Conservation Connection Blog - Prairie Rivers of Iowa

Tallgrass Prairie – A View from the Fly on the Gall

by Jessica Butters | Jul 13, 2023

The North American Prairie Conference was a big conference (638 people from 24 states and 2 countries) but not all the sessions dealt with big mammals, tall grasses, and wide open spaces. During a break from working the registration table, I caught some delightful talks by MJ Hatfield and Chris Helzer about the tiny creatures you can meet and the stories you can learn if you “walk slow, look close, and be curious” – MJ Hatfield.

Howdy! I’m a goldenrod gall fly (formally, Eurosta solidaginis). Have you ever seen flower stems with an odd, ball-shaped growth? These round growths are called galls, and if you’ve seen one on goldenrod, I may have been the architect that created it. But what exactly is a gall? To me, a gall is a highly specific and comfy nursery, created with a little hijacking (picture to the left © MJ Hatfield).

A gall can be about anywhere on a plant, including flowers and leaves, and are created by hijacking the plant’s hormones. You read that right. I’m a hormone hijacker. In spring, before I was born, my mother inserted her egg (me!) into the goldenrod’s stem. Later, when I hatched into a larva inside the goldenrod, I started eating the inside of the stem. My saliva contains chemicals that trick the plant into thinking the saliva is its own hormones. My saliva signals the goldenrod to grow more tissue in the feeding area (or nursery, as I like to call it). The goldenrod ends up creating a beautiful, round nursery. In short, I’ve built my very own gall. I’ll eat and grow in this goldenrod gall throughout the summer until fall. In autumn, I chew a tunnel near the outside of the gall and then pupate, waiting until spring to emerge. But how the heck am I supposed to get out of the gall?!

This is where it gets seriously interesting. I have an air bag like structure on my head between my eyes. I inflate this air bag against the gall, and bam! I break through, seeing the outside world for the first time. Also, this whole process doesn’t hurt the goldenrod. It nearly always flowers like normal and continues enjoying life as a goldenrod plant.

My species can’t survive in any other plant. Because I’m a weak flier, I will probably stay in the same neighborhood that I grew up in. I hope nothing happens to this patch of goldenrod…I’m not sure if I could make it to a different prairie patch. Maybe if there were more prairie plantings, it wouldn’t be so drastic if changes came to my neighborhood. The prairie restorations could act as a safety net.

Goldenrod gall with gall fly, by MJ Hatfield

As the goldenrod gall fly, my entire life and future requires the presence of goldenrod. And I’m not the only one! At least two moth species also make galls on goldenrod. There are quite a few bees that rely solely on goldenrod pollen. You might think we are picky, but can you imagine how hard it is to find a home that you can not only live in, but also eat? And us gall flies have to develop specific chemicals in order to hijack specific plant hormones to even make our home and food. It’s very complicated, and we can’t just change all that with a snap of our wings!

Stiff leaf goldenrod, photo credit Dan Haug

Many people now know that monarch caterpillars can only eat milkweed, and are planting gardens with milkweed to help them. That’s great, but monarch butterflies are not the only insect that needs a certain plant for food or shelter. Sawtooth sunflower has four different species of gall-forming insects that dependent upon it. The blue sage bee requires pollen it can only get from blue sage flowers. Swallowtail butterflies rely on plants in the carrot family (such as golden alexander). Make room for a diverse prairie planting and you could be supporting ten times as many species of insects, many of them so small or well-camouflaged that few people have ever met them!

Tallgrass Prairie – A Butterfly’s View

by Dan Haug | Jul 13, 2023

The tallgrass prairie once covered 170 million acres, and at the 2023 North American Prairie Conference, I was reminded of that continental scale. Between assisting presenters with technology, I heard sessions about protecting orchids in the aspen-prairie parkland of Manitoba, time lapse photography along the Platte River in Nebraska, surveying insects in Alabama’s “Black Belt”, restoring spring wildflowers on the Kankakee Sands of Indiana, and building out the native seed supply chain in South Dakota, as well as lots of good information from friends and colleagues in Iowa. The following are a few insights I picked up from the conference, written from a butterfly’s perspective.

Hi, I’m a monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus). Like the meadowlark, I continued to thrive in Iowa long after the prairie was broken. For me, the tipping point was when GMO soybeans and copious use of herbicides replaced “walking the beans” as a method for weed control. No more milkweed in farm fields! Like the meadowlark, I’m a strong flier and not too picky about my habitat, but I’ve got two pairs of eyes (two compound eyes and two ocelli) so my perspective is a little different!

Monarchs on meadow blazingstar, photo credit Monarch Butterfly Garden

For me, it’s all about the forbs—broad-leaved herbaceous plants. I know, you can’t have grassland without grasses, but I need milkweeds to feed my caterpillars and nectar-producing flowers to drink. I’m visit whatever flowers are blooming (I’ll even use non-native forage plants like red clover and weeds like musk thistle) but since Dr. Benedict and his students are asking, yes, I do have some favorites. In addition to milkweeds, I’m partial to plants in the sunflower family, which have heads packed with nectar-producing, short tubed flowers that make for easy sipping. At the Central College prairie, compassplant (Silphium laciniatum) is my top choice, but that’s just because you don’t have any meadow blazing star (Liatris ligulostylis). As native plant nurseries and seed producers can attest, we monarchs go nuts for that!

In some remnant prairies, we’ve seen the forbs get crowded out by aggressive grasses like big bluestem and switchgrass. It’s even worse in restored prairies that used too much grass in the seed mix—we see this with older CRP plantings. On the other hand, a seed mix without any native grasses won’t have all the functions of a prairie and won’t hold up well against invasive weeds. In an intact prairie, the big warm-season grasses are important, but they’re kept in check by a combination of fire and grazing—the fire makes the grass green up and then the bison chow down! Hemiparasitic plants like lousewort (Pedicularis lanceolata) and bastard toadflax (Commandra umbellata) also set back the grass by sending a modified root into the grass roots and sucking out their juices. Prairie isn’t just a collection of native plants, it’s a web of relationships!

Few reconstructed prairies have bison or hemiparasitic plants, so check out this NRCS publication for other ideas to increase forb diversity in grass-dominated stands.

If you’re starting from scratch, be sure to use a seed mix like CP25 or CP42 that includes plenty of native flowers. We’re happy to learn that over 600,000 acres in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) have been planted with these mixes.

Iowa can be an inhospitable place for an insect, but thanks in large part to the efforts of the Tallgrass Prairie Center at UNI and the Iowa DOT’s Living Roadway Trust Fund, we have a better supply of native seeds than many other states, and many miles of roadside ditches planted to prairie. Next step, find some more room for prairie plantings on farms and in cities!

NAPC field trip to Neil Smith Wildlife Refuge

This article is based on sessions presented by Laura Jackson (University of Northern Iowa), Tom Rosburg (Drake University), Russell Benedict (Central College), Justin Meissen (University of Northern Iowa), Brian Wilsey (Iowa State University), and James Cronin (USDA-NRCS).

Tallgrass Prairie – A Bird’s Eye View

by Dan Haug | Jul 13, 2023

The tallgrass prairie once covered 170 million acres, and at the 2023 North American Prairie Conference, I was reminded of that continental scale. Between assisting presenters with technology, I heard sessions about protecting orchids in the aspen-prairie parkland of Manitoba, time lapse photography along the Platte River in Nebraska, beetles in the prairies of Alabama’s “Black Belt”, restoring spring wildflowers on the Kankakee Sands of Indiana, and building out the native seed supply chain in South Dakota, as well as lots of good information from friends and colleagues in Iowa. The following are a few insights I picked up from the conference, written from a bird’s perspective.

Hi, I’m an eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna). I grew up in the tallgrass prairie, but I’m not picky about the species composition of my grassland habitat. I was the most common bird in Iowa for a century after the prairie sod was broken, making a good living in hayfields and hedgerows. Things didn’t get really bad for me until the second half of the twentieth century, when most Iowa farms dropped alfalfa, hay and small grains in favor of corn and soybean production at ever larger scales. That conversion is also the root of the nitrate problems in Iowa’s rivers.

But the flip side of that is that grassland generalists like me don’t need a perfectly authentic prairie to make a comeback. A food system that included more pasture and forage crops to raise animals could make a big difference for wildlife, water, and the vitality of rural communities.

For more on this concept, see the University of Wisconsin’s “Grassland 2.0” project, which is reimagining a food system that provides the ecological functions of prairie. The new book “Tending Iowa’s Land” edited by Connie Mutel comes to the same conclusion: the book introduces Iowa’s four worst environmental crises with a combination of science and stories, explains their historical roots, and outlining visions for a more sustainable future. Laura Jackson’s presentation also provided inspiration for this article.

Notable Quotes from Sackett v. EPA

by Dan Haug | May 30, 2023

We’re almost halfway through our weekly video series “The Clean Water Act: 50 Years, 50 Facts” which tries to explain the consequential and complex environmental law in 90 second chunks accompanied by some rock and pop favorites from the ’70s and ’80s that I’ve adapted to include lyrics about environmental law. On May 25, a major decision by the Supreme Court (Sackett v. EPA) reshaped the legal landscape, so our episodes in June will focus on Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the definition of “waters of the United States” to give you some context.

Clean Water Act 50 Years 50 Facts Playlist

I have mixed feelings about this area of law, informed by an entry-level job at Wisconsin DNR that involved documenting wetland losses and auditing wetland fill permits. In my opinion, decades of litigation and Congressional gridlock have resulted in some compromises which satisfy no-one: the system is confusing and expensive for developers and landowners but doesn’t do enough to protect aquatic ecosystems from “death by a thousand cuts.” If there was a constituency for “environmental federalism”, maybe I could see a path forward, but opposition to federal environmental regulation generally goes hand in hand with opposition to environmental protection at the local and state level. In Idaho, the Sackett’s neighborhood is one of many being built in wetlands along Priest Lake with the approval of a conservative county government. Here in Iowa, the legislature has recently considered bills that would have limited the ability of county governments and land trusts to purchase sensitive natural areas for parks, and limited the ability of cities to regulate development for the purposes of flood control.

But enough about my personal opinions, let’s talk legal opinions. While all nine justices agreed to overturn the Circuit Court’s decision in favor of the Sacketts, four justices thought the majority went too far in limiting the scope of the Clean Water Act. A few choice quotes from the concurring opinions in Sackett v. EPA (with legal citations removed for brevity) really help to illustrate what’s at stake.

From Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence, joined by Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson:

The Clean Water Act generally prohibits dumping dredged or fill material without a permit into the “waters of the United States.” The “waters of the United States” include wetlands that are “adjacent” to waters covered by the Act—for example, wetlands that are adjacent to covered rivers or lakes. The question in this case is whether the wetlands on the Sacketts’ residential property are adjacent to covered waters and therefore covered under the Act.

I agree with the Court’s reversal of the Ninth Circuit. In particular, I agree with the Court’s decision not to adopt the “significant nexus” test for determining whether a wetland is covered under the Act. And I agree with the Court’s bottom-line judgment that the wetlands on the Sacketts’ property are not covered by the Act and are therefore not subject to permitting requirements.

I write separately because I respectfully disagree with the Court’s new test for assessing when wetlands are covered by the Clean Water Act. The Court concludes that wetlands are covered by the Act only when the wetlands have a “continuous surface connection” to waters of the United States—that is, when the wetlands are “adjoining” covered waters…

Recall again how the 1977 Act came about. In 1975, the Army Corps concluded that the 1972 Act’s coverage of “waters of the United States” included “adjacent” wetlands. In 1977, Congress adopted a new permitting program for a category of “waters of the United States.” Congress allocated to the Federal Government exclusive authority to issue Clean Water Act permits for dumping dredged or fill material into certain “waters of the United States,” “including wetlands adjacent thereto.” … Congress’s 1977 decision was no accident. As this Court has previously recognized, “the scope of the Corps’ asserted jurisdiction over wetlands”—including the Corps’ decision to cover adjacent wetlands—“was specifically brought to Congress’ attention” in 1977, “and Congress rejected measures designed to curb the Corps’ jurisdiction.” …

The eight [presidential] administrations since 1977 have maintained dramatically different views of how to regulate the environment, including under the Clean Water Act. Some of those administrations promulgated very broad interpretations of adjacent wetlands. Others adopted far narrower interpretations. Yet all of those eight different administrations have recognized as a matter of law that the Clean Water Act’s coverage of adjacent wetlands means more than adjoining wetlands and also includes wetlands separated from covered waters by man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, or the like…

The difference between “adjacent” and “adjoining” in this context is not merely semantic or academic. The Court’s rewriting of “adjacent” to mean “adjoining” will matter a great deal in the real world. In particular, the Court’s new and overly narrow test may leave long-regulated and long accepted-to-be-regulable wetlands suddenly beyond the scope of the agencies’ regulatory authority, with negative consequences for waters of the United States. For example, the Mississippi River features an extensive levee system to prevent flooding. Under the Court’s “continuous surface connection” test, the presence of those levees (the equivalent of a dike) would seemingly preclude Clean Water Act coverage of adjacent wetlands on the other side of the levees, even though the adjacent wetlands are often an important part of the flood-control project…

The Court’s erroneous test not only will create real-world consequences for the waters of the United States, but also is sufficiently novel and vague (at least as a single standalone test) that it may create regulatory uncertainty for the Federal Government, the States, and regulated parties. … How does that test apply to the many kinds of wetlands that typically do not have a surface water connection to a covered water year-round—for example, wetlands and waters that are connected for much of the year but not in the summer when they dry up to some extent? How “temporary” do “interruptions in surface connection” have to be for wetlands to still be covered?

From Justice Kagan’s concurring opinion, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson:

[M]ake no mistake: Congress wrote the statute it meant to. The Clean Water Act was a landmark piece of environmental legislation, designed to address a problem of “crisis proportions.” …

Vital to the Clean Water Act’s project is the protection of wetlands—both those contiguous to covered waters and others nearby. As this Court (again, formerly) recognized, wetlands “serve to filter and purify water draining into adjacent bodies of water, and to slow the flow of surface runoff into lakes, rivers, and streams.”

At the same time, wetlands play a crucial part in flood control (if anything, more needed now than when the statute was enacted). And wetlands perform those functions … not only when they are touching a covered water but also when they are separated from it by a natural or artificial barrier—say, a berm or dune or dike or levee….

Today’s majority, though, believes Congress went too far. … Congress, the majority scolds, has unleashed the EPA to regulate “swimming pools and puddles,” wreaking untold havoc on “a staggering array of landowners.” Surely something has to be done; and who else to do it but this Court? It must rescue property owners from Congress’s too-ambitious program of pollution control.

As the majority concedes, the statute “tells us that at least some wetlands must qualify as ‘waters of the United States.’” … It relies as well on a judicially manufactured clear-statement rule. When Congress (so says the majority) exercises power “over private property”—particularly, over “land and water use”—it must adopt “exceedingly clear language.” There is, in other words, a thumb on the scale for property owners—no matter that the Act (i.e., the one Congress enacted) is all about stopping property owners from polluting. ….

A court may, on occasion, apply a clear-statement rule to deal with statutory vagueness or ambiguity. But a court may not rewrite Congress’s plain instructions because they go further than preferred. That is what the majority does today in finding that the Clean Water Act excludes many wetlands (clearly) “adjacent” to covered waters. …

And still more fundamentally, why ever have a thumb on the scale against the Clean Water Act’s protections? … Today’s pop-up clear-statement rule is explicable only as a reflexive response to Congress’s enactment of an ambitious scheme of environmental regulation. It is an effort to cabin the anti-pollution actions Congress thought appropriate. … And that, too, recalls last Term, when I remarked on special canons “magically appearing as get-out-of-text-free cards” to stop the EPA from taking the measures Congress told it to. There, the majority’s non-textualism barred the EPA from addressing climate change by curbing power plant emissions in the most effective way. Here, that method prevents the EPA from keeping our country’s waters clean by regulating adjacent wetlands. The vice in both instances is the same: the Court’s appointment of itself as the national decision-maker on environmental policy….

Because that is not how I think our Government should work—more, because it is not how the Constitution thinks our Government should work—I respectfully concur in the judgment only.

What’s next for water monitoring in Iowa?

by Dan Haug | May 27, 2023

The Kopecky family helped with water testing for our spring snapshot.

As you may know, Prairie Rivers of Iowa has been working for several years on the outreach and data analysis for a local water monitoring program that includes volunteers led by Story County Conservation and lab-testing by the City of Ames. However, we’re not the only organization partnering with volunteers and local governments in Iowa to monitor streams and educate the public! In the coming year we have an opportunity to get to know one another, learn from each other, and do more in partnership. Actually, it’s already started.

In late May, Prairie Rivers organized a volunteer “snapshot” event to do same-day testing of sites throughout the Ioway Creek watershed. On that same day, Polk County Conservation tested over 100 sites as part of their spring snapshot. By coordinating our schedules, we can see how water quality compares across a broader swath of Iowa. Check out the Izaak Walton League’s nationwide Nitrate Watch map, which includes some of our results!

In mid-May, I added some extra stops to my route and was able to track down the main source of fecal bacteria affecting the lower part of West Indian Creek—it looks like the new wastewater treatment plant being built in Nevada will make a big difference for water quality. In our other creeks, the sources and solutions for E. coli are uncertain, so we’re anxious to hear what Partners of Scott County Watersheds is learning from its microbial source tracking projects in the Davenport area.

In early May, Prairie Rivers released a report analyzing the data that volunteers with Story County Conservation and the lab at the City of Ames have been collecting, including some good news! We’re learning a lot about waters in Story County, but we’re also learning how to work with data from national and statewide databases, account for the influence of streamflow, and make pretty graphs. The computer code, the skills, and the lessons learned are transferable, we just haven’t had an opportunity to apply them outside Story County… until now.

Our 2022 report included an analysis of nitrate trends in the South Skunk River.

Prairie Rivers applied for a grant from the Mosaic Foundation, which reached out to the Water Foundation to fund our project! Both these foundations have an interest in “movement infrastructure”–building the capacity of the environmental movement to do more by working together. Between now and next April, we’ll be building a network of organizations in Iowa with an interest in water monitoring, developing some tools and guidance to help us make sense of our data, and translating data into action. The planning team includes Prairie Rivers and three other Resource Conservation and Development councils (RC&Ds), Partners of Scott County Watersheds, Polk County Conservation, Iowa Environmental Council, and the Izaak Walton League of America.

While we’re excited to see the growth of volunteer initiatives like Nitrate Watch, bimonthly monitoring with semi-quantitative test strips is not a substitute for equipment that can precisely measure nitrate in a stream every 15 minutes and immediately publish the data to the internet. In April and May we learned that the latest state budget included targeted cuts to University of Iowa’s nitrate sensor network. The decision has raised more than a few eyebrows, giving the impression that some legislators would rather the public not know how polluted our lakes and streams really are, or whether conservation efforts are working as expected. Let’s keep our leaders honest and Iowans well-informed!

How a Pollinator Plan can Enrich Life in Ames

by Jessica Butters | May 24, 2023

Prairie Rivers of Iowa, Ames Public Works, and the Pollinator Task Force with Mayor Haila proclaiming Pollinator Week and the Ames Pollinator-Friendly Community Plan.

June is National Pollinator Month!

We are *buzzing* with exciting news! Mayor John Haila recently proclaimed National Pollinator Week in Ames, starting on Monday, June 19. Additionally, Haila announced a plan to make Ames a more pollinator-friendly city! To our knowledge, Ames is the first city in the United States to create its own 10-year plan, tailor-made for Ames residents and Iowa-native pollinators. Prairie Rivers of Iowa partnered with the City of Ames Public Works Department to organize a Pollinator Task Force, comprised of Ames residents, who came together to write the City of Ames Pollinator-Friendly Community Plan. Prairie Rivers and the City of Ames are now calling on even more residents to get involved in implementing this 10-year plan. You may be asking: ‘Why proclaim a national pollinator week, and why should we have a plan concerning pollinators for Ames?’. Because supporting pollinators is supporting the Ames community!

Do you like apple pie topped with ice cream? Thank pollinators!

Supporting Pollinators = Supporting Our Food

A pollinator is any animal (insect, bird, mammal) that moves pollen between flowers (the Ames Pollinator Plan focuses on supporting native bees, butterflies, moths, and other insects). The pollen exchange facilitated by pollinators allows plants to be fertilized and consequently grow fruits and seed. The fruits and seed produced with the help of pollinators is infinitely important! About one-third of our global food supply depends upon pollinators. If you like almonds, apples, tomatoes, or even steak and butter, you have pollinators to thank. Wait, steak and butter? Yes indeed. Pollinators are very important in producing seed for growing alfalfa, a hay crop fed to beef and dairy cattle. Without hay in livestock rations, it would be harder to access all things cattle, from ice cream to beef tacos. Lastly, almost 90% of flowering plants depend on pollinators! If you like seeing wildflowers on hikes or along roadsides, then you should want to keep pollinators around. Imagine if we lost nearly all of our flowering species? Our landscapes would be quite boring and colorless, and our plates would look more empty.

Supporting Pollinators = Supporting Ames’ Natural Resources

Yes, pollinators are very important for food crops at the national and global scale. But what are some benefits that we will be able to see locally, here in Ames? We’ll list two: 1) our water quality and 2) our soil health could be improved by planting pollinator habitat. One of the best ways to support pollinators is by planting native vegetation, or plants that have evolved and are originally from Iowa. Pollinators eat the nectar and pollen of these plants, and some also create nests in their stems. Many native plants are perennial, and because of this have expansive, thick root systems. Planting a patch of native plants is similar to casting a thick, wide net underground. This net of roots holds soil in place on slopes, soaks up extra water during heavy rain, and absorbs excess chemicals such as fertilizers and pesticides as water moves through. These actions provided through native vegetation will lower erosion, mitigate flooding, and keep our local waterways cleaner if planted in the right areas.

Pollinator habitat also supports water quality!

Planting for pollinators is also planting for people.

Additionally, because these plants are well-adapted to Iowa, they need fewer inputs such as pesticides and thrive without fertilizer. This creates a low-input, sustainable planting system. Lastly, creating a good pollinator habitat will create a good human habitat (see graphic on page 4 of link). Bear with me here. Being surrouned by greenery and wildlife such as butterflies reduces stress and stimulates curiosity and creativity. Strategically planting more diverse vegetation and flowering plants may increase the observations of birds, butterflies, and other wildlife, which could have a positive impact on the mental health of Ames residents. This plan will support the pollinator community to address food insecurity, ecological health, offset the impacts of climate change, and will serve as an example for other cities around the world. Supporting pollinators truly supports the Ames community and beyond!

So What’s in this Plan?

The vision of the Pollinator Plan is for the City of Ames “to become a leader in developing and sustaining pollinator habitat that will enrich the quality of life for the human and biological communities of Ames“. Besides creating habitat that benefits pollinators and people, this plan also contains four pathways to bring this vision to life: 1) public education about pollinators and other important wildlife in Ames, 2) policy enhancements to support habitat implementation in the city, 3) research current and future conditions for pollinators and residents, and 4) the creation/strengthening of partnerships to use all resources to the fullest potential. Through education, policy, research, and partnerships, our plan will leverage the excitement and interest in pollinators to reach a beautiful vision of Ames: a more engaging, sustainable, beautiful, and healthy place that will not only serve pollinators, but the people and visitors of Ames.

You can read the plan in its entirety on the Pollinator-Friendly Ames webpages!

Do you live in the Ames area? Are you excited to be a part of this vision for Ames? If so, click the blue button to fill out our volunteer form! You can also contact Katelyn Rinicker at krinicker@prrcd.org or call 515-232-0048 to let us know you are interested in volunteering!

Pollinator Team Volunteer Form

« Older Entries

Next Entries »