficial by providing areas with greater sunlight andincreased ground layer vegetation diversity. 2.Remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetationand, if warranted, selectively thin native understory/shrub layer vegetationto increase sunlight reaching the ground layerand to improve views to the lake. Coverage of invasive brush will be <10%, and visual permeability through understory/shrub layer (leaf-. 3.Where there is sufficient fine fuel (e.g., oak leaves), conduct at least one prescribed burn throughout unit. In order to protect vulnerable wildlife species, unburned refugia should be left within the unit, which is typically accomplished naturally through natural heterogeneity of burn coverage due to site conditions. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan51 4.After restoration/management is initiated in this unit, annually conduct critical cuts and/or fall foliar spraying of invasive shrubs, and spot spray invasive herbaceous vegetation as necessary to achieve <10% cover. 5.After invasive vegetation is under control, conduct native overseeding where warranted (ideally post burning) using appropriate native herbaceous species (see descriptionofFDs37, Southern Dry-Mesic Oak (Maple) Woodland). 6.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. SUB-UNIT 4A: Restoration goals: Work in the pine plantation/altered forest is a lower priority, due to the prevalence of planted pines, but the stand could be thinned and managed for long-term healthier trees. 1.Within five years, remove and control all invasive trees and at least begin to selectively thin planted pines. Goal is to remove at least half of the trees over a period of five to ten years. 2.Within five years, remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetation to increase sunlight reaching the ground layer. Coverage of invasive brush will be <10%. 3.Within five years, if advantageous to restoration goals and where there is sufficient fine fuel (e.g., oak leaves, pine needles), conduct at least one prescribed burn throughout the subunit (to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation), but protect any young/vulnerable plantings. 4.Within five years, after invasive vegetation is under control, conduct native overseeding where warranted (ideally post burning) using appropriate native herbaceous species (FDc34, Central Dry- Mesic Pine-Hardwood Forest). 5.Annually control invasive herbaceous vegetation with spot spraying as necessary to achieve <5% cover. 6.Long-term, burn on a rotation of approximately every 20 to 30 years. 7.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. UNIT 5: Restoration goals: Work inthesewetlands is not expected to occur within the next five years, but when possible in future years,the City should prioritize which wetland basins theywould like to enhance. In general, it is recommended that higher quality wetlands (e.g., 5B) and/or wetlands within priorityforest restoration areas (i.e., 5G, 5H, and 5I, being within forest management Unit 3)be enhanced before other wetlands.Future target management activities include: 1.Remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetation on wetland fringes. 2.Remove and control all invasive herbaceousvegetation in wetlands. 3.After restoration/management is initiated in a wetland, annually control invasive herbaceous vegetation with spot spraying as necessary to achieve <5% cover. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan52 4.Where there is sufficient fine fuel in the unit’s wetlands, burn entire basinsat least once(to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation). 5.After invasive vegetation is under control, conduct native overseedingin low native cover/diversity areas using appropriate native herbaceous species (see descriptionsof WPs54(Southern Wet Prairie), WMn82(Northern Wet Meadow/Carr), and MRn83(Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh)). 6.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. UNIT 6: Restoration goals: Work in Unit 6 is a priority, due to the relatively high quality of this wetland. Target management activities include: 1.Within five years, begin annual control of invasive woody and herbaceous vegetation with spot spraying as necessary to achieve <5% cover. 2.Within five years, burn the entire wetlandat least once(to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation). 3.Within five years, after invasive vegetation is under control,native overseeding where warranted (ideally post burning) usingappropriate native herbaceous species (see description of WMn82b,Sedge Meadow). 4.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. UNIT 7: Restoration goals: Work inthiswetland is not expected to occur within the next five years, but if enhancement of this invasive cattail marsh is desired by the City, when possible in future years, target management activities include: 1.Remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetation on the wetland’s edge. 2.Remove and control all invasive herbaceousvegetation in wetland. 3.Wick, boom, or spray cattails in the late summer/early fall. Multipleapplicationsover multiple years will likely be necessary. 4.Burn the entire unit at least once (to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation), ideally during a drought year when cattails are stressed. 5.After invasive vegetation is under control, conduct native overseedingin low native cover/diversity areas using appropriate native herbaceous species (see description of MRn83, Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh). 6.After restoration/management is initiated, annually control invasive herbaceous vegetation with spot spraying as necessary to achieve <5% cover. 7.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan53 UNIT 8: Restoration goals: Work inone of these shorelinewetlandsis a priority as a pilot project.Sub-unit 8Bmaybe the best candidate, as it is relatively small and would provide an opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of restoration methods with limited initial investment.Target management activities include: 1.Within five years,remove and control all invasive understory/shrub layer vegetation on the edge of Sub-unit 8B. 2.Within five years,remove and control all invasive herbaceousvegetation in 8B. 3.Within five years,burn all non-inundated portions of 8Bat least once (to reduce reliance on herbicide for control of vegetation). 4.After invasive vegetation is under control, conduct native overseeding where warranted in 8B using appropriate native herbaceous species(see description of WMn82(Northern Wet Meadow/Carr). 5.Annually control invasive herbaceous vegetation(particularly reed canary grass)with spot spraying as necessary to achieve <5% cover. 6.Within five years,conduct native shallow emergent plug plantingin the shallow lake zone of 8B, ideally in May or June; see description of LKi32 (Inland Lake Sand/Gravel/Cobble Shoreline). Sub-units 8A and 8B had more organic and loamy substrates, so emergent species found in LKi54 (Inland Lake Clay/Mud Shore)may be more appropriate for those locations. 7.Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. 2.SuggestedFutureConsiderations Ecosystem Approach As the science of restoration ecology has advanced over recent decades, an ecosystem approach to restoration and management has become more accepted. This approach, which has been assimilated into this restoration plan,considers all interacting factors in an ecosystem and designs management techniques that replicate, at lowest practical cost, the ecological structures and processes that enable ecosystems to adapt to changing conditions.Restoration and management actions are typically considered and implemented in the following sequence, although not all actions may be applicable to a given site or project. Actions that restore processes and structures are done first because these may increase species diversity without seeding and planting.If that fails to restore the desired biodiversity, seeding and planting become necessary. Restore natural disturbance regimes (e.g., fire, flooding, grazing). Introduce biocontrols when available and feasible. Remove and control invasive trees and shrubs mechanically. Install native trees and shrubs where suitable. Remove and control invasive herbs. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan54 Install herbaceous seeds and plants. Use herbicides sparingly and only when othermethods fall short of goals. Conduct long-termmonitoring, and use adaptive management. During the implementation, assessment, and refinement of this restoration plan over the coming years, this ecosystem approach should be considered to help guide decisions and maximize the benefits and efficiency of restoration efforts. Climate Change and Target Communities In general, given the current trends in Minnesota’s climate(including projections based on research), it is likely that the warmer climate, with increased frequency and magnitude of drought, will favor drier plant communities over the majority of Minnesota, including AlimagnetPark.Many of these drier plant communitiescan be efficiently managed with prescribed fire.This restoration plan was developed with this understanding in mind. As climate predictions are refined over the coming years and decades, adjustments to this plan (and associated management practices) may become warranted. Disc Golf Course Expansion The City of Apple Valley wants to evaluate the pros and cons related to the future of the disc golf course in Alimagnet Park. Outcomes could be removal of the disc golf course, reduce to a 9 hole course, the continuation of the current 12 hole course, or an expansion to an 18 hole course. An additional outcome may be the relocation of existing holes to better meet the needs of protecting the park’s most valuable natural resources. In general, it is recommended that future disturbances associated with the possible addition of six new holes occur in close proximity to existing holes and/or in areas of lower ecological quality. Figure 12 illustrates existing infrastructure associated with the disc golf course (yellow pins) as well as the ecological quality of the park’s native plant communities (ranks are represented by black-font labels; see the legend for a description of each). Using this criteria, disc golf expansion would best befocused in the southwest portion of Unit 3 and the southern portion of Unit 1. If additional area is needed, extending disc golf holes along the east edge of Unit 1 (because of its low ecological quality and adjacent to the neighborhood) or up into Unit 4A (which is low quality due to the presence of a pine plantation) could also be explored. Once the City has implemented a few years of the recommendations found in this NRMP it is recommended that a more detailed assessment be conducted in order to consider detailed site conditions such as specific vegetation communities, potential for erosion, and site selection criteria of disc golfers. If it is ultimately decided that disc golf is to remain at the site, the City should also, consider planting native savanna grasses and wildflowers in between fairways, to provide habitat for wildlife. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan55 B.WaterManagement This restoration plan is not focused on water resources—itis more focused on upland resources—however, Alimagnet Park contains,and is adjacent to,a variety of important aquatic habitats, including Alimagnet Lake, the namesake of the park. It is well known that uplands and lowlands, although seemingly distinct, are in fact linked and interdependent systems. Therefore, maintaining a robust plant community in the uplands of watersheds goes a long way to protecting and maintaining diverse wetland communities and good water qualityin those watersheds. As stated before in this plan, while the shoreline of Alimagnet Lake and the ravines leading down to it arerelatively stable, care should be taken that any restoration and management activity isdone in a manner that does not promote erosion. This concern applies also to other steep slopes around the park, many of which lead down to depressional wetlands. Regular monitoring of the park’s natural areas will ensure erosion issues are identified and addressed promptly. In addition, removal of common buckthorn and other non-native shrubs in the woodlands will help improve water quality, since buckthorn thickets shade out most everything underneath them. This dense shade results in vast areas of bare soil that is prone toerosion. Thinning of tree and shrub canopies will allow more light to reach the ground, thus promoting the establishment of grasses and sedges with fine roots that hold onto fine soil particles, which will reduce soil erosion and sedimentation into basins. C.WildlifeManagement 1.PrioritySpecies While Alimagnet Park provides a variety of habitats for a multitude of species, its extensive oak forests, woodlands, and savannas provide an important opportunity for birds and other wildlife that are dependent on this type of habitat.For example, just some of the wildlife species supported by mature upland forests and oak woodlands are:Acadian flycatcher, cerulean warbler, hooded warbler, prothonotary warbler, wood thrush,red-shouldered hawk, northern barrens tiger beetle, eastern fox snake, northern long-eared bat, red- headed woodpecker, whip-poor-will, eastern meadowlark, and many invertebrate pollinators including many butterfly species. Many of these species are protected or their populations are in decline. For instance, by removing invasive brush under the canopy of oaks, this should help improve the hunting success for red- shouldered hawk. Expanding the restoration and management work in the park’s forests and woodlands will continue to increase the acreage and improve the quality of these critical wooded habitats.For example, red- shouldered hawk prefer open woodlands with scattered small lakes, and will benefit from brush removal because it improves their hunting success. In addition to forests and woodlands, the park’s many depressional wetlands exhibit a variety of hydrologic regimes, and hence,a variety of habitats and microhabitats.These wetlands within the park’s matrix of forests and woodlands, creates a rich mosaic of habitats, providing full life-cycle needs to many native wildlife species, including wood frogs and tiger salamanders, among others. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan56 2.ProblemSpecies The most problematic wildlife species at Alimagnet Park iswhite-tailed deer. While these charismatic megafauna are cherished by many residents and park users, they can be detrimental to the restoration and maintenance of healthy forests and woodlands.Damage to native woody and herbaceous species from deer grazing, browsing, and rubbing their antlers on trees can harm desirable vegetation, especially delectable herbaceous plants and young tree plantings. The City of Apple Valley does nothave a program in place to control deer populations. 3.IndicatorSpecies The following are relatively common bird species that are largely dependent on woodland habitat. Not all these species would be expected at Alimagnet Park, but many of them would be. Presence/absence can depend on multiple factors such as the size and shape of the woodland, proximity to prairie or other habitat types, degree of isolation, and structural and species diversity.There are many additional species that would also be expected on woodlands but are not considered as woodland-dependent. Table 4: Woodland Habitat Indicator Bird Species WOODLAND BIRDS Cooper's hawkEastern wood peweeBrown creeper Black-billed cuckooEastern phoebeBlue-gray gnatcatcher Great horned owlLeast flycatcherOvenbird Barred owlGreat crested flycatcherBlue-winged warbler Red-bellied woodpeckerYellow-throated vireoYellow-rumped warbler Yellow-bellied sapsuckerWarbling vireoAmerican redstart Downy woodpeckerRed-eyed vireoScarlet tanager Hairy woodpeckerBlack-capped chickadeeRose breasted grosbeak Pileated woodpeckerWhite breasted nuthatchBaltimore oriole Conducting bird surveys is a good way to gauge the habitat status of a natural area. Timing of bird surveys is important—conductingthem during migration periods of spring or fall, versus conductingthem in June-July after spring migration, provides different information. But surveys should includewhat type of habitat exists to support a certain suite of bird species, for instance breeding vs. migrating birds. Additionally, the size of the habitat is important. For instance, even though high-quality savanna might have been restored, if it is too small an area, or below a critical size, it may not be sufficient to ever attract or support savanna bird species. 4.HabitatEnhancements There are many habitat enhancements that can attract and benefit wildlife species. Brush piles (e.g., cut buckthorn), nesting boxes (e.g., for bats, wood ducks, bluebirds), and basking logs (e.g., for turtles) are just a few of the enhancements that can be provided to help wildlife.Consideration shouldbe given to the degree of labor needed to maintain nesting boxes;however, volunteers may provide such labor. Targeting specific City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan57 wildlife species, such as species of greatest conservation need (SGCN), can provide more guidance regarding how natural areas should be managed to maximize their benefit for target species. For instance, retaining snags (standing dead trees)is an effective way to promote habitat for woodpeckers. Specificallyfor red- headed woodpecker(an SGCN), it is especially important to retain large snags on the edges of woodlands adjacent to open grasslands or savanna. Xȁ - ¦¤¬¤³ 0« A.PrioritizedTasks Implementation of restoration and management work requires resources, namely time, laborand money. Limitations in staffing, volunteers, and funding make it necessary to prioritize projects and tasks.It is wise to first ensure that all areas where previous restoration/management investments have been made are properly maintained –otherwise, those efforts may amount to little,if any,conservation value. After ensuring sufficient funds and attention have been allocated to maintain previous natural areas investments, new projects can be considered. Prioritization of new projects can be based on a variety of criteria, including consideration of anarea’s location, visibility, current ecological condition, rare natural features, sensitivity to further degradation, etc. These criteria and others were considered in developing a five-year work plan for Apple Valley’s Alimagnet Park. B.Five-YearWorkPlan A five-year work plan (see Table 5) was developed to provide guidelines forachieving the recommended communities shown in Figure 13.This work plan was developed to focus on the natural resource management and restoration priorities for protecting and improving Apple Valley’s Alimagnet Park. The table includes a list of priorities, activities, schedules, responsibilities, and estimated costs. A general time frame is described in Table 5,but note that “Year 1” for each Management Unit may be independent of Year 1 in other Management Units, although they may also coincide. Also note that the costs shown are estimates, based on similar work at other sites, including City of Burnsville’s part of Alimagnet Park. Actual costs may be higher or lower, depending on multiple factors,including inflation, how many proposals were received, etc. One of the biggest factors is allowing contractors enough time to provide good proposals and allowing them enough lead time to implement the work—if a project is a “rush job”, prices will be higher. Each Management Unit was prioritized for restoration need, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the highest. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan58 Table 5: Five-Year Work Plan Priority One: Unit 3 -Enhanceexisting forest/woodland Area Cost Estimate Season/YearUnitActivity \[acres\]($) Spring/Summer3Mark trees, prepare request for quotes, select contractor and prepare 20.5$4,000 2024contracts. Prepare public notices.Manage overall project and yearly staff/contractor tasks. Winter 2024-3Large-scale woody biomass removal for invasive species and unwanted 20.5$62,000 2025woody species. Remove all invasive trees and shrubs; forestry mowing may be appropriate in areas, recognizing this is “selective” brushing. Additional canopy thinning may be necessary to achieve target canopy cover of 70-90%. All saw-cut stumps will betreated, and cut material will be shredded on site, burned in City-approved locations, orremoved from the site. Where feasible, a finish forestry mow maybe warrantedafter woody removals inorder to shred remaining woody debris and facilitate future management activities. 20253Controlled burn(wherever fine fuel, including oak leaves, aresufficient to 20.5$10,300 carry fire). Annually 2024-20.5 3Conduct critical cuts and/or fall foliar spraying of invasive shrubs.$9,300 2028 Annually 2024-20.5 3Spot treat invasive herbaceous vegetation.$9,300 2028 20.5 20253Purchase native seed to overseed post burn. $20,500 20.5 2025 or 20263Broadcastseed after burn, ensuring good seed-to-soil contact. $8,200 Controlled burn(wherever fine fuel, including oak leaves, are sufficient to 2028320.5$10,300 carry fire) Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement of Annually 2024- 3performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. Cost 20.5$15,000 2028 estimate is for the entire five-year span, not for each year. $148,900 (assuming Sub-total contractor used for most work) The table above (for Unit 3) lays out a recommended approach to forest/woodland enhancement that would also be appropriate for Units 1, 2, and 4. Using the per-acre cost of Unit 3, $7,263.41, and extrapolating for the acres in each of the forest/woodland units 1, 2, and 4, gives the following: UnitArea (acres)Per-Acre Cost Estimate (based Cost Estimate on Unit 3) 120.5$7,263.41$112,582 215.5$7,263.41$204,828 410.1$7,263.41$73,360 Total for all forested/wooded 74.3Should be 66.67,263.41$483,743.41 units, 1, 2, 3 and 4 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan59 Priority Two: Unit 6-Enhanceexisting sedge meadow Area Season/YearUnitActivityCost Estimate ($) \[acres\] Annually 2024- 6Spot treat invasive woody and herbaceous vegetation.0.3$2,000 2028 Controlled burn(assume conducted simultaneously with other burn 0.3 Fall 20246$3,000 units in park). 20246Purchase native seed to overseed post burn. 0.3$300 2024 or 20256Broadcastseed after burn, ensuring good seed-to-soil contact.0.3$350 Annually 2024-6Conduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate achievement 0.3$2,000 2028of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. Cost estimate is for the entire five-year span, not for each year. $7,650(assuming Sub-total contractor used for most work) Priority Three: Unit 8B –Restore shoreline wetland (pilot project) Area Season/YearUnitActivityCost Estimate ($) \[acres\] Annually 8BSpot treat invasive woody and herbaceous vegetation.0.1$2,000 2024-2028 Fall 20248BControlled burn(assume conducted simultaneously with other burn units 0.1$500 in park). 20248BPurchase native seed to overseed post burn. 0.1$200 2024 or 20258BBroadcastseed after burn, ensuring good seed-to-soil contact. 0.1$350 20258BPurchase emergent wetland live plants(“plugs” or potted plants)0.1$1,000 20258BInstall emergent wetland live plants in shallow water (ideally May/June, 0.1$2,000 but can be done any time before freezing temps); protect new plantings from deer browse with fencing or equivalent. Annually 8BConduct annual vegetation monitoring (both of flora and fauna) to assess 0.1$1,500 2024-2028progress, evaluate achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. Consider conducting breeding bird surveys, and other wildlife survey, too. Cost estimate is for the entire five-year span, not for each year. $7,550(assuming Sub-total contractor used formostwork) City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan60 Priority Four: Unit 4A–Convert former pine plantation to savanna. Area Season/YearUnitActivityCost Estimate ($) \[acres\] Spring/Summer 4APrepare silvicultural prescription to encourage an uneven-aged 1.4$500 2024stand distribution and create a healthier, more resilient pine stand. Mark trees, prepare request for quotes, select contractor and prepare contracts. Prepare public notices.Manage overall project and yearly staff/contractor tasks. Winter 2024-4ALarge-scale woody biomass removal for invasive species and 1.4$20,000 2025unwanted woody species(including pinesremoved as part of prescription). Remove all invasive trees and shrubs; forestry mowing may be appropriate in areas, recognizing this is “selective” brushing. All saw-cut stumps will be treated, and cut material will be shredded on site, burned in City-approved locations, or removed from the site. Where feasible, a finish forestry mow may be warranted after woody removals in order to shred remaining woody debris and facilitate future management activities. 20254AControlled burn(wherever fine fuel sufficient to carry fire).1.4$8,500 Annually 2024-4AConduct critical cuts and/or fall foliar spraying of invasive shrubs.1.4$2,000 2028 Annually 2024-4ASpot treat invasive herbaceous vegetation.1.4$2,000 2028 20254APurchase native seed,appropriate for a Central Dry-Mesic Pine 1.4$1,000 Hardwood Forest (FDc34), to overseed postburn. 2025 or 20264ABroadcastseed after burn, ensuring good seed-to-soil contact. 1.4$350 Annually 2024-4AConduct annual monitoring to assess progress, evaluate 1.4$2,000 2028achievement of performance standards, and allow for adaptive management. Cost estimate is for the entire five-year span, not for each year. $36,350(assuming Sub-total contractor used for mostwork) $535,293(assuming TOTAL for 4 Projects(76 acres)should be 68.31 contractor used for most work) 8)ȁ /³§¤± #®²¨£¤± ³¨®² Other issues for consideration atAlimagnet Parkinclude: Impervious Surfaces. Parking lots, roadways, buildings, and,to a lesser degree,athletic fields, produce runoff,which, if not properly managed, can degrade natural areas, especially surface water resources. While out of the scope of this restoration plan, it may be beneficial to assess runoff from impervious surfaces in the park to identify and rectify any problem areas. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency “Minnesota Stormwater Manual” provides background information and design recommendations for a broad range of stormwater best management practices (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 2022). Recommend limiting impervious surfaces in the park and watersheds of the park to no more than 10% of City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan61 the total area of the watershed (Schueler 1994; Arnoldand Gibbons1996; Chithra et al 2015). If watersheds cannot be limited to 10% impervious cover, then they should be limited to no more than25% impervious cover.The key resource objective for these watersheds is to mitigate impacts to the greatest extent possible, using effective best management practices. Trails. Apple Valley’s Alimagnet Park is beloved for its extensive trail network(only some of the park’s trails are shown on Figure 13). Most of these trails appear stable; however, some were observed to be actively eroding, and erosion may continue to be a problem, especially along steep slopes, heavily used areas(e.g., disc golf areas), and where the public creates their own trails. Monitoring of trails for their condition and stability is recommended. The DNR provides guidelines for sustainable trail design in theirpublication “Trail Planning, Design, and Photo 10:Eroded trail in the southern portion of Unit 1 Development Guidelines”(DNR 2007). Pesticide and Herbicide Use. Restoringnative species dominance in all vegetation layers of a plant community often justifies theuse of herbicides. If native dominance can be restored without herbicides, spot-treatment may still be appropriate to eliminate colonies of the most problematic species. Some invasive plant species can be managed with mowing or hand-pulling, but in most cases targeted herbicide treatment is the best means of control, or a combination of mechanical and chemical methods. The public is increasingly concerned about herbicides and other pesticides used on public land. City staff may be contacted for information in response to restoration and management involving herbicides. A consistent message should be conveyed to the public by City staff who receive inquiries about herbicides: o The City minimizes herbicide use by taking an ecosystem approach and following Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices. When deemed necessary, the City allows use of herbicides with the lowest toxicity to achieve restoration goals. o Herbicide application on City-managed lands is applied at the lowest effective concentration by licensed applicators following manufacturer’s instructions. o Recommended safety precautions are followed by herbicide applicators, and signage is installed as appropriate to inform the public of herbicide use and appropriate exclusion intervals following application. The amount of herbicide applied for ecological restoration and management is at levels far below that used in agricultural fields. Moreover, the herbicide is often precisely applied to small areas, such as a cut stump or individual thistle clump. Preference is given to sponge-or wick-application or low-pressure nozzle to minimize drift and spillage. Restoration professionals prefer to use broadcast herbicide City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan62 application as a tool of last resort, in order to remove a dominant invasive plant in a vegetation layer that is resistant to other approaches. Community Engagement& Education. Providing opportunities to educate and engage the public in natural areas management is an important opportunity to advance and expand municipal natural resources programs. Increasing people’s understanding and appreciation for ecological restoration and management will provide community support for such projects, which can be realized through volunteerism as well as public support for natural resources projects and increasedfunding. Just some of the ways the community could be engaged to advance the restoration and management of Alimagnet Park’s natural areas are: o Volunteer events. Not all restoration and management tasks are appropriate for volunteers, and volunteereventstypically require organization, supplies, training, and oversight.Nonetheless, volunteering is an effective way for the public to learn, appreciate, and take ownership of natural areas. o Bioblitz. Typically a 24-hour period when professionals and volunteers document all living species within a given area, such as a public park. o Celebration. Much work goes into managing natural areas, and the process can take many years. For that reason, it is important to pause and celebrate projects –from ribbon-cutting events, to achieving milestones, celebrations can bring attention to natural areas management and increase community support for continued or expanded work. o Interpretive Signage. Ecological restoration and management isa relatively young science, and much of the public is unfamiliar with the goals and techniques used in natural resource programs. Signage is a relatively easy and affordable way to help the public learn and appreciate the park’s natural areas, plant communities, wildlife, etc. Signage can also be useful to explain the restoration and management process, so park users are aware of what is being done and why,as well as the benefits that come from actively restoring and managing natural areas. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan63 8))ȁ 2¤¥¤±¤¢¤² ǉ 2¤²®´±¢¤² Adams, R.2016.Pollution sensitivity of near-surface materials: St. Paul, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Hydrogeology Atlas Series HG-02, report and plate, accessible at: https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/groundwater_section/mapping/mha/hg02_report.pdf (Accessed January 2024). Arnold, C.L. Jr. and C.J. Gibbons. 1996. Impervious Surface Coverage The Emergenceof a Key Environmental Indicator. Journal of the American Planning Association 62(2):243-258. Barr EngineeringCo. 2018. Surface Water Management Plan 2018-2027. Report prepared for the City of Apple Valley. https://www.ci.apple-valley.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/507/2018-Surface-Water- Management-Plan?bidId=(Accessed February 2024). Chithra, S.V., Nair, M.V.H., Amarnath, A. and Anjana, N.S. 2015. Impact of Impervious Surfaces on the Environment. International Journal of Engineering Science Invention, 4, 27-31. Foth, Henry D (Michigan State University). 1990 (8th Edition). Fundamentals of Soil Science. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. Marschner, F.J. 1974. The Original Vegetation of Minnesota (map, scale 1:500,000). USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minnesota (redraft of the original 1930 edition). Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). 2023. Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS)/Biotics data. Accessed under License Agreement 1025. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(DNR). 2007. Trail planning, design, and development guidelines. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources–Trails and Waterways. St. Paul, MN. https://cdn2.assets-servd.host/material-civet/production/images/documents/MN-Trail-Planning- Design-Development-Guidelines.pdf(Accessed December 2023). Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(DNR). 2005. Tomorrow’s Habitat for the Wild and Rare: An Action Plan for Minnesota Wildlife. Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Minnesota Department of NaturalResources. http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/assistance/nrplanning/bigpicture/cwcs/chapters_appendix/tomorrows_ha bitat_toc.pdf(Accessed December 2023). Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(DNR). 2005. Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: The Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province. Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. St. Paul, MN. City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan64 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(DNR). 2004. Minnesota Land Cover Classification System User Manual, Version 5.4. DNR Central Region, St. Paul, Minnesota. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources(DNR). 1997. Natural Communities and Rare Species of Dakota County, Minnesota. Map by the Minnesota County Biological Survey. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.2022. Minnesota Stormwater Manual. https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Main_Page(Accessed December 2023). Mossler, John H.(2013).M-194 Bedrock Geology of the Twin Cities Ten-County Metropolitan Area, Minnesota.Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/154925 (Accessed December2023). Schueler, T. 1994. The Importance of Imperviousness. Watershed Protection Techniques1(3): 100-111. !00%.$)#%3 AppendixA:PlantSpeciesRecordedatAlimagnetPark The following plant species were identified at Alimagnet Park for each land Management Unit on October 16, 2023by Douglas Mensing and Michael Lopez (RES).Note, “Cover Class” numbers correspond to the following percentages in the below tables: + (0-1%), 1 (1-5%), 2 (5-25%), 3 (25-50%), 4 (50-75%), 5 (75-100%). These plant lists are a useful reference to common plant species observed within each unit duringthe relatively short assessment visits,but are not a comprehensive list of all plant species present. UNIT 1(SE forest/woodlandunit): Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 3 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Forbs Achillea millefolium Yarrow+ Ageratina altissima White snakeroot1 x Alliaria petiolata Garlic mustard2 x Arctium minus Common burdock1 x Cirsium arvense Canada thistle+ x Cirsium vulgare Bull thistle+ Desmodium glutinosum Pointed-leaf tick-trefoil+ Galium cf asprellum Rough bedstraw+ Galium boreale Northern bedstraw+ Geumcfaleppicum Yellow avens+ x Glechoma hederacea Ground ivy+ City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan65 Hackelia virginiana Virginia stickseed1 Osmorhiza claytonia Sweet cicely+ cf Persicaria sp.unknown knotweed+ Solidago gigantea Giantgoldenrod+ cf Symphyotrichumsp.unknown aster+ x Verbascum thapsus Common mullein+ Verbena urticifolia White vervain+ Graminoids Common woodland Carex blanda+ sedge Carex pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge1 Vines and Woody Species Acer negundo Box elder1 Juniperus virginiana Eastern red cedar+ x Lonicera sp.Invasive honeysuckle1 Parthenocissus inserta Woodbine+ Quercus alba White oak+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn2 Rubussp.unknown raspberry+ x Vinca minor Periwinkle+ Vitis riparia Riverbank grape+ Zanthoxylum americanum Prickly ash+ Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 4 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Acer negundo Box elder1 Celtis occidentalis Hackberry1 Cornus racemosa Gray dogwood+ Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash1 x Lonicera sp.Invasive honeysuckle1 Ostrya virginiana Ironwood+ Populus tremuloides Quaking aspen1 Prunus serotina Black cherry1 Prunus virginiana Chokecherry+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn4 Ribes cf missouriense Wild gooseberry+ Canopy and Sub-canopy Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 5 Non-Cover Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon Name native (x)Class (%)(larger specimens,in inches): Betula papyrifera Paper birch+ City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan66 Celtis occidentalis Hackberry+ Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash2 Populus deltoides Cottonwood1 Populus tremuloides Quaking aspen1 Prunus serotina Black cherry1 Quercus alba White oak3 Quercus ellipsoidalis Northern pin oak2 Quercus macrocarpa Bur oak+ Quercus rubra Northern red oak2 Sorbus decora Showy mountain-ash+ Tilia americana American basswood+ Ulmus americana Americanelm2 UNIT 2(NE forest/woodlandunit): Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 3 Cover Non- Scientific NameCommon NameClass Comments native (x) (%) Forbs Ageratina altissima White snakeroot+ x Alliaria petiolata Garlic mustard1 x Arctium minus Common burdock+ Bryales Unknown moss+ x Cirsium vulgare Bull thistle+ x Convallaria majalis European lily-of-the-valley+ Euphorbia marginata Snow-on-the-mountain+ Eutrochium maculatum Spotted Joe-pye weed+ Isolated patch in NE portion of x Reynoutria japonica Japanese knotweed+ unit x Farfugium japonicum Leopard plant+ Galium cf asprellum Rough bedstraw+ Geranium maculatum Wild geranium+ x Glechoma hederacea Ground ivy+ Hackelia virginiana Virginia stickseed1 x Leonurus cardiaca Motherwort+ Monarda fistulosa Wild bergamot+ Osmorhiza claytonia Sweet cicely+ Senna hebecarpa Wild senna+ City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan67 Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod+ Unknown FernUnknown fern+ Graminoids Bromuscfpubescens Hairy woodland brome+ Carex cf blanda Comon woodland sedge+ Carex cf pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge1 Elymus virginicus Virginia wild rye+ Scirpus cyperinus Woolgrass+ Vines and Woody Species Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash+ Prunus virginiana Chokecherry+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn2 Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 4 Cover Non- Scientific NameCommon NameClass Comments native (x) (%) Acer negundo Box elder1 Celtis occidentalis Hackberry+ x Lonicera sp.Invasive honeysuckle1 x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn3 Vitis riparia Wild grape+ Zanthoxylum americanum Prickly ash+ Canopy and Sub-canopyLayer: Total Percentage of Cover = 5 Cover Non-Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon NameClass native (x)(larger specimens,in inches): (%) Acer negundo Box elder1 Betula papyrifera Paper birch1 Populus tremuloides Quaking aspen1 Prunus serotina Black cherry1 Quercus alba White oak3 Quercus ellipsoidalis Northern pin oak2 Quercus macrocarpa Bur oak1 Quercus rubra Northen red oak1 Ulmus americana American elm1 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan68 UNIT 3(SW forest/woodlandunit): Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 3 Cover Non- Scientific NameCommon NameClass Comments native (x) (%) Forbs x Arctium minus Common burdock+ Desmodium glutinosum Pointed-leaf tick-trefoil+ Gallium cf asprellum Rough bedstraw+ x Glechoma hederacea Ground ivy+ Maianthemum racemosum False Solomon’s seal+ Osmunda claytoniana Interrupted fern+ Solidago canadensis Canadagoldenrod+ cf Symphyotrichum sp.Asterspecies+ Thalictrum dioicum Early meadow rue+ x Torilis japonica Japanese hedge parsley+ Unknown FernUnknown fern+ Graminoids Carex cf pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge1 Vines and Woody Species Parthenocissus inserta Woodbine+ x Lonicera sp.Invasive honeysuckle+ Quercus albaWhite oak+ Quercus rubra Northern red oak+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn2 Vitis riparia Riverbank grape+ Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 3 Cover Non- Scientific NameCommon NameClass Comments native (x) (%) Cornus racemosa Gray dogwood+ x Lonicera sp.Invasive honeysuckle+ Prunus serotina Black cherry+ Prunus virginiana Chokecherry+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn4 Ribescfmissouriense Missouri gooseberry+ Rubus allegheniensis Common blackberry+ Rubus occidentalis Black raspberry+ Viburnum lentago Nannyberry1 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan69 Canopy and Sub-canopyLayer: Total Percentage of Cover = 5 Cover Non-Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon NameClass native (x)(larger specimens,in inches): (%) Acer negundo Boxelder+ Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash1 Prunus serotina Black cherry1 Quercus alba White oak4 Quercus ellipsoidalis Northern pin oak1 Sorbus decora Showy mountain-ash+ Ulmus americana American elm1 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan70 UNIT 4(NW forest/woodlandunit): Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 3 Cover Non- Scientific NameCommon NameClass Comments native (x) (%) Forbs Achillea millefolium Yarrow+ Agrimonia gryposepala Tall hairy agrimony+ Circaea lutetiana Enchanter’s nightshade+ Desmodium glutinosum Pointed-leaf tick-trefoil+ Fragaria virginiana Wild strawberry+ Galium cf asprellum Rough bedstraw+ Galium boreale Northern bedstraw+ Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower+ Maianthemum racemosum False Solomon’s seal+ Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod+ cf Symphyotrichum sp.Aster species+ Thalictrum dioicum Early meadow rue+ Graminoids Common woodland Carex cf blanda+ sedge Carex cf pensylvanica Pennsylvania sedge+ Vines and Woody Species x Frangulaalnus Glossy buckthorn+ x Lonicera sp.Invasive honeysuckle+ Parthenocissus inserta Woodbine+ Prunus serotina Black cherry+ Quercus albaWhite oak+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn2 Rubus idaeus Red raspberry+ Vitis riparia Riverbank grape+ Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 3 Cover Non- Scientific NameCommon NameClass Comments native (x) (%) Acer negundo Boxelder+ Celtis occidentalis Hackberry+ Cornus racemosa Gray dogwood1 x Frangula alnus Glossy buckthorn+ x Lonicera sp.Invasive honeysuckle+ City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan71 Ostrya virginiana Ironwood1 Prunus serotina Black cherry+ Prunus virginiana Chokecherry+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn3 Rubus allegheniensis Common blackberry+ Salix babylonica Weeping willow+ Ulmus americana American elm+ Viburnum cf dentatum Arrowhead viburnum+ Vitis riparia Riverbank grape+ Zanthoxylum Americanum Prickly ash+ Canopy and Sub-canopyLayer: Total Percentage of Cover = 5 Cover Non-Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon NameClass native (x)(larger specimens,in inches): (%) Betula papyrifera Paper birch1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash+ Pinus resinosa Red pine2 Pinus strobus White pine+ Populus tremuloides Quaking aspen+ Quercus alba White oak3 Quercus rubra Northern red oak1 City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan72 UNIT 5(herbaceous/open water wetlands) Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 4 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Forbs Alismatrivale Northerwater-plantain+ x Alliaria petiolata Garlic mustard+ x Arctium minus Lesser burdock+ Bidens cernua Nodding bur-marigold1 x Cirsium arvense Canada thistle+ Galium sp.Bedstraw species+ Impatiens capensis Spotted Touch-me-not+ Iris sp.Iris species+ Laportea canadensis Canadian wood nettle+ Lycopus uniflorus Northern bugleweed+ x Lysimachia nummularia Creeping Jenny+ x Lythrum salicaria Purple loosestrife+ Mentha arvensis Wild mint+ Onoclea sensibilis Sensitive fern+ Persicaria sp.Smartweed species+ x Persicaria hydropiper Marsh waterpepper+ Pilea pumila Dwarf clearweed+ Polygonum sp.Knotweed species+ Scutellaria lateriflora Mad-dog skullcap+ Solanum dulcamara Bittersweet nightshade+ Sonchus arvensis Perennial sowthistle+ Sonchus cf asper Spiny sowthistle+ Stachys cf palustris Marsh hedge nettle+ Stellaria media Common chickweed+ Symphyotrichum sp.Aster species+ Thelypteris palustris Northern marsh fern Urtica dioica Stinging nettle+ Verbena hastata Blue vervain+ Unknown fernUnknown fern+ Graminoids Calamagrostis canadensis Canada bluejoint+ Carex lacustris Lake sedge+ Carex sp.Sedge species+ Carex stricta Tussock sedge+ Eleocharis palustris Common spikerush+ City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan73 Eleocharis sp.Spikerush species+ Glyceria cf grandis American manna grass+ Glyceria sp.Manna grass species+ Leersia oryzoides Rice cutgrass+ Lemna minor Common duckweed2 x Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass3 Schoenoplectus Soft-stem bulrush+ tabernaemontani Scirpus cyperinus Woolgrass+ x Typha angustifolia Narrow-leaved cattail+ Typha latifolia Broad-leaf cattail+ Wolffia sp.Columbian watermeal1 Vines and Woody Species Ulmus americana American elm+ Viburnum lentago Nannyberry+ Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 1 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Cornus racemosa Gray dogwood+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn+ Viburnum lentago Nannyberry+ Canopy and Sub-canopyLayer: Total Percentage of Cover = + Non-Cover Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon Name native (x)Class (%)(larger specimens,in inches): None documented City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan74 UNIT 6(sedge meadow): Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 5 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Forbs Bidens cernua Nodding bur-marigold2 Bulblet-bearing water Cicuta bulbifera+ hemlock Lycopus uniflorus Northern bugleweed+ x Lythrum salicaria Purple loosestrife+ Persicaria hydropiper Marsh waterpepper+ Arrow-leaved Persicaria sagittata+ tearthumb Pilea pumila Dwarf clearweed+ Ranunculussp.Buttercup species+ Scutellaria lateriflora Mad-dog skullcap+ Solanum dulcamara Bittersweet nightshade+ Graminoids Carex lacustris Lake sedge2 Carex sp.Sedge species4 Dulichium arundinaceum Three-way sedge+ Glyceria sp.Manna grass species+ Scirpus cyperinus Woolgrass+ Vines and Woody Species None documented Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = + Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Salix discolor Pussy willow+ Canopy and Sub-canopyLayer: Total Percentage of Cover = + Non-Cover Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon Name native (x)Class (%)(larger specimens,in inches): None documented City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan75 UNIT 7(invasive cattail marsh): Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 5 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Forbs Bidens cernua Nodding bur-marigold1 Epilobium sp.Willowherb species+ Laportea canadensis Canadian wood nettle1 x Lythrum salicaria Purple loosestrife1 Pilea pumila Dwarf clearweed+ Solanum dulcamara Bittersweet nightshade+ Thelypteris palustris Northern marsh fern+ Graminoids Carex sp.Sedge species+ x Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass 1 x Typha angustifolia Narrow-leaved cattail5 Vines and Woody Species None documented Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 1 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Acer saccharinum Silver maple+ Salix discolor Pussy willow+ Salix cf nigra Black willow+ Canopy and Sub-canopyLayer: Total Percentage of Cover = + Non-Cover Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon Name native (x)Class (%)(larger specimens,in inches): None documented City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan76 UNIT 8(shorelinewetlands): Ground Layer(Zero to four feet above ground level)= 5 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Forbs Apocynum cannabinum Indian hemp+ Asclepias incarnata Swamp milkweed+ Bidens cernua Nodding bur-marigold+ Epilobium sp.Willowherb species+ Hydrocotyle ranunculoides Floating pennywort+ Impatiens capensis Spotted Touch-me-not+ Iris sp.unknown iris + Laportea canadensis Canadian wood nettle+ Lemna minor Common duckweed+ Lycopus uniflorus Northern bugleweed+ x Lythrum salicaria Purple loosestrife+ Onoclea sensibilis Sensitive fern+ Persicaria sp.unknown smartweed + Persicaria cf hydropiper Marsh waterpepper+ Arrow-leaved Persicaria sagittata+ tearthumb Rudbeckia triloba Brown-eyed Susan+ x Rumex crispus Curly dock+ Solidago gigantea Giant goldenrod+ Sonchus cf asper Spiny sowthistle+ Thelypteris palustris Northern marsh fern+ Urtica dioica Stinging nettle+ Verbena hastata Blue vervain+ Graminoids cf Agrostis stolonifera Creeping bentgrass+ Bolboschoenus fluviatilis River bulrush+ Carex stricta Tussock sedge+ Cyperus sp.Flat/Nut sedge species+ Lemna minor Common duckweed+ x Phalaris arundinacea Reed canary grass5 Schoenoplectus Soft-stem bulrush+ tabernaemontani Scirpus atrovirens Dark green bulrush+ Scirpus cyperinus Woolgrass+ Typha latifolia Broad-leaf cat-tail+ City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan77 Wolffia columbiana Columbian watermeal+ Vines and Woody Species Understory or Shrub Layer: Total Percentage of Cover = 1 Non-Cover Scientific NameCommon NameComments native (x)Class (%) Cornus racemosa Gray dogwood+ Cornus sericea Red-osier dogwood+ Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash+ Populus tremuloides Quaking aspen+ x Rhamnus cathartica Common buckthorn+ Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry+ Viburnum lentago Nannyberry+ Canopy and Sub-canopyLayer: Total Percentage of Cover = + Non-Cover Diameter at Breast Height Scientific NameCommon Name native (x)Class (%)(larger specimens,in inches): Salix cf nigra Black willow+ City of Apple Valley–Alimagnet Park Natural Resource ManagementPlan78