Skip to Main Content
Unintended consequences: Tamarisk control and increasing threats to the southwestern willow flycatcher [Chapter 5]Author(s): Mary Anne McLeod
Source: In: Johnson, R. Roy; Carothers, Steven W.; Finch, Deborah M.; Kingsley, Kenneth J.; Stanley, John T., tech. eds. 2018. Riparian research and management: Past, present, future: Volume 1. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-377. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 62-84. doi: http://doi.org/10.2737/RMRS-GTR-377-CHAP5.
Publication Series: General Technical Report (GTR)
Station: Rocky Mountain Research Station
Download Publication (1013.0 KB)
DescriptionIt is well known that nonnative tamarisk (Tamarix parviflora, T. ramosissima, T. chinensis, and their hybrids; a.k.a. saltcedar) has replaced native riparian woodland vegetation along many streams in the arid Southwest over the last 100 years. Tamarisk can form extensive, dense monocultures and may alter not only the physical structure of the riparian woodland but also soil salinity and fire frequency (Sher 2013). There is significant debate, however, over whether tamarisk is the driver or a passenger of ecological change (Johnson 2013). The decline in the numbers and range of native riparian wildlife has been concurrent with the spread of tamarisk, and numerous studies show that tamarisk-dominated stands may support a lower density and/or diversity of wildlife than do native habitats (Bateman and Ostoja 2012; Sogge et al. 2008; Strudley and Dalin 2013). Consequently, tamarisk is often portrayed as the primary cause for declines in riparian wildlife (e.g., DeLoach et al. 2003a). Although it is now recognized that water use by native vegetation compared to tamarisk depends on site conditions (Zavaleta 2013), tamarisk was also widely blamed for water consumption in excess of native species (Nagler and Glenn 2013). Tamarisk control efforts, many of which were driven by the desire to make more water available for human use, began in the 1940s (Douglass et al. 2013) and continue to the present day, with improvement of wildlife habitat often cited as a goal of tamarisk removal.
- You may send email to firstname.lastname@example.org to request a hard copy of this publication.
- (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
- We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
- This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.
CitationMcLeod, Mary Anne. 2018. Unintended consequences: Tamarisk control and increasing threats to the southwestern willow flycatcher [Chapter 5]. In: Johnson, R. Roy; Carothers, Steven W.; Finch, Deborah M.; Kingsley, Kenneth J.; Stanley, John T., tech. eds. 2018. Riparian research and management: Past, present, future: Volume 1. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-377. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 62-84. doi: http://doi.org/10.2737/RMRS-GTR-377-CHAP5.
Keywordsriparian, ecosystem, ecology, riparian processes, restoration, aquatic, arid, semi-arid, upland, freshwater, groundwater, hydrology
- Southwestern Avian Community Organization in Exotic Tamarix: Current Patterns and Future Needs
- A habitat overlap analysis derived from Maxent for Tamarisk and the South-western Willow Flycatcher
- Do riparian plant community characteristics differ between Tamarix (L.) invaded and non-invaded sites on the upper Verde River, Arizona?
XML: View XML