Mechanical Control
Cutting
and pulling invasive species are the most common methods of mechanical
control. While they can be effective for certain invasive species, others
respond by putting out more sprouts, which makes the problem worse.
Thus, it is important to understand the biology of each species invading
the site.
Cutting/Mowing
The time of year is an important factor when using cutting
to control woody plants. Cutting plants in the spring just as the plant
leafs out is the most effective. At leaf out, the plant’s roots
are depleted of stored carbohydrates (or energy reserves) as they move
from the roots to the branches in order to feed new growth. Removing
the above-ground biomass just after the plants have fully leafed out
prevents the plant from easily rebuilding its reserves through photosynthesis.
Subsequent cutting of resprouting stems throughout the summer will further
deplete the roots. By contrast, cutting during the winter does not remove
as many stored carbohydrates, and the plant will resprout vigorously
in the spring. Cutting or mowing a plant before its fruits mature can
reduce its seed production. For example, cutting in mid-summer can be
used to stop seed production in Asiatic bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus)
vines. However, for cutting or mowing to effectively control the overall
vigor and spread of an invasive plant population, it must be done several
times during the growing season (June through September) and repeated
for many years. Often, cutting is practical only when it can be integrated
into an existing field mowing plan.
Pulling
Pulling plants out of the ground can be effective on species
that have shallow roots and that do not reproduce through root suckering.
For example, it is often possible to pull out most of the root system
of glossy buckthorn (Frangula alnus) and garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata).
Some sprouting might occur, but reasonable control may be achieved.
By contrast, species such as Asiatic bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus),
Phragmites, and Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) have extensive
root systems that are hard to remove. Plants will resprout vigorously
from small sections of root left in the ground. While it is hard to
control many species through pulling, if one comes across small, satellite
populations it is worth taking the time to pull them out. One downside
of pulling is that is disturbs the soil, which may provide a seed bed
for other invasive plants to become established. Many aquatic plants
reproduce by plant fragments, so thorough removal by hand is difficult
except in very small populations. Water chestnut (Trapa natans) reproduces
by seed and is an annual, so hand-pulling can be very effective. For
a detailed discussion of control of aquatic plants through pulling,
please see Section 4.3.1 of Massachusetts DCR’s Generic
Environmental Impact Report (GEIR)
(14mb file - may take several minute to download.)
Drawdowns
The temporary drawdown of dammed water bodies can be used to control
certain aquatic plants. For example, drawdowns are effective on certain
species such as Brazilian elodea (Egeria densa) and less effective
on Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata). Drawdowns are only applicable
in water bodies that can be easily drained. Drawdown can also be used
to facilitate other control methods; they help with the placement of
benthic barriers (fabrics used to smother invasive plant populations);
and drawdowns prior to herbicide application reduce the volume of water
that needs to be treated, in turn reducing the cost and amount of chemical
used. For additional information on the use of drawdowns to control
invasive plants, please see section
4.2
of Massachusetts DCR’s Generic Environmental Impact Report
(GEIR). For a summary of drawdowns, please see
page 79
of The Practical Guide to Lake Management in Massachusetts.
Drawdowns
are regulated by the state of Massachusetts. Applicants need to file
a Notice of Intent and obtain a five-year Order of Conditions in accordance
with 310 CMR 10.05 (6) (d). Drawdowns used for invasive plant control
are likely to improve wildlife habitat and are permitted under 310 CMR
10.60. For a more complete description of the permit process please
see page 6
of DEP's Guidance for Aquatic Plant Management in Lakes and Ponds.
For case studies of drawdowns, please see Sections
2.4.7
of the GEIR. (14mb file - may take several minute to download.)