Alaska Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide - Alaska Plant ...

Alaska Coastal Revegetation 

& Erosion Control Guide

Alaska Coastal Revegetation 

& Erosion Control Guide 

By 

Stoney J. Wright 

and 

Philip K. Czapla 

Editing, Layout, and Design: 

Brennan Veith Low 

1 st printing: December, 2010 

2 nd printing: August, 2011 

3 rd printing: May, 2013 

This publication was awarded the 2011 Educational Achievement Award 

from the International Erosion Control Association. This award recognizes 

an outstanding training program, public program or tool used within the industry 

which demonstrates advancement in erosion and sediment control 

education based on experience and factual knowledge. 

The Alaska Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide was recognized with a 2012 

Certificate of Excellence from the American Society of Agronomy’s Extension Community 

Educational Materials Awards Program. The purpose of this program is to provide Society 

members a chance to share their creative and useful educational materials and programs 

with colleagues and to receive recognition for their superior achievement. 

Front Cover: A natural stand of Beach Wildrye in southeastern Prince William Sound 

Photo: Brennan Veith Low (AK PMC)

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes 

only and does not imply endorsement by any employee or 

branch of the State of Alaska. Information submitted by private 

companies in the case studies section of this document is publicly 

available, and presented for educational purposes. All photographs 

are copyright of their respective owners. 

Published by: 

State of Alaska 

Department of Natural Resources 

Division of Agriculture 

Plant Materials Center 

5310 South Bodenburg Spur 

Palmer, AK 99645 

This publication was funded 

in part by a grant from the 

United States Department of 

Agriculture, Natural Resource 

Conservation Service. 

Plant Materials Center logo: ‘Germinate’ - Original artwork by Sheila Wyne, used with permission

Foreword 

i

Author’s Preface 

Aerial photo: ShoreZone (NOAA) 

A narrow strip of sand, called a tombolo, connects two islands in this photograph from western Prince William Sound 

I have always been fascinated with coastal areas. They are a magical area 

where the sea (or in some cases large freshwater lakes) meets land. That interest 

matured fully in 1995, during a seed collection project in an area near the Port 

Clarence LORAN Station in northwest Alaska. Traveling south from the station on 

a 4-wheeler, the peninsula narrowed to the point that both the left and right tires 

were in sea water. This was my first encounter with a tombolo, a depositional land 

form that is created when waves refract around an island to create a spit, tieing 

the island to the shore. Ahead of the tombolo, I could just make out additional 

above-water portions of the peninsula. 

The lure of collecting additional seed to the south kept me inching ahead, even as 

the water was getting deeper and the sides of the tombolo were getting narrower. 

Looking around in a complete circle, I saw only water, and the 4-wheeler looked 

very small. I felt even smaller as I looked at a land vehicle in a watery world. As 

I put the machine in reverse and started to back out of the area, I saw the sand 

of the tombolo begin to slide laterally, and the front of the 4-wheeler begin to sink 

deeper. Fear took over. I’d never before realized just how fast a 4-wheeler could 

go in reverse, or how high those tires could throw water into the air! A charging 

bear could not have caused the adrenaline to flow through my body any faster. 

What a truly fascinating place - that area where land meets water. 

ii

This guide is intended for use in coastal areas of Alaska, specifically the 

areas designated by the Alaska Inland Coastal Zone Boundaries. Coastal areas 

have been my primary focus with regard to revegetation and erosion control 

activities during the past 32 years. Consolidating and publishing the research 

and information gathered during that period motivated the development of this 

document. 

The guide is divided into sections detailing steps that should be followed for a 

successful revegetation project. The guide is dedicated to the Great Land and its 

immense and fragile coastal region. It is my intent to raise awareness across the 

state of the need to protect and restore coastal environments as necessary in the 

land we call Alaska. 

Researchers and environmental professionals from across Alaska were invited 

to share case studies for this publication, to showcase some outstanding 

revegetation and erosion control projects, as well as alternative approaches and 

ideas in restoration. These case studies demonstrate what can be accomplished 

or learned by recreating vegetation communities, landforms or controlling erosion 

using vegetation. The guide also provides an overview of work performed in 

Alaska’s coastal regions by the Alaska Plant Materials Center (PMC) during the 

past three decades. 

In the first section of this guide, the reader will find useful background information. 

A short history of the major impacts to the coast of Alaska is presented, along 

with an introduction to the principles of revegetation. A primer on coastline types 

and terminology, as defined by coastal geomorphologists is also included. 

The Project Implementation section will guide the reader through the basics of 

the entire process of a revegetation project, from the initial project planning phase 

to obtaining necessary permits, seeding, and mulching. This section includes an 

introduction to soil science and planting methods, as well as other forms of planting 

stock used in Alaska. Information about seed quality and specifications is also 

presented. The Project Implementation section details various techniques used 

to prepare the planting surface, as well as other specialized planting methods. 

As many sites require additional protection to preserve important land features or 

critical habitats, conservation and protection methods are also covered. 

Section 3, Species Selection, consists of a survey of available plant species 

appropriate for revegetation across Alaska. A description of vegetation communities 

in each region is included, along with lists of primary and secondary species 

adapted to that region. A table for each region will guide the reader in determining 

what species mixture will work best in the area. Each individual species is 

color-coded to the regions of Alaska to which is adapted, and this information is 

presented along with details of its growth habit and tolerances in the Plant Species 

chapter. 

The Case Studies section consists of reports from past revegetation and restoration 

projects, provided by researchers and environmental professionals across 

the state. These projects, conducted in each region of Alaska, will expose readers 

to the realities of revegetation in the field; successes, challenges, and lessons 

learned. It is our hope that the case study section will become a useful resource 

for future projects. These reports are available on the web, at plants.alaska.gov. 

iii

The final section of the manual lists the work cited, as well as a list of agencies 

and organizations that have an interest or statutory responsibility related to the 

coastal zone is also provided. We chose to include a reprint of the 1994 Beach 

Wildrye Planting Guide for Alaska as an appendix. This publication, though out 

of print, has continued to generate interest, warranting its inclusion. Also included 

as appendices are the amended State of Alaska seed regulations, and descriptions 

of other other publications of interest. 

I hope you find this guide worthwhile and informative. 

Stoney J. Wright 

iv

Acknowledgements 

This guide was written to assist land owners, land managers, engineers 

and environmental professionals in making decisions regarding revegetation 

and the use of vegetation in soil erosion control and soil conservation. 

The information contained in the guide builds upon past revegetation 

manuals including: 

Wright, Stoney J. (1994) - Beach Wildrye Planting Guide for Alaska. 

State of Alaska. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Plant 

Materials Center. 28 pp. 

Wright, Stoney J. and Moore, Nancy J. (1994) - Revegetation 

Manual for Eareckson Air Force Station Shemya, Alaska. State of 

Alaska, Division of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center. 34 pp. 

Moore, Nancy J. and Wright, Stoney J. (1994) - Revegetation Manual 

for King Salmon Air Force Base, King Salmon, Alaska. State of 

Alaska, Division of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center. 51 pp. 

2001 Alaska Highway Drainage Manual (2001) - Chapter 16: Erosion 

and Sediment Control. State of Alaska, Department of Transportation 

and Public Facilities. 

Wright, Stoney J. (2008) - A Revegetation Manual for Alaska. Edited 

by Peggy Hunt. State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, 

Division of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center. 

The authors would like to thank the individuals named below for their participation 

in this project. 

Harvey Smith, Ruth Carter, James Bowers and Janet Hall-Shempf at 

the Alaska Department of Transportation, Carrie Bohan and Marty Rutherford 

with the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, and John Whitney 

at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

v

Table of Contents 

Alaska Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide 

Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis and Lyngbyei sedge, Carax lyngbyei dominate 

this road berm and coastal wetland at Boat Launch Road, Kenai 

Section 1: Background 

1. Introduction 

• Geography 

• History 

• Impacts 

• Purpose 

• Method 

2. Coastlines 

• Coastal Glossary 

• Coastline Types 

........................... 2 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

........................... 8 

....................................... 

....................................... 

vi

Section 2: Project Implementation 

1. Planning 

• Goal Setting & Preparation 

• Identify Site Conditions 

• Construction Site Revegetation 

• Revegetation Objectives 

• Seeding Methods 

• Planting Time 

• Selection of Species 

• Planting Methods 

• Mulch & Erosion Matting 

2. Wild Seed Collection 

3. Techniques 

• Charged Overburden Veneer 

• Sod Clumps 

• Vegetation Mats 

• Enhanced Natural Reinvasion 

• Imprinting 

• Scarification 

• Dormant Seeding 

4. Conservation & Protection 

• Preventing Damage to Dunes 

• Protection of Eelgrass 

• Protection of Estuarine Habitats 

Section 3: Species Selection 

1. Adapted Plants 

• Coastal Regions of Alaska 

• Vegetation Communities 

• Revegetation Suggestions 

2. Plant Species 

Section 4: Case Studies 

1. Arctic Region 

• Arctophila fulva, Kuparuk 

• Vegetation Study, Sagavanirktok River 

• Project Chariot Site, Ogotoruk Valley 

2. Western Region 

• Red Dog Mine Site, NW Alaska 

• M/V All Alaskan Cleanup, St. Paul 

..........................16 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

..........................27 

..........................32 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

..........................44 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

..........................50 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

..........................69 

........................106 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

........................116 

....................................... 

....................................... 

vii

Section 4: Case Studies 

Section 5: Additional Information 

Appendices 

3. Southwest Region 

• Lateral Clear Zone, Shemya 

• Natural Reinvasion, Shemya 

• Coastal Dune Restoration, Adak 

• Pringle Hill Sand Quarry, Adak 

• Landfill Restoration, Adak 

• Wetland Revegetation, Kodiak 

4. Southcentral Region 

• Sedge Restoration, Girdwood Area 

• Chester Creek Restoration, Anchorage 

• Fish Creek Wetland, Anchorage 

• Jet Fuel Pipeline Restoration, Anchorage 

5. Southeast Region 

• Jordan Creek Wetland, Juneau 

• Nancy Street Wetland, Juneau 

• Airport Estuary Restoration, Gravina 

1. Works Cited 

2. Partner Agencies 

A: Beach Wildrye Planting Guide 

B: State of Alaska Seed Regulations 

C: Other Publications of Interest 

........................121 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

........................139 

.......................................... 

.......................................... 

.......................................... 

.......................................... 

........................155 

....................................... 

....................................... 

....................................... 

........................170 

........................175 

........................A.1 

........................B.1 

........................C.1 

viii

Background 

Photo: Benjamin Jones (USGS) 

A disused cabin falls into the Beaufort Sea in this photograph, victim to climate-driven coastal erosion 

Section 1: 

1. Introduction 

• Geography 

• History 

• Impacts 

• Purpose 

• Method 

2. Coastlines 

• Coastal Glossary 

• Coastline Types 

1

Introduction 

Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide 

Photo: Harvey Smith (AK DOT) 

Melting permafrost is a natural coastal erosion process, shown in this photograph of the Beaufort Sea coast. 

This guidebook will address methods using vegetation to mitigate and reduce erosion caused by human activity. 

Alaska is known as a land of superlatives. It is the northernmost state, 

the westernmost state and by some definitions, the easternmost state (the 

Near Islands and the Rat Islands being west of the 180 th Meridian). The 

state’s name is derived from the Aleut word “Alyeska”, translated as “the 

object towards which the action of the sea is directed”, and generally taken 

to mean “Mainland” or “The Great Land”. 

Alaska is by far the largest state within the United States of America; having 

more than twice the area of the next largest. Indeed, Alaska by itself 

covers 1% of the land mass on Earth, and is larger than all but 19 countries 

on the planet. Its massive land mass notwithstanding, Alaska is first and 

always a coastal state. 

2

Alaska has more miles of coastline than the contiguous United States 

Photo: Phil Czapla (AK PMC) 

The coastal community of Seldovia, on Kachemak Bay, 

is bordered by intertidal mud flats 

Graphic: US ACE, Alaska District 

GEOGRAPHY 

The Alaska Department of Natural 

Resources estimated the Alaska 

coastline to be 44,500 miles long, 

as measured on the most detailed 

maps available. Alaska’s coastline 

is larger than the remainder of the 

United States’ combined coastline. 

Nearly three quarters of the 

Alaska’s population live in communities 

along this coastline. The 

coastal region supports industries 

like commercial fishing, logging, 

tourism, and oil and gas production. 

Production industries, though 

responsible for a large portion of 

Alaska’s economic product, can 

have significant impact on coastal 

areas, and any adverse effects 

should be mitigated. 

HISTORY 

Alaska has been peopled for several 

thousand years. Humans entered 

Alaska from Asia, either by 

walking over the Bering Strait or by 

boat (Mason et al, 1997). Although the earliest known archeological remains 

in Alaska are just 12,000 years old, radiocarbon dating of a peat bed 

150 feet below the surface of the Chukchi Sea show that the land bridge 

remained exposed until 11,000 years ago; plenty of time for a land crossing 

(Mason et al, 1997). Complex societies first developed in the Bering 

Straits region, on Kodiak Island, and in Southeast Alaska, 2000 years ago. 

Alaska remains home to several indigenous cultures & tribes, such as the 

Athabascan, Eyak, Haida, Tlingit, Tshimian, Yupik & Inupiat Eskimo, and 

Aleut peoples. 

The area now known as Alaska was first colonized by Tsarist Russia, 

beginning in 1732. The basic shape of Alaska was established by treaty 

between Britain and Russia in 1825. Exploitation of Alaska’s natural resources 

was almost exclusively restricted to the coastline until 1867, when 

the territory was sold to the United States, by Alexander II. A border dispute 

with Canada over the southeastern portion of the territory was resolved in 

1908, when a treaty between the USA and Britain finalized the border. 

The 1867 purchase of the territory of Alaska, instigated by Secretary of 

State William H. Seward, was criticized by contemporaries, and commonly 

referred to as ‘Seward’s Folly’ or ‘Seward’s Icebox’. Despite this derision, 

3

4 

1867 U.S. Treasury warrant for the purchase of Alaska from Russia 

IMPACTS 

Image: US National Archives 

a $7.2 million treasury warrant was 

issued, and the purchase made. 

The United States received the 

586,412 square miles, or approximately 

365 million acres of land, 

to be known as the Department of 

Alaska. Alaska would be classified 

twice more, as a district and as a 

territory, before becoming a state. 

Alaska’s constitution was ratified in 

1956; “The Great Land” became a 

state on January 3 rd , 1959. 

Many natural events have impacted Alaska’s dynamic coastal environment. 

Impacts such as the 1964 Good Friday Earthquake can cause upheaval 

on an unprecedented scale, though very little can be done to correct or 

restore uplift or subsidence of land. Volcanic eruptions, glacial advance 

and tsunamis can also massively disrupt existing coastlines. These 

processes are part of the natural progression of landforms, and it is unlikely 

that human intervention to correct or reverse the resulting changes will 

ever be effective or practical. 

Human caused impacts, both accidental and intentional, have also disrupted 

natural ecosystems in Alaska. During the early 1940s, the Aleutian 

Islands were host to a number of military actions and battles associated 

with World War II. The legacy and impact of this conflict remains today; not 

only in the lost lives, destroyed villages, and acres of war debris, but also 

in the form of actual scars on the land surface. These reminders of past 

actions remain, a lasting impact that has affected generations of coastal 

residents. 

Even after the Second World War, other threats to peace caused the 

coastline of Alaska to take center-stage. In the Cold War drama that began 

in the 1950s and continued for decades, the Defense Early Warning System 

was established at several locations in the Aleutian Islands, and along 

the Western and Arctic coastlines of Alaska. These ‘D.E.W. Line’ sites were 

not in themselves detrimental, but what was left behind often was. Debris, 

petroleum contamination, and toxic substances all contributed to coastal 

impact. Environmental remediation and cleanup activities at many of these 

remote sites was undertaken by the Department of Defense in the 1980s 

and 1990s. Federal legislation, notably the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and its subsequent 

amendment, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

of 1986 (SARA), was instrumental in accomplishing the cleanup. 

Construction impacts associated with industrial progress and commerce 

are expected with a growing society and its communities. One example of 

this is the construction of the Valdez Marine Terminal, the southern terminus 

of the Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). This 1,000 acre terminal was

Photo: Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory - llnl.gov 

Cannakin nuclear warhead being lowered 

into position on Amchitka Island in 1971 

The quest to use nukes on coastal Alaska actually 

started earlier than the Amchitka exercises, with the 1958 Project Chariot 

study near Point Hope. Project Chariot was a part of a national effort 

known as Operation Plowshare, an attempt to use the nuclear arsenal for 

peaceful projects like construction. While the intended goal of the project, 

the excavation of a harbor using nuclear detonations, never came pass, 

the environmental impacts of the study remained until the site was rehabilitated 

in the 1990s. 

Impacts to the coastal environment continued with the development of 

the Alaskan economy. These impacts, though not as large as the events 

previously mentioned, were expected and often mitigated. As oil development 

on the Arctic Coast ramped up in the 1970s and 1980s, impacts to 

the coastline were managed, and lasting disturbances minimized. Methods 

have been developed to mitigate these impacts, such as limiting travel 

along the arctic coastal plain to the winter months, when snowpack protects 

the fragile tundra. These techniques reinforce the age-old maxim that 

an ounce of prevention is worth a 

pound of cure. 

Photo: US Navy - 

dodmedia.osd.mil 

Cleanup efforts underway in Prince William Sound in May of 1989. 

carved out of a mountainside, allowing tanker ships 

to load north slope crude oil for transport to market. 

Before the first drop of oil was transported through 

the TAPS, the coastal impact of this development was 

considerable. 

On occasion, progress can seem to take a step backward. 

Alaska’s coastline witnessed the underground 

detonation of three nuclear devices between 1965 and 

1971, in the western Aleutians. These three events 

were collaborative efforts between the Atomic Energy 

Commission and the Department of Defense. Amchitka 

Island, in 1965, saw the detonation of an 80 kiloton 

device, followed by a 1 megaton blast in 1969, and in 

1971, the detonation of the largest nuclear weapon 

ever on US soil, under Project Cannikin. Amchitka Island 

was selected as the test site because the warhead 

was too large to be safely detonated in Nevada. The 

continued impact is only now being determined. 

Alaskans’ view of their coastline 

was changed forever, just a few 

minutes into the morning of March 

24, 1989. Residents awoke to 

the news that the oil tanker Exxon 

Valdez was hard aground on the 

largest charted reef adjacent to 

the shipping lanes near the port of 

Valdez. The tanker was leaking its 

load of crude oil into Prince William 

5

6 

Photo: US Coast Guard 

Two halves of the freighter Selendang Ayu, adrift 

north of Unalaska Island - December, 2004 

Sound. Eventually, 1,300 miles of pristine coastline was covered with a 30 

million gallons of crude oil (AK DOL, 1990; Ott, 1996). This single occurrence 

is widely viewed as the most significant event to impact the Alaska 

coastline, severely affecting beaches, wildlife, plant communities, and the 

region’s industries. Paradoxically, in some areas more damage may have 

resulted from misguided cleanup efforts than the oil itself. 

In a 2005 assessment of remaining impacts, the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Response and Restoration made 

the following observation: “..rocky sites ... stripped of heavy plant cover by 

high-pressure, hot-water cleaning remain mostly bare 

rock” (NOAA, 2005). As the nation continues to deal 

with the ongoing impacts from the oil disaster in the 

Gulf of Mexico, the lessons learned from the Exxon 

Valdez Spill are taking center stage. 

Photo: AK DEC Incident Response 

A rocky beach on Unalaska Island coated with spilled 

soybean cargo from the wrecked Selendang Ayu 

The 1989 spill, though the largest, was by no means 

the last maritime event to strongly impact the Coast 

of Alaska. In late 2004, a freighter laden with over 60 

tonnes of soybeans, en route from Seattle, Washington 

to Xiamen, China, suffered engine problems near 

Dutch Harbor. Heavy seas and a strong wind complicated 

rescue efforts, pushing the stricken vessel 

towards the coast of Unalaska Island. The ship subsequently 

broke in two, spilling its cargo, along with 

350,000 gallons of bunker oil and diesel fuel (PAME, 

ongoing). Wave action deposited large quantities of 

the cargo onto the north coast of Unalaska Island. In 

2006, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 

determined that the decomposing beans 

presented no danger to human health, and all incident 

response activities were suspended. 

PURPOSE 

This guidebook was developed to aid in the 

process of coastal revegetation. The intended 

audience is private property owners, as 

well as state and local government. 

For the purpose of this document, revegetation 

is defined as: 

The re-establishment of plant cover by 

means of seeding or transplanting on a 

site disturbed by natural or man-caused 

actions. 

Impacts, both large and small, will continue 

to disrupt the coastal regions of Alaska. The 

coasts experience natural soil erosion caused

y water (fluvial), wind (eolian), and gravity. Combinations of waves, frost 

heaving and unobstructed fetch along miles of coastline present ample 

opportunities for soil loss. Removal of vegetation and soils proceeds at 

unsustainable rates in some areas, changing the dynamics of natural ecosystems. 

Recovery (defined as the presence of self-sustaining vegetation 

cover, and limited erosion) of most sites will require human intervention to 

correct limitations and guide the ecosystem towards a desired end state. 

Material presented in this manual focuses on the “soft approach” to erosion 

control, using vegetation. While the “hard approach” (i.e. the use of rip-rap) 

is an effective means of stabilizing an area, these non-vegetative methods 

will be left to Coastal Engineers. 

Numerous approaches are available for reintroducing vegetation on a site. 

This manual details a logical sequence of surface preparation, fertilization, 

and seeding. When followed on a site, this sequence will usually result in a 

self-sustaining native plant community that requires minimal management 

input. When conditions allow, most disturbed sites will naturally be re-colonized 

with plants from the surrounding area. This “do-nothing” approach 

is rarely used, however, as it does not provide aesthetic cover quickly 

enough for highly visible areas. Natural Reinvasion, as this technique is 

known, is effective, but it may take years for a plant community to become 

established. As nearly three quarters of the state’s population lives in communities 

along the coast, political and aesthetic consideration frequently 

preclude this option. 

METHOD 

The sheer size of the state, along with considerable differences in climate 

and vegetation in different areas, necessitated the division of Alaska into 

five coastal regions: Arctic, Western, Southwest, Southcentral, and Southeast 

Alaska. Vegetation communities present in each region are described 

in detail, and a list of appropriate revegetation species for the region is 

included in the Adapted Plants section. 

A map of Coastal Zone boundaries, included on the inside front cover, is 

used to define what is ‘Coastal’. These zones vary in size considerably, 

depending on the terrain and elevation. Coastal zones can extend inland 

over several atlas quads in western Alaska, or stop very near the coastline 

in southcentral parts of the state. 

A sizable portion of this manual is dedicated to case studies, highlighting 

past revegetation projects that have occurred on coastal sites in each 

region of Alaska. These case studies can also be found online, at plants. 

alaska.gov. 

7

Coastlines 

Photo: Janet Hall-Schempf (AK DOT) 

Steep, vegetated cliffs dominate this beach on Walrus Island, near Togiak, Alaska 

Alaska has a long and diverse coastline, representing several unique 

eco-regions. An eco-region can be defined as a large area of land and 

waters containing vegetation communities that share ecological dynamics, 

environmental conditions, and interactions that are critical for their longterm 

persistence (Nowacki, et al, 2001). It is necessary to address the 

issue of revegetation in the context of an eco-region, as this will effect species 

selection and other planting requirements. 

Within each eco-region, and across Alaska, several different types of 

coastline exist. In this section, you will find a short description of several 

coastline types and the geomorphic factors that influence each. 

8

Coastal Glossary: 

Fetch: 

An extent of open water across which the wind is blowing (Bird, 2008). 

Beach: 

The area between high tide and the coastline. The beach is defined as an accumulation 

of loose sediment, sand, gravel, or boulders (Bird, 2008). 

Shore Zone: 

The area influenced by tidal forces. Stops at the border with the coastline. 

Coastline: 

The edge of the land at highest tides, at the upper limit of the shore platform. 

Frequently indicated by the seaward boundary of terrestrial vegetation. 

Intertidal Zone: 

The area between high tide and low tide, below the beach. 

Shore Line: 

The edge of the waterline, moving as the tide rises and falls. Typically measured 

at low, mid, and high tides (Bird, 2008). 

Shore Platform: 

The shore platform includes the area defined by the tidal range, up to the coast 

line, typically demarcated by a cliff or steep slope. 

Intertidal Mud Flats: 

Mud flats consist of sediment built up along coastlines. Mud Flats are found in 

sheltered areas such as bays, lagoons and estuaries, near salt marshes. 

9

Coastline Types: 

Graphic: Eric Bird: Coastal Geomorphology, 2nd Edition. © J. Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 

Figure 1: Coastal Terminology 

Figure 2: Diagram of barrier island, tidally influenced areas 

Graphic: Nate Dibble (University of Rhode Island, Coastal Institute) 

10



Mendenhall Wetlands State Game Refuge 

Intertidal Wetlands: 

Intertidal wetlands refer to a range 

of the shore between high and low 

tides. This zone experiences regular 

tidal inundation, and is typically cut by 

meandering channels branching out 

to the ocean. 

This type of coast occurs predominantly 

in Southern Alaska. 

Coastal Lagoons: 

Coastal lagoons are areas of relatively 

shallow water that have been 

separated from the sea by coastal 

barriers. These areas can exhibit 

high variability in salinity, changing 

from brackish to hypersaline (Davis, 

Fitzgerald, 2004). 

Like estuaries, these areas have a 

mixture of fresh and sea water (Bird, 

2008). Species diversity is typically 

low, although the hardy species that 

can tolerate the high salinity are found 

in abundance. 

Lagoons occur across Alaska, especially 

in the northwestern region. 

Aerial photo: Alaska DEC | Spill Prevention and Response section 

James Lagoon, McCarty Fjord, near Seward, Southcentral Alaska 


Chickimin River estuary, Southeast Alaska 

Estuary: 

An estuary is a zone where freshwater 

from rivers and streams meets the 

sea, mixing with salt water from the 

ocean. Estuaries are among the most 

productive ecosystems, harboring 

unique plant communities, specially 

adapted to this brackish mix of waters 

(NOAA, 2007). 

Gradual elevation gains in these 

areas can extend the coastal habitat 

range inland for several miles. Saline 

tolerant species should be selected 

for an estuarine vegetation mixture. 

11


Deltas: 

Deltas form at the mouths of large 

rivers. Sediment deposition creates 

enlarged intertidal areas, making the 

shore-zone shallower. 

Silts and clay soils are prevalent in 

Deltas. On cold and arid coasts, delta 

vegetation is sparse and sediments 

are coarse with large amounts of sand 

and gravel (Bird, 2008). 

Satellite Photo: NASA Multimedia Gallery 

Yukon River delta, Western Alaska. Note sediment fan. 

Sheer Cliffs: 

Sheer cliffs are areas where the 

coastline rises steeply from the end of 

the shoreline. Vertical cliffs occur in 

homogenous geologic strata, such as 

sandstone and limestone (Bird, 2008). 

In Alaska, the major river deltas are 

the Yukon-Kuskokwim, the Copper 

River, and the Colville, on the north 

slope. 


The shore zone may be all but nonexistent 

in Fjords. When a cliff rises 

500 meters vertically within 50 meters 

of the shore line, the coastal vegetation 

can be very different from that 

which is present on the shore. 

A sheer cliff rises from the shore in the McNeil 

River State Game Refuge, Southwest Alaska 

Rocky Beaches: 

Rocky Beaches are the norm in Alaska. 

These beaches have low erosion 

potential, and low dynamics. 

Aerial photo : Shorezone (NOAA) 

Rocky Coastline in Prince William Sound, near Whittier 

Sparse vegetation cover and gravelly 

soils typify these areas. Pebbles and 

rocks dominate the shore zone. Terrain 

tends to be stony right up to the 

coastline, where terrestrial vegetation 

begins. 

12

Photo: Harvey Smith (AK DOT) 

Atsakirak Mound, a coastal barrier island northwest of Kivalina 


Coastal Barriers: 

Coastal barriers and barrier islands 

are elongated land forms formed by 

the deposition of beach materials 

offshore. Barriers consist of sand or 

gravel deposited by long-shore drifting 

or carried in from the sea floor 

(Bird, 2008). The landward side of 

these features often enclose lagoons 

and wetlands. Coastal barriers are 

a prevalent geomorphic feature in 

north-west Alaska. 

Typically, grassy vegetation is prevalent 

on these coastlines. 

Coastal Dunes: 

Coastal dunes are characterized by 

high quantities of sand and exist in a 

place of significant tidal action. Dunes 

have a very dynamic and transitional 

nature. 

Typically, dunes support Beach 

Wildrye communities. This species 

is uniquely able to tie together loosegrained, 

sandy soil. Coastal dunes 

provide critical protection for beaches 

and inland areas against storm 

surges. 


Coastal dunes on the Kenai peninsula. Note stabilizing vegetation. 

Photo: US Army Corps of Engineers 

The Homer Spit protrudes 4.5 miles into 

Kachemak Bay, about 19 feet above sea level 

Spits: 

Spits are beaches built up above 

the high tide level, protruding into 

the water, usually ending in one or 

more landward hooks or recurves 

(Schwartz, 1972). Spits are deposition 

landforms, caused when waves 

hit the coast at oblique angles, moving 

sediment down the beach. As spits 

grow, a salt marsh is likely to develop 

behind them, in the area sheltered 

from the wind and waves. 

The Homer spit and the Port Clarence 

spit are examples of this geomorphic 

feature in Alaska. 

13



A sandy beach in Prince William Sound 

Sandy Beaches: 

Sandy beaches can be found in 

Alaska. This one is from the western 

edge of Prince William Sound, at the 

edge of the Chugach National Wildlife 

Refuge. 

Sandy beaches form by accretion of 

sediment. Species that thrive in these 

areas must be adapted to loosegrained 

soils. Notable examples include 

Beach Wildrye (Leymus mollis) 

and Bering Hairgrass (Deschampsia 

beringensis). 

Tidal Mudflats: 

Mudflats form when fine sediments 

such as silts and clays are deposited 

along the shoreline. These areas can 

extend the intertidal zone significantly. 

Vegetation is limited in tidal mud flats, 

due to the tidal fluctuations and salinity. 

Species most adapted to this type 

of coast include Seashore Alkaligrass 

(Puccinellia sp.), Seaside Arrowgrass 

(Triglochin sp.), and Seaside Plantain 

(Plantago maritima). 


Vegetation along a tidal mudflat in Cook Inlet 

High Energy Coasts: 

High energy coasts are those with very little natural protection 

from the ocean’s waves. The continental slope tends 

to drop off sharply in these areas. A long fetch means that 

high energy coasts are subjected to strong wave action and 

erosive influences. 

These beaches are characterized by large rocks and very 

little vegetation growth. Some high-energy beaches can 

be sandy, however, such as those in the western Aleutians. 


A high energy beach in the Walrus 

Islands State Game Sanctuary 

High energy coasts are sometimes characterized by rugged 

cliffs and long, curving beaches. The long, curving type 

of high energy beaches are generally found where the continental 

slope is shallower. (Bird, 2008) 

14

Project Implementation 


Erosion control fabric supporting willow stakes and seeded plants, along the banks of the Matanuska River 

Section 2: 

1. Planning 

• Goal Setting & Preparation 

• Identify Site Conditions 

• Construction Site Revegetation 

• Revegetation Objectives 

• Seeding Methods 

• Planting Time 

• Selection of Species 

• Planting Methods 

• Mulch & Erosion Matting 

2. Wild Seed Collection 

3. Techniques 

• Charged Overburden Veneer 

• Sod Clumps 

• Vegetation Mats 

• Enhanced Natural Reinvasion 

• Imprinting 

• Scarification 

• Dormant Seeding 

4. Conservation & Protection 

• Preventing Damage to Dunes 

• Protection of Eelgrass 

• Protection of Estuarine Habitats 

15

Planning 

Photo: Ruth Carter (AK DOT) 

A constructed berm at Fishing Hole Inlet on the Homer Spit awaits revegetation in this 1999 photograph. 

The establishment of vegetation is a practical and effective means of maintaining a constructed grade. 

Planning should be the first step for any 

project. The revegetation/restoration process 

requires careful planning and management, as 

the designer is working with biological processes 

that have specific timing and environmental requirements. 

When multiple stakeholders are involved 

in a restoration project, design decisions 

should be coordinated. This allows restoration 

goals to be implemented effectively. 

Goal-Setting and Preparation 

The planning phase of a restoration project encompasses 

several steps. These include 

• gathering baseline data 

• identifying site problems 

• collecting reference plot information 

• setting goals 

Goals tell managers about the desired state of 

the ecosystem, as compared to a reference ecosystem. 

Objectives are measures taken to attain 

the goals, and are evaluated on the basis of performance 

standards (SER, 2002). Without clear 

goals, objectives and performance standards, a 

restoration project should not move forward. 

Performance standards come from an understanding 

of the reference ecosystem and the realization 

that the trajectory of the degraded site 

should progress towards the desired state of recovery 

comparative to the reference site. 

If data collected and interpreted during monitoring 

shows that performance standards have 

been met, then project objectives have been 

reached. Revegetation goals may include erosion 

control, visual enhancement, weed control, 

or other desired outcomes. Often, in coastal areas, 

the goal is erosion control. 

Baseline Environmental Data Collection 

After determining the revegetation objectives, 

take note of factors influencing the site. These 

16

include climate, soils and vegetation. Climate includes 

temperature, precipitation, and wind, plus 

other factors. Climate records can be obtained 

online, through resources such as the National 

Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration’s 

National Climate Data Center, at www. 

ncdc.noaa.gov/. 

A soils inventory involves identification of soil 

types and characterization of the soil types, as 

well as distribution. Soil surveys have been 

completed by the Natural Resource Conservation 

Service (NRCS) and are accessible online 

at soils.usda.gov/. If feasible, a sample of soil 

from the site should be sent to a soil testing lab. 

There, a lab analysis will check the physical (texture, 

density), chemical (pH, salts, organic matter) 

and biotic (activities of organisms) characteristics 

of the soil. All of this information aids in 

developing a seed and fertilizer mix. 

Mapping of vegetation types and characterization 

of the vegetation types in regards to production, 

cover and density will be part of an in-depth 

vegetation analysis. Review available data for 

your region prior to creating a revegetation plan. 

Reference Sites 

A reference ecosystem serves as a model for 

planning a revegetation/restoration project, allowing 

for measurement of the progression of an 

ecosystem towards its desired end-state (SER, 

2002). It’s important to note that a restored ecosystem 

can never be identical to the reference 

site. A reference system is best assembled from 

multiple reference sites to account for the possibility 

that one particular site may be biased. 

Many sources of information are useful in describing 

a reference site, such as lists of species 

present, maps of the site prior to damage, 

and aerial and ground-level photography (SER, 

2002). Reference ecosystems should have high 

production and species composition in order for 

managers to evaluate the progress of the ecosystems 

towards its desired state of recovery. 

Eventually, the restored ecosystem should emulate 

the reference site (SER, 2002). 

Collecting information from a reference site can 

quickly become expensive, and is often limited 

by available funds . 

Permitting 

Permits are required for some projects. Projects 

that disturb an acre or more, discharge 

storm water into a municipal separate storm 

sewer system (MS4), or into the surface waters 

of the United States require an Alaska Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (APDES) Permit. 

This permit is issued by the Alaska Department 

of Environmental Conservation (DEC), in accordance 

with the Federal Clean Water Act. AP- 

DES permits are issued as either a phase one 

or phase two permit depending on the size of 

the area disturbed and nearby population. More 

information about the APDES program can be 

found at the DEC website, at dec.alaska.gov/water/npdes/. 

A dewatering permit is necessary if the total discharge 

volume is equal to or greater than 250,000 

gallons and wastewater discharge is located less 

than one mile from a contaminated site. Other 

permits are necessary for projects that affect fish 

habitat, historic properties, endangered species, 

and other concerns. 

Identify Site Conditions and 

Develop Mitigation Measures 

Potential limiting factors that will affect revegetation 

establishment are extensive, and a complete 

discussion is beyond the scope of this 

guide. This publication is focused is on the limiting 

factors that have been observed regularly 

on coastal sites in Alaska, and other parameters 

important for revegetation success. 

Plant growth depends on water availability. The 

amount of water a type of soil can hold and how 

easily roots can penetrate the soil depend on the 

texture and structure of the soil. 

Soil Texture 

Soil is made up of mineral particles, organic 

matter, air, and water. Soil texture is determined 

by the composition of soil, expressed as % sand, 

% silt, and % clay. Seven classes of particle size 

are acknowledged with sands being the largest 

(2.0-.05 mm), silts (.05-.002 mm) intermediate in 

size, and clays (

18 

Figure 3: USDA Agronomic Soil Textural Triangle 

GRAPHIC: USDA, SoilSensor.com, 

adaptated by editor 

The Agronomic Soil Textural 

Triangle (Figure 3, 

Figure 4) is a tool used to 

determine the textural type 

of a soil. Field analysis of 

soil texture can also be 

done using the “By Feel 

Method” (Figure 5). This 

qualitative method is quick, 

easy, and fairly reliable. 

Testing procedure involves 

wetting a sample of the soil 

and working the soil between 

one’s fingers. Water 

is often used to moisten 

the soil, but saliva is also 

suitable. Texture cannot 

be determined accurately 

when the soil is dry. Quantitative 

measures to determine soil texture are 

also available. Contact the Alaska Plant Materials 

Center for more information about testing 

and analysis of soils. 

Some characteristics of clay soils are that they 

restrict air and water flow, have high shrink-swell 

potential, and are highly absorptive. Sand, in 

GRAPHIC: US Department of Agriculture, 

adapted by SoilSensor.com, 2008 

Figure 4: Soil Triangle usage example 

In the example above, the soil consisted of 

40% Sand (red line), 30% Clay (blue line), 

and 30% Silt (green line). Thus, the soil is 

classified as clay loam, as indicated by the 

intersection of the three lines. 

contrast, has a low water 

holding capacity, due to 

large pore spacing, and 

has limited absorptive 

capability for substances in 

solution. 

Soil Structure 

The aggregation of mineral 

soil particles (sand, silt, 

clay) is referred to as soil 

structure. The arrangement 

of soil particles create 

varying pore spaces allowing 

different quantities 

of moisture to be retained. 

This is referred to as the 

porosity of the soil, and will 

be noted on a soils test. A 

reduction in the pore space 

of the soil by pressure applied 

to the soil surface 

initiates soil compaction. 

Compaction compresses 

micropores and macropores, 

destroying the soil 

structure. This affects the 

uptake and movement of 

water and can inhibit plant 

and microbial growth. 

Breaking up compacted 

layers can be accomplished 

by mechanical tillage. 

Equipment should be 

operated along the contour 

to reduce the potential of 

water entering furrows and 

creating soil erosion problems. 

Nutrients 

In most forms of revegetation, 

the application of fertilizer 

at the time of seeding 

is necessary. Most commercial fertilizers meet 

minimum standards for quality. When problems 

do arise, they can usually be traced to the product 

becoming wet during storage or shipment. 

Fertilizer is described by a three number designator, 

referred to as N-P-K. These numbers 

refer to the percentages of three elements: ni-

Chart: NRCS Irrigation Guide, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1997. 

If possible, fertilizer should be applied concurrent 

with or prior to seeding. Once the seed has 

been applied, no additional traffic should be allowed 

on the site, to avoid compaction and unnecessary 

disturbance of the seed bed. 

Topsoil 

The topsoil layer in undisturbed areas in Alaska 

is often very thin, and therefore expensive and 

impractical to salvage. However, this layer is a 

source of native seed, plant propagules, organic 

matter, and soil microbes which can enhance the 

quality of the substrate being revegetated. Top 

soil is a valuable resource in revegetation, and 

should be preserved or salvaged when possible. 

Many construction sites in Alaska have exposed 

surfaces of gravel or gravely soils. Gravelly sites 

tend not to be highly erodible. If some fine particles 

are present in the gravelly soil, adapted 

species will grow without additional topsoil. In 

fact, the addition of a layer of topsoil on a gravel 

surface can increase erosion potential. 

Photo: Stoney Wright (AK PMC) 

Figure 5: The ‘By Feel’ Texture Classification Method 

Photo: Roadside Revegetation (Steinfeld et al., 2007) 

Figure 6: Heavily compacted soil; Note platy structure. 

Water flow through this soil is poor. 

trogen, phosphorus, and potassium, respectively. 

Therefore, 20-20-10 fertilizer contains 

20% nitrogen, 20% phosphorus, and 10% potassium 

by weight. 

Figure 7: Arctic Bluegrass, Poa arctica, established on a 

gravelly coastal spit near Port Clarance LORAN station 

19

Construction Site 

Revegetation 

Construction and mining 

sites rarely have intact soil 

horizons. The preceding 

discussion on soil profiles 

does not apply to most disturbed 

land. More basic 

measures of soil particle 

size, elasticity, and water 

holding capacity are usually 

applied to construction 

and mining sites. The 

uniform soil classification 

table is the best means of 

determining soil characteristics 

for revegetation purposes. 

The Unified Soil Classification System 

(USCS) describes both the texture and grain size 

of a soil. Symbols are composed of two letters; 

the first represents primary grain size division 

(>50% of soil). The second letter refers to the 

uniformity or plasticity of a soil, or to a second 

major soil type (>12% fines present). A complete 

symbol chart is included as Figure 8. 

Revegetation Objectives 

After receiving a project contract, immediately 

purchase seed and plant materials. This ensures 

that the revegetation portion of the project 

can be completed while equipment and personnel 

are available. Seed and plant materials must 

be properly stored in a dry, cool environment to 

prevent loss of viability. 

Site Preparation 

Figure 8: Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) 

The surface of the prepared seedbed should be 

relatively smooth for drilling and rough for broadcasting. 

Germination and survival increase 

with proper site preparation. An ideal seedbed 

should: 

1. Be free of construction debris. 

2. Have relatively few large rocks or objects. 

3. Be free of ruts or gullies. 

4. Have the top two inches in a friable, noncompacted 

condition (allowing a heel to 

make a 1 /4 inch depression). 

5. Be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches if 

heavily compacted. 

6. Devoid of non-native weeds. 

(To determine which non-native weeds 

are of concern, refer to Invasive Plants 

of Alaska, produced by the USDA, in 

cooperation with the Alaska Soil and Water 

Conservation District, or refer to plants. 

alaska.gov/invasives/). 

If traditional surface preparation equipment such 

as disks and/or chisel plows are available, the 

conditions required for adequate surface preparation 

are the same as previously noted. 

Chart: American Society for Testing & Materials D 2487-83 

20 

Seedbed preparation is the primary concern of 

most revegetation projects, since it is the most 

labor-intensive, energy consumptive, and often 

determines success or failure (Vallentine, 1989). 

The objectives of site preparation are to create 

environments that provide conditions favorable 

for seed germination and seedling growth. 

Note: If hydroseeding is chosen as a method 

of seed application, surface preparation as described 

in this section may not be applicable. 

Seeding Methods 

The objective of seeding is to place the seed 

where it is needed and in proper contact with the 

soil. The method used depends upon the plant

species being seeded and 

the characteristics of the 

site, such as soil type and 

topography. 

Drill Seeding 

Drill seeding is a method 

whereby the seed is placed 

in a soil furrow and covered 

with a relatively precise amount of 

soil. Drill seeders are used most 

often in agricultural settings. One 

type of drill seeder, the Brillion-style, 

is often used for revegetation of mine 

and construction sites (Figure 9). 

This seeder has been successfully 

used on most soil types, except very 

gravelly soils. 

Fertilizer cannot be applied with all drill seeders, 

however. The drill seeder delivers the seed 

into the soil, packs the seed in place, and applies 

seed with high accuracy. This method is considered 

by many to be the best method of distributing 

seed, however the need for specialized 

equipment may be impractical at many remote 

sites in Alaska. 

Broadcast Seeding 

The broadcast method scatters seed on the soil 

surface and relies on natural processes or harrowing 

to cover the seed. The recommended 

seeding rate for broadcasting 

is double that of drilling 

due to the lack of application 

control, seed predation, 

and the potential for 

reduced seed establishment 

and germination 

rates. 

Broadcasting includes aerial 

seeding, hydroseeding, 

and hand-held methods. 

Hand-held and hand-oper- 

ated spreaders (Figure 10) are commonly used 

on coastal sites due to their portability, speed, 

low cost and because they can be used for both 

seed and fertilizer application. 

Hydroseeding 

Figure 9: Brillion ® tow-behind drill seeder 

Figure 10: 

Handheld broadcast 

seeder 

Figure 11: A truck-mounted hydroseeder 

applies a seed mixture 

ers come in truck-mounted 

and trailer forms. Major 

contractors either have a 

hydroseeder or can easily 

subcontract one. 

Hydroseeders are well suited for seeding steep 

slopes and rocky areas, as they apply mulch, 

seed, and fertilizer in a single step. Hydroseed- 

Hydroseeder manufacturers 

have claimed that hydroseeding 

promotes more 

vigorous plant growth, but that claim 

has not been proven. In fact, grass 

growth can be inhibited if too much 

mulch is applied. 

The primary disadvantage of hydroseeding 

is the requirement for large 

quantities of water, which can result 

in numerous passes across land that 

is being revegetated. The equipment 

is complex, and potential mechanical problems 

can cause costly delays. 

Hydroseeders are also useful as supplemental 

watering trucks once seed has been applied. 

Additional applications of water increase project 

costs, and are not always necessary to produce 

a good stand of vegetation. Even without additional 

water application, seed will remain dormant 

until rainfall provides sufficient moisture for 

germination. 

A hydroseeding contract should state that seed 

will not remain in the hydroseeder 

for more than 

one hour. This will prevent 

seed from absorbing 

excess water and being 

damaged by the dissolved 

fertilizer. 

Transplanting 

Photo G.E. Hubbard Transplants, cuttings, and 

sprigs are all a form of 

planting where some portion 

of a live plant is placed 

directly into the soil. This is a labor intensive 

process, however there are times when it is the 

most appropriate revegetation method. Planting 

transplants, sprigs or cuttings is a way to jumpstart 

vegetation growth, as the transplanted 

species has already reached a certain state of 

development. 

21

94, 10) 

Planting Time 

Timing is crucial to revegetation success. The 

optimum planting season is just before the 

longest period of favorable conditions. In Alaska, 

spring planting is optimum where the primary 

growing season occurs in the late spring and/or 

summer. The following table approximates the 

end of planting season across several regions 

of Alaska. The earliest time to plant is when the 

snow melts and the site is accessible. 

Latest Date to Seed: 

Arctic Coast July 15 

Western Alaska August 15 

Southcentral region August 31 

Southeast Alaska & Aleutian Islands Sept. 15 

If you are planning a revegetation project after 

the end of the planting season, refer to the dormant 

seeding section of the Techniques chapter 

for further information. 

Selection of Species 

One of the most important criteria for successful 

revegetation is species selection. A restoration 

project seldom relies on a single species, however. 

A classic definition states: 

“Species selection strategies that emphasize 

diversity assume species-rich ecosystems are 

more stable and less susceptible to damage 

from unusual climactic events, disease, or insects.” 

(Whisenant, 2005) 

Several characteristics are important in choosing 

a seed mixture, including reliable establishment, 

the ability to survive changing conditions, 

and ease of propagation (Coppin & Stiles, 1995). 

The Alaska Plant Materials Center recommends 

including at least three species in a planting mixture. 

Plant species should be chosen based on 

their adaptation to the project site and whether 

or not it is native to the area being revegetated. 

Species is Adapted to site 

The harsh environments of Alaska limit species 

growth and production potentials. It is imperative 

that chosen species are able to survive and 

thrive in the local environment. Climatic, topo- 

graphic, and soil conditions all influence plant 

performance, and should all be taken into account 

when selecting species. 

Species is Native to the area 

Native species, already adapted to Alaska, generally 

perform better than introduced materials. 

However, prices may be higher for native plants 

or seed. Availability is currently the primary obstacle 

to using native species for revegetation in 

Alaska. In-state production of native plants is increasing, 

however, due in part to state and federal 

mandates requiring the use of these species. 

A list of potential commercially available native 

species is listed in the Native Plant Directory, a 

publication of the Alaska Plant Materials Center, 

available at plants.alaska.gov. 

Planting Methods 

After a species or species mixture has been 

selected, a decision needs to be made about 

which form of plant to use. Revegetation objectives, 

cost, and the availability of equipment 

are a few of the factors that influence this decision 

(Whisenhant, 2005). Refer to Figure 15, on 

page 24, to determine which planting procedures 

are most appropriate for your site. 

Seed 

Seed is the most commonly used plant material 

for revegetating disturbed areas, because it 

is easy to collect, clean, store, transport, mix and 

apply to the site using drill or broadcast methods. 

Grass and forb species are usually directly 

seeded onto disturbed sites. 

Seed Specifications 

Quality seed is critical to success. Specifying 

“certified” seed assures quality because the 

seed must meet certain standards for germination 

and purity; certification also provides some 

assurance of genetic quality. 

Some native seed species are not available as 

certified seed. Seed quality can still be ascertained 

by examining percent germination and 

percent purity; information that will be clearly labeled 

for any seed sold in Alaska. This labeling 

is required by 11 AAC, chapter 34: Seed Regulations 

(included as Appendix B). 

22

The true cost of seed can be determined by the 

Pure Live Seed calculation. To calculate Pure 

Live Seed (PLS), use the equation: 

The true price of seed, then, can be determined 

using the equation: 

These calculations can increase the accuracy 

of bid comparisons. PLS price is a good method 

of comparing different seed lots at time of purchase. 

All seed sold or used in the state of Alaska must 

also be free of noxious weeds, under 11 AAC 

34.075. This is noted on seed tags, along with 

germination and purity. 

The seed mixes presented in this manual have 

been carefully developed and are based on results 

from trials throughout the state. Give careful 

prior consideration to any deviation from the 

suggestions. If problems occur or questions 

arise regarding seed, call the Alaska Plant Materials 

Center at (907) 745-4469. 

Seed stored on site should be kept cool, dry, 

and in rodent-free areas. Remember seed is a 

living commodity. A bag may contain seed; however 

some percentage may be dead husks - the 

equivalent of cadavers. Always buy seed based 

on the PLS Calculation. 

Certified Seed 

The term “certified seed” can cause confusion 

because it is used to describe two different issues: 

The official use of the term Certified seed (with 

a capital C) is to describe seed that has been 

grown under the rules of the Seed Certification 

Program. Certified seed is the usual commercial 

category of seed. Its ancestry can be traced back 

to Registered Class or Foundation Class seed. 

In addition, the Certified seed must meet variable 

standards of purity and germination. These 

standards are a means of verifying authenticity 

of a seed source. All the Alaska developed seed 

varieties or cultivars can be sold as either Certified 

or common. 

Figure 12: Alaska Certified seed tags 

Seed can also be certified (without a capital C) 

to be free of weeds or as meeting a minimum 

germination standard (11 AAC 34.075). This has 

nothing to do with variety identification - it simply 

indicates the quality of the seed. In other words, 

the buyer knows quality, but has no assurance of 

type (other than species). 

Certified seed should be used when available. 

Seed produced in Alaska is easy to trace to its 

origin. It may be common (uncertified) ‘Arctared’, 

but it is still ‘Arctared’. Minimum purities 

and germination should always be stated with 

orders. Common seed is a usable product and 

may be used to meet demands. Common seed 

should meet Certified standards with regard to 

germination and purity, although these standards 

may need to be relaxed to acquire sufficient material 

for a large job. Lower germination rates 

can be overcome by increasing the seeding rate. 

Lower purities should be avoided, as weeds can 

become a problem. 

Other Certification Classes 

Many new native seed sources are being developed 

in Alaska. For the most part, these will not 

Figure 13: Pre-certified class seed tags 

23

e sold as Certified seed. 

They may carry the following 

designations: ‘Source 

Identified’, ‘Tested’, or ‘Selected’. 

These classes will 

be in keeping with the certification 

system and standards 

of germination and 

purity will be enforced, but 

the term ‘Certified seed’ 

will not apply. These classes 

are referred to as being 

‘Pre-certified’ class. 

Transplants 

Planting Procedure Selection Chart 

24 

Transplants are plants 

growing in their native 

habitat that are transplanted 

directly into a restoration 

site, or into a nursery to 

be cultured for future use. 

Large transplants are able 

to establish and spread 

more quickly than other 

planting methods, and 

have a more immediate 

effect on visual aesthetics 

(Hoag, 2003). 

Transplanting shock is a 

problematic and common 

occurrence, whereby the 

transplanted species fails 

to become established, for 

any number of reasons. 

These include lack of moisture 

or nutrients and stresses 

to the root system. Care 

should be taken to prevent 

transplant shock. 

Sprigs 

Sprigging is a method of 

transplanting whereby a 

plant clump is divided into 

individual sprigs, each of 

which is capable of growing 

into a new plant (Figure 

14). On sites where coastal 

erosion is a concern, 

sprigging is an excellent 

means of reinforcement, 


Figure 14: A clump of Beach Wildrye suitable 

for division into sprigs. This plant could 

create three or four viable transplants. 

The use of Beach Wildrye on sandy and 

gravelly coastal areas is a proven practice. To 

learn more about Beach Wildrye transplants 

and erosion control, refer to Appendix A: 

Beach Wildrye Planting Guide. 

Figure 15: Planting procedure 

selection chart seeds vs. sprigs 

as the roots of the transplanted 

species will create 

a rhizomatic web that 

ties together loose grained 

soils (Ffolliott et al., 1994). 

Sprigs can be harvested 

from wild stands of 

vegetation, and planted 

without special equipment. 

A sprig does not need to 

have well-developed roots 

at planting time, only a 

portion of the below ground 

crown. The above ground 

portion of a sprig may die 

back after transplanting, 

however this is not cause 

for concern. New growth 

will start from the below 

ground portion. Sprigs 

become established faster

than seeded grass. 

The planting procedure 

selection chart (Figure 15) 

may be used to decide 

which planting methods to 

use in a given situation. 

Bare-root stock 

Bare–root stock is 

commonly used to establish 

woody plants. Seedlings 

are grown in outdoor 

nurseries, lifted from the 

soil when dormant, and 

then stored in a cool and 

moist environment until 

transplanted (Munshower, 

1994). Hardening, which 

induces dormancy, is often 

done in a 6-8 week period 

prior to transplanting, 

in order to expose the 

seedlings to conditions 

similar to the planting site. 

Container – grown stock 

Container stock is grown 

in artificial growing media in a controlled environment, 

usually a greenhouse. When harvested, 

the root system forms a cohesive plug (Steinfeld, 

et al., 2007). Containers come in a variety of 

sizes and shapes. Container grown plants are 

able to tolerate harsh conditions more easily than 

bare-root transplants (Eliason & Allen, 1997). 

Cuttings 

The use of willow cuttings is the most commonly 

used method of vegetative planting in Alaska, 

both historically and today. The use of willow 

cuttings has proven successful in all areas of 

Alaska where willow occurs naturally. Because 

timing is critical to both collection and planting, 

prior planning is an absolute necessity. 

For detailed instructions on the use of 

willow cuttings, please refer to Streambank 

Revegetation and Protection, published by 

the Alaska Department of Fish & Game. This 

publication is online, at www.adfg.alaska.gov/ 

index.cfmadfg=fishingSport.main. 


Figure 16: A clam-gun is an effective 

means of harvesting sprigs of sedge 

Figure 17: Trimming guide 

for vegetative cuttings 

Graphic: Nancy Moore (AK PMC) 

Photo: Nancy Moore (AK PMC) 

Figure 18: Willow cuttings were used to re-establish 

vegetative cover on the banks of the Kenai River 

25

Mulch & Erosion Matting 

When deciding a soil cover method to use 

(i.e. mulch or erosion matting), several factors 

should be considered. Erosion potential due to 

wind or water is the primary consideration. If the 

soil does not have a high erosion potential, then 

mulch and/or matting may be skipped. The second 

consideration is cost. Application of mulch 

and matting add significant costs to a project; 

not only in materials, but also in labor. The third 

consideration is safety. Sections of netting may 

come loose and cause hazards to wildlife and 

property. A final concern is that straw may introduce 

unwanted weeds. 

The above concerns do not apply to wood and 

paper fiber or similar products used in hydroseeders. 

When hydroseeders are used, mulch 

is obligatory. The mulch fiber forms a slurry that 

acts as a carrier for the seed and fertilizer. Without 

mulch, seed and fertilizer would not suspend 

properly or efficiently in solution, and uniform 

distribution would be impossible. Mulch also 

serves as a visual indicator of areas that have 

been treated. 


26 

Figure 19: Erosion Control matting can stabilize a cut slope while seed or transplants become established

Wild Seed Collection 


A pull-type seed stripper is an effective means of harvesting collections of wild seed 

An alternative to obtaining seed commercially is to collect seed from the wild. 

Wild seed can be harvested from native grass, forbs, shrubs, and trees found 

at or near the project site (Steinfeld, et al, 2007). If seed collection occurs at a 

considerable distance from the project site, make sure the species is adapted to 

the site conditions before using it in a revegetation project. For an example of 

wildland seed collection, review the Girdwood Sedge Restoration case study in 

this manual. 

Collection of wildland seed is a lengthy process that benefits from prior planning. 

The steps in this process are seed collection, processing, and increase. Seed 

collection includes locating donor plant communities, collecting seed, and choosing 

a method of harvest. When determining where to harvest, remember that there 

is no un-owned land in Alaska; collecting seed from any property, unless it is your 

own, requires the permission of the owner. If the potential seed collection site 

is state, federal, or tribally owned land, permits may be required. For a list of 

agencies and large land holders in Alaska, refer to the Partner Agencies section. 

27


Figure 20: A tractor mounted potato harvester 

being used to harvest Beach Wildrye 

Photo: USDA Forest Service 

Figure 21: When harvesting 

by hand, cut the stem just 

below the seed-head 

Proper timing in the season is critical for 

successful seed collection. A number of field 

visits may be required in order to collect seed that 

is ripe and mature. Seeds go through different 

stages of maturity; being able to recognize 

these stages allows one to collect seed in the 

proper ripening window. This collection window 

may vary from a few days to several weeks. 

Additional collection trips in the following year 

may be required if this window is missed. Also, 

some species may not produce enough seed in 

a single year, requiring multiple collection trips 

before planting can commence. 

Methods of recognizing seed maturity differ 

for grasses, trees, and shrubs. Color, taste, 

and hardness are factors to consider when 

determining if a seed is mature. Plants with 

fruits start green and change to red, blue, white, 

or other colors with maturity. A sour or bitter taste in fruits indicates 

a immature plant. With time, higher sugar content in the fruit signals 

maturity, giving it a sweet taste when eaten. Also, the hardness of the 

fruit will change when mature. When the fruit becomes soft and pulpy, 

it is usually mature. 

Seed pods are another indication of maturity. If rattling can be heard 

when the pod is shaken, then the seeds are ready to collect. Cracks 

or breakage of the seed pod is another indicator of readiness. Lupine 

is a species that displays these traits. 

Grass seed maturity can be determined by how the seed responds 

when it is pressed between the fingers. The stages of grass seed 

maturity are best expressed by Steinfeld, et al. 

• Milk stage: A milky substance is secreted when pressure is applied, 

indicating an immature seed lacking viability. 

• Soft-dough stage: Seed has a doughy texture, indicating it will have 

low germination and viability if collected. 

• Hard-dough stage: No excretion of dough or milky substance when 

squeezed. Seeds are collected at this stage. Seeds can be collected at 

the transition between soft-dough and hard-dough stages. If collection 

occurs between these stages, seed should not be stripped from the 

plant. Instead, seed heads should be cut and placed in collection bags 

where seeds will continue to mature. 

• Mature: Seed in this stage are usually too hard to bite. Collection 

should begin immediately, because the seeds can dislodge from the 

stem at any time. 

Weather conditions at the collection site are another variable to consider. Seed 

collection should commence during dry weather with little wind. High wind can 

blow the seed off site and make collection difficult. 

Seed collection methods are dependent upon the species being collected, where 

28


Terrain is another factor that 

determines how the seed is collected. 

Steep slopes may limit access by 

Figure 22: A Woodward Flail-Vac © seed stripper attachment is 

mechanical equipment, requiring 

used to collect large amounts of wild seed, such as fireweed 

alternate means of collection. For 


large, flat sites a combine (Figure 30) or Flail-Vac © type 

seed stripper (Figures 22 - 25) can be used. A pull type seed 

stripper can be mounted to an All Terrain Vehicle, facilitating 

collection on less flat ground. 

Figure 23: Collected fireweed stays in the 

seed stripper until removed for processing 

Diagram courtesy of Aaron Beisel. 

Figure 24: Schematic of a Woodward Flail-Vac © seed stripper 

collection occurs, and the scale of the 

project. Grass seed is often harvested 

by hand, usually by shaking it off the 

stem or cutting off the seed head 

with a knife or scissors (Figure 21). 

Shrub seed can be picked by hand or 

lightly shaken into a tarp or bucket for 

collection. Large-scale harvesting is 

usually accomplished by mechanical 

means. Collection bags should allow 

airflow; cloth bags are often used. 

Project scale is another consideration when collecting 

seed. The quantity of seed needed will often determine 

how seed is collected. Small quantities can be collected by 

hand, but large-scale projects requiring large amounts of 

seed will benefit from using mechanical implements. 

For inaccessible sites that are too large for hand harvesting, 

a portable seed collector, such as a hand-held seed stripper 

(Figure 27) or a commercial leaf vacuum (Figure 28) can be 

utilized. A push-type chipper/shredder can also be used to 

collect seed (Figure 26), however some damage to the seed 

may occur, due to the nature of the equipment. Regardless 

of the method of collection, processing is required before 

the seed can be used for revegetation. 

Seed processing involves separating weeds, chaff, dirt, 

stems, and other inert matter from the seed. This is generally 

done using specialized equipment, but seeds can also 

be processed by hand for smaller field 

collections. After cleaning, the seed 

is tested at a seed lab for purity and 

germination. 

Seed increase involves taking 

cleaned wild seed and planting it in a 

nursery field. The field is then cultured 

for heavy seed production, which 

involves weeding and fertilization, 

amongst other treatments. When 

sufficient quantities of seed are 

available, the increased seed must 

then be collected and processed, as 

29

Photo: Brennan V. Low (AK PMC) 

Figure 25: Using a seed stripper leaves the inflorescence (seed-head) intact, allowing for multiple equipment passes 

previously described, before planting can begin. 

Harvested seeds from tree and shrubs species are often started at a nursery and 

grown in nursery beds (bare-root stock) or containers (container-grown stock) in a 

green-house. Seedlings are then transplanted to the site when ready. 

Photo: 

Prairie Habitats Inc. 

Figure 27: A Hand-held seed stripper is 

an effective solution for medium volume 

collections in inaccessible sites 

Photo: Troy-Bilt USA 

Figure 26: A chipper shredder with a vacuum used to harvest seeds 


Figure 28: A leaf blower with a vacuum 

function can be used to collect seeds 

30

No 

Have you located 

Donor Plant Communities 

Locate a suitable 

donor plant community. 

Check with 

the Plant Materials 

Center or Cooperative 

Extension 

Service. 

Yes 

Investigate land 

ownership - check with 

Partner Agencies. 

Has land ownership 

been 

determined 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

Can you wait until 

seed is ready to 

be collected 

Wait until 

seed is 

mature. 

Is seed mature 

enough to be 

harvested 

Yes 

Yes 

Will land owner grant 

permission to harvest 

seed 

Choose a method of seed collection. 

Is the collection area larger than 

can be hand-harvested with 

available time and personnel 

Does the terrain limit 

access for mechanical 

harvesting equipment 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

Proceed 

with handharvesting. 

Proceed 

with mechanical 

harvesting. 

Figure 29: Wild seed harvest decision chart 

Figure 30: Combine harvesting a wild Bluejoint Reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis) stand 

31

Techniques 


Many techniques exist for revegetation, including pre-prepared vegetation mats 

In a number of situations, revegetation through seeding is not practical. 

There are several alternative methods that can be used to revegetate 

an area, in place of seeding. The different approaches highlighted in this 

chapter provide for greater flexibility to various site conditions and available 

materials. 

32

Charged Overburden Veneer: 

The charged overburden veneer technique promotes growth by spreading overburden 

(usually topsoil taken from a nearby work site) over the area to be revegetated. 

Seed and roots already present in the soil constitute the ‘charge’, and 

are relied upon to establish vegetation. The term “charged overburden veneer” 

was coined during the Shemya Island road close-out project included in the case 

study section. The drawback to this revegetation technique is that it may involve 

placing an erodible material on the site. 

Special measures must be taken if the overburden material has the potential 

to be transported into storm sewer systems and / or surface waters. Numerous 

Best Management Practices (BMPs) exist to limit soil sediment transport. 

For more information, view appendix F of the Alaska Storm Water Pollution Prevention 

Plan Guide, available at dot.alaska.gov/stwddes/desenviron/resources/ 

stormwater.shtml 

Photos:James Bowers (AK DOT) 

Spreading charged overburden - May, 2006 

Topsoil being gathered onsite - November, 2005 

Vegetation growth after 2 seasons - August, 2008 

Heavy equipment used to spread topsoil - May, 2006 

Vegetation cover fully established, using charged overburden technique - August, 2008 

33

Sod Clumps: 

The use of sod clumps is a form of transplanting whereby natural vegetation 

stands are harvested in block form. Dimensions of these blocks vary from one 

to several feet square (Muhlberg & Moore, 1998). Using sod clumps provides 

immediate vegetative cover on a site, and species are able to establish on a 

large area more quickly than with other forms of transplanting (i.e., using sprigs 

or individual plants). 

Photo: Pentec Environmental / Hart Crowser Inc. 

Clumps of sod deposited near an estuary to promote quick vegetation establishment 


A prepared grass roll, consisting of sod clumps 

wrapped in an biodegradable fabric, with slits cut in 

the top for the shoots 

Sod clumps are also used in the restoration 

of erodible stream banks. Grass rolls use 

sod clumps wrapped in biodegradable fabric 

to stabilize river banks and quickly establish 

vegetation cover. 

For further explanation of this technique, 

refer to the ADF&G publication: ‘Streambank 

Revegetation and Protection, a Guide for 

Alaska’, available at www.adfg.alaska.gov/index. 

cfmadfg=streambankprotection. 

34

Vegetation Mats: 

If clumps of sod are not readily available, a vegetative mat can be prepared in a 

nursery or greenhouse, and later transported to the site. In this technique, plantings 

are grown in a controlled environment until roots and rhizomes have become 

established. 

Vegetation mats provide many of the same benefits of a sod clump, though at a 

greater cost in time, materials and labor. Prior planning is necessary when using 

vegetation mats, as the preparation of a mat will take at least one growing season. 

Some seeds may require stratification, while others may require scarification. All 

of these factors should be taken into account if you are using this technique. 

Photos: Nancy Moore (AK PMC) 

Soil spread on erosion control fabric provides a binding medium for roots 

Seeds in flats for cold / moist 

stratification over the winter. 

During the stratification process, 

seeds are placed in cloth 

bags, with a layer of peat beneath 

and above them. The 

cloth around the seeds provide 

a steady source of moisture. 

10’ x 3’ constructed mats framed with dimensional lumber, with thick plastic and erosion control matting 

used for the base. Only the biodegradable erosion control matting will remain once the mat is deployed. 

35

Stratified seeds are sown on a vegetation mat, using hand seeders 

and a constructed grid to seed at a rate of 1 seed per 2 inch square 


Germinated seeds take root in the constructed vegetation mats 

In situ irrigation allows wetland species to 

thrive in the constructed vegetation mat 

Underside of vegetation mat, showing 

developed roots intertwined 

with erosion control fabric 

Established water sedge mats ready for transport to site 

36

Vegetation mats should be sized to fit available methods of transportation 

Heavy plastic sheeting facilitates on-site transport of 

the vegetation mats 

A line of vegetation mats, ready for placement 


Vegetation mats being installed along the waters edge 

Vegetation mats, one year after transplanting 

37

Enhanced Natural Reinvasion: 

Natural reinvasion can be assisted or enhanced with any combination of surface 

preparation or modification techniques, fertilizers, and soil amendments. This 

technique is infrequently used in the field, as few sites offer ideal conditions. Additionally, 

the regulatory process precludes methods that cannot give specifics of 

final vegetative cover and/or composition. 

The enhanced natural reinvasion method of revegetation is dependent upon 

seed arriving at the site by natural processes. This method is faster than natural 

reinvasion, but still has a relatively low success rate. Anyone wishing to apply 

this technique must understand the potential for failure, and be willing to move to 

an active form of revegetation if problems emerge. 


Using a tow-behind broadcast seeder to apply fertilizer can ensure uniform distribution 


38 


Fertilizer should be applied to edge of existing vegetation 

The effect of surface scarification on plant 

establishment and growth after two growing 

seasons. No seed was applied to the 

site, but it was fertilized with 20N-20P-10K 

fertilizer at a rate of 500 pounds per acre.

Imprinting: 

Land imprinting is a method of seedbed preparation that uses heavy rollers 

to make a depression in the soil surface, creating basins in the soil that reduce 

erosion, increase water infiltration and capture runoff (Dixon, 1990). Imprinting 

can be accomplished with heavy equipment such as a compactor with a ‘sheepsfoot’ 

attachment. A broadcast seeder is often attached to the back of an imprinter 

to apply seed. 

When the soil has been imprinted, uncovered seeds in the basin areas will tend 

to be covered by natural processes such as wind and rain. Imprinting creates 

micro-climates suitable for plant germination and growth. ‘Track-walking’ is a 

method of imprinting whereby the cleats on a track leave depressions on a soil 

surface. This technique is commonly used on sloping sites, before seeding. 


Aerial Photo: Bill Quirk 

The wheels of this landfill compactor imprint the surface area, 

creating basins of micro relief in the seedbed 


A striated pattern is still visible 

one year after the above site 

was imprinted. Vegetative 

cover is a result of natural reinvasion; 

no seeding or fertilization 

occurred. 

Imprinting creates pockets in the soil, each with 

a favorable micro-climate for vegetation growth 

39

Imprinting: 



Surface imprinting accomplished using 

the ‘track-walking’ technique 

Vegetation grows in the depressions 

created by the cleats of a tracked vehicle 


Alkaligrass grows in the depressions created by bulldozer tracks 

40

Scarification: 

Soil is scarified on almost all sites in preparation for seeding and fertilizer. 

A harrow is a tool used to roughen the soil surface and kill shallow-rooted weeds. 

This process, called harrowing, can also break the compaction layer within the 

first few inches of the surface. When used after broadcast seeding, a harrow will 

help to cover the seed with soil. 

Heavy equipment, such as graders and front-end loaders, are frequently used 

for scarification on highly compacted rocky soils. A dozer blade can be modified 

with ‘tiger teeth’ at regular intervals and used for scarification. 

Photos: Stoney Wright (AK PMC) 

Deep scarification of the soil 

surface can be accomplished 

with a grader with a ‘ripper 

shanks’ tool bar 

A bulldozer, modified with ‘tiger-teeth’ attached to the blade, 

is an effective means of surface modification that promotes 

root growth by reducing soil compaction 

41

Dormant Seeding: 

Dormant seeding is the process of planting seed during late fall or early winter 

when soil temperatures become too low for seed germination to occur so that 

seed germination occurs the following spring. 

Facts to consider when choosing Dormant Seeding: 

Choosing dormant seeding as a revegetation approach will allow for an extended 

planting season. The planting window for revegetation projects can be 

extended by several months when dormant seeding is incorporated into a revegetation 

plan. 

Seeds in flats for cold / moist stratification over the winter. During 

the stratification process, seeds are placed in cloth bags, with a layer 

of peat beneath and above them. The cloth around the seeds provide 

a steady source of moisture. 

Planting seed later in the season can 

naturally overcome seed dormancy 

mechanisms. Some native species 

require exposure to cold and moisture 

(overwintering) to break internal and 

external dormancy. In these species, 

the winter season allows for stratification 

and scarification processes to 

take place. Breaking seed dormancy 

in a spring/summer planting schedule 

may require that these winter conditions 

be artificially recreated in a controlled 

environment. Most grasses 

used for revegetation in Alaska do not 

require this treatment. Forbs are more 

likely to require stratification. 

Another benefit of dormant seeding is the head-start against weeds. Seed present 

in the soil at the start of the growing season will face less competition with 

weeds for resources like oxygen and water. 

Dormant seeding can also result in significant and unanticipated problems. Unseasonably 

warm temperatures after seed placement can trigger germination, 

and the possible failure of the seeding effort due to seedling mortality. Also, seed 

predation by rodents or birds can become a concern if seed was not adequately 

protected. Seed can also be transported away from the intended site by wind 

during the winter, or by water erosion during spring break-up. 

Remember that dormant seeding cannot be counted as an active measure on 

the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) without some other physical 

measure that protects the soil surface overtop of the seed bed. Dormant seeding 

is not an immediately effective Best Management Practice (BMP). 

Site Preparation & Planting 

Seeding methods become more limited with dormant seeding. The ground 

should be frozen with a soil temperature below 40 degrees so that the seed will 

not germinate. Seeds must remain un-germinated and in place until after the next 

growing season starts. 

42

Late season planting restricts the type of site preparation equipment that can be 

used, as well as the method used to apply the seed mix. Frozen soil on a project 

site is harder to manipulate, and this can affect the viability of the seedbed. A 

mechanical implement such as a drill seeder is not as adaptable to frozen soil. 

Broadcasting and hydroseeding are effective methods for distributing seed on 

frozen ground. If hydroseeding, a dark colored much should not be used in the 

slurry. Dark mulches may raise the soil temperature promoting early germination. 

Dormant seeding is a roll 

of the dice and requires a 

high degree of confidence. 

The user is essentially becoming 

a farmer. 

Planting Time & Rate 

As a general rule dormant seeding should only be undertaken after 

the first hard killing frost, but not after four inches of snow. This will 

prevent premature germination and allow good seed-to-soil contact. 

Dormant seeding should never be attempted on crested snow. 

Mulch application may necessary for unprotected and windy sites, to 

protect the seed and prevent it from blowing offsite. The type of mulch 

used and application rates will be determined by the project engineer 

or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project site. 

Application rates are usually in accordance with manufacturer specifications. 

Higher application rates are recommended for dormant seeding because seed 

mortality rate is higher. A 15-25% increase is appropriate. Dormant seeding is not 

temporary seeding and should include both annual and perennial species. 

Seeding schedules tend to be agency specific. As rule of thumb, seed as soon 

as you can in the spring (i.e. when no crusty snow remains on the ground). Temperature 

in the spring has no effect on seed dormancy. 

43

Conservation & Protection 

Aerial Photo: ShoreZone (NOAA) 

Eelgrass beds near Craig, Alaska 

Coastal landforms and vegetation communities are especially vulnerable 

to damage, and care should be exercised to minimize impacts to 

these areas. Areas that need particular attention are coastal dunes, eelgrass 

beds, and estuarine habitats. This chapter will address protection 

methods and regulations that affect these resources. 

Preventing Damage to Dunes: 

Coastal dunes are a dynamic landform consisting of fine-grained material, 

such as sand, bound together with vegetation. The rhizomes and roots 

of dune adapted species hold the loose soil together. A unique coastal 

feature, dunes are susceptible to erosion caused by natural and human 

sources. Wind is the main transport mechanism for sand. Vegetation 

serves to protect sand dunes, preventing movement and stabilize soil. 

(Maia, et al., 2007). If erosion processes are allowed to continue, a loss 

44

Photos: Brennan V. Low (AK PMC) 

of plants and animal habitat, and / or, damage to scenic beauty could 

occur. Restoration and conservation of dunes will ensure continued 

protection from damage arising from natural and human forces. 

For the purposes of this guide, dune restoration will focus on the “soft” 

(vegetative) approach, as an alternative to engineered structures. The 

soft approach relies on biodegradable erosion control blankets, native 

plant materials and / or seed for dune stabilization. Engineered structures 

such as stone and concrete walls are often not an acceptable approach, 

because of public opposition. Dune restoration activities should 

be undertaken for the purpose of reestablishment of dunes and vegetative 

cover, as well as controlling human impacts that can destabilize dunes 

(Rooney, 2007). 

Coastal dunes can be damaged by foot and vehicle traffic, wave action, and 

extreme winds. Limiting traffic to a threatened area is a very effective way 

to preserve dune formations. This may be achieved by walkways through 

the dune area, access barriers (fencing), laws (fines), and informative 

signage. Dune degradation from wind and wave action can be mitigated 

with vegetation that provides the structural integrity for soil fixation and 

retention. A revegetation 

plant species with 

this characteristic is 

Beach Wildrye. More 

information about this 

species can be found 

in Appendix A: Beach 

Wildrye Planting Guide. 

Dune protection measures in place 

near the mouth of the Kenai River 

There are presently no 

regulations in Alaska 

prohibiting activities that 

may damage dunes. The 

city of Kenai has adopted 

an ordinance limiting 

access to dune environments 

and establishing 

fines. A physical barrier 

has also been constructed 

to protect threatened 

dunes. Previously, coastal dunes at the 

mouth of the Kenai River were routinely being 

damaged by camping and fishing traffic. 

The success of this approach is evident; 

dune formation is widespread and vegetation 

is well established. 

Protection of Eelgrass: 

Eelgrass is a sea grass primary found in shallow 

nearshore waters along coastlines. Its preferred 

habitat is 3 to 12 feet below the surface of 

the water, a zone with abundant light. Eelgrass 

45

Photo: NOAA Fisheries Service - www.fakr.noaa.gov 

Eelgrass is a sea grass that is a protected fish habitat; 

impacts to eelgrass beds must be mitigated in Alaska 

beds provide habitat for invertebrates 

and are utilized by a variety of fish 

species for spawning, rearing, and 

feeding. Eelgrass is also valuable in 

protecting the shoreline from erosion 

and wave action. The species has 

a narrow tolerance for turbidity, sediment 

disturbance, and eutrophication 

(McCracken, 2007). Eutrophication 

refers to high nutrient levels in the 

water depleting oxygen available for 

marine species, a process associated 

with algal blooms. The vulnerability 

of eelgrass to shoreline development 

warrants the protection of this coastal 

habitat. 

There are numerous regulations and 

permits concerning habitat restoration 

projects. Some federal regulations of 

note are the Clean Water Act and the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conser- 

vation and Management Act. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires prior 

approval for any discharge of dredge or fill material, and prohibits discharge or 

filling if a practicable alternative exists. Dredging and filling activities represent a 

known threat to eelgrass habitat in Alaska. Good water quality and circulation are 

necessary for healthy eelgrass populations. 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the development of fishery management 

plans (FMPs) which include descriptions of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for documented 

species, and measures that can be taken to conserve and enhance 

these habitats. Eelgrass beds are protected because of the importance of this 

type of habitat for fish rearing. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), 

part of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is tasked with 

implementing the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

NOAA’s Office of Habitat Conservation conducts environmental reviews of nonfishing 

activities, and supports habitat restoration efforts through the Habitat Restoration 

Center. The goal of the Office of Habitat Conservation is to minimize 

impacts to marine resources; including eelgrass beds and estuaries. 

Eelgrass beds are threatened by excessive sediment deposition, which can 

be a result of soil erosion. Strategies for erosion control include revegetation 

(detailed in this guide) and streambank restoration. The latter topic is covered in 

detail in ‘Streambank Revegetation and Protection’, published by the Alaska Department 

of Fish & Game. This document is available at www.adfg.alaska.gov/ 

index.cfmadfg=streambankprotection.main. NOAA fisheries will have additional 

recommendations for the conservation of sea grasses. 

Within Alaska, the ‘special aquatic site’ designation affords additional protection 

and consideration to sensitive habitats, including eelgrass beds (Harris, 2008). 

Proposed development projects that may have an impact on these sites are reviewed 

by permitting agencies. 

46

Protection of Estuarine Habitats: 

An estuary is a body of water that is found along the coast and is formed when 

freshwater from a river flows into the salt water of the ocean. The mixing of nutrients 

from fresh and salt water supports an environment teeming with life. These 

areas provides food and shelter for wildlife and plant species. Estuaries also 

provide recreational opportunities, fishing and tourism jobs, aesthetic value, and 

food. Estuarine habitats include mudflats, salt marshes, wetlands, and eelgrass 

beds. 

Years of disregard for estuaries has resulted in habitat loss, diminished economic 

opportunities for fishing and tourism, and negatively impacted the quality 

of life for coastal communities. 

Estuaries throughout Alaska are quite healthy, and have seen with minimal development 

(Nature Conservancy, 2010). Potential threats include oil spills, sedimentation 

from erosion, dredging and filling activities, as well as pollution. 

Laws and regulations exist for the protection of estuaries and the habitats they 

provide. One such law is the Estuary Restoration Act (ERA) of 2000. This act 

enhanced federal monitoring and research capabilities, provided funds for financial 

and technical assistance in estuarine habitat restoration, and established an 

Estuary Habitat Restoration Council, charged with coordinated federal restoration 

efforts. This Council is comprised of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of 

the Interior (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Department of Agriculture (Natural 

Resources Conservation Service), and the Department of Army. 

An estuary in the Copper River delta 


Amendments were made 

to the ERA in 2007. One notable 

amendment was the 

delegation of small projects 

(less than $1,000,000) to 

NOAA, USFWS, EPA, and 

NRCS by the Secretary of 

Army. Also, NOAA, US- 

FWS, EPA, and NRCS receive 

$2.5 million per fiscal 

year through 2012 to carry 

out restoration projects. 

Section 320 of the Estuary 

Restoration Act directs the 

Environmental Protection 

Agency to administer a 

National Estuary Program, 

and assist states in developing 

a ‘Comprehensive 

Conservation and Management 

Plan’ (CCMP). As of 

2011, there is no CCMP for 

Alaska. 

47

Species Selection 


A lone specimen of Beach Fleabane (Senecio psuedoarnica) on a gravelly beach site in northwest Alaska, near Nome 

Section 3: 

1. Adapted Plants 

• Coastal Regions of Alaska 

• Vegetation Communities 

• Revegetation Suggestions 

2. Plant Species 

49

Adapted Plants 

Selecting an appropriate species mixture 


Reedgrass, Hairgrass, Alpine Bluegrass, and Red Fescue are present in this St. Lawrence Island plant community 

50 

Species diversity is a critical component of true revegetative success. Predicting 

which species will become established at a site is an inexact science. 

However, selecting native plant varieties which are adapted to the region 

and the specific characteristics of the site is key. The use of several different 

plant species increases diversity of the stand and increases the ability of the 

vegetated area to withstand unforeseen complications or changing site conditions. 

It is always prudent to use more than one species in a seed mix. The 

charts within this section can be used to develop adapted planting mixtures 

appropriate for each region of Alaska.

Alaska contains thirty-one unique ecoregions, 

defined as large areas of land and 

waters containing vegetation communities 

that share ecological dynamics, environmental 

conditions, and interactions that are critical 

for their long-term persistence. (Nowaki 

et al, 2001). Nineteen of these regions are 

coastal, and fall into five major zones. Each 

Coastal Regions of Alaska: 

region of Alaska has a dominant vegetation 

community, and it is necessary to address 

the issue of revegetation in the context of 

these communities, as this will effect species 

selection and other planting requirements. 

The species suggestions in this section are 

color-coded by region, as indicated below. 

Map adapted from work by Nowaki, et al, 2001 

51

Uniform Soil Classification Table 

Symbol 

Soil Type 

GW well-graded gravel 

GP poorly-graded gravel 

GM silty gravel 

GC clayey gravel 

SW well-graded sand 

SP poorly-graded sand 

SM silty sand 

SC clayey sand 

ML silt 

MH elastic silt 

CL lean clay 

CH flat clay 

OL organic clay/silt - low plasticity 

OH organic clay/silt -high plasticity 

PT peat - high organic 

Revegetation Suggestions: 

How to use the Species Chart : 

1. Estimate soil moisture conditions. (Saturated, Average, Very Dry) 

2. Select the soil type based on the Uniform Soil Classification engineering 

soil classification table. 

3. Select an effective seed mix from the of primary 

and secondary species lists for the region. 

Primary Species, selected from the primary 

species list for the region, should account for 

80–100% of the seed mix. (relative weighting 

indicated by a ‘1’ or ‘2’ preceding the 

species name on chart for the region). If soil 

conditions at the site are uniform, a two or 

three species mix composed of exclusively 

primary species will suffice. Conversely, if 

soil conditions vary considerably, secondary 

species should be included as well. 

Secondary Species represent the smallest 

percentage of a seed mix, often species 

that are costly or in short supply. (indicated 

by a ‘3’ on chart for the region). Secondary 

material adds a degree of variability to 

the mix and is recommended to address 

special environmental concerns such as stream crossings. Material 

for a given secondary species should not exceed 5% of the total mix. 

4. Seeding rates for the entire mix are listed in the column “Seed Rate.” 

This number is interchangeable for either lbs / acre or kg / hectare. 

5. If the site is determined to be an erosion hazard, add no more than 

10% Annual Ryegrass to the previously developed mix. This species, 

while giving temporary erosion protection, competes for nutrients with 

long-term perennial species. Also, Annual Ryegrass is a highly palatable 

forage species that can attract herbivores (i.e. moose and deer). 

Annual ryegrass cannot be used in conjunction with Alpine Bluegrass 

(Poa alpina). The allelopathic effects of Annual Ryegrass will kill Alpine 

Bluegrass. 

Revegetation Suggestion Chart Structure 

52

Vegetation Communities: 

ARCTIC REGION 


Above: 

Thermal degradation, caused 

by melting permafrost, is 

evident within this sedgegrassland 

community in arctic 

Alaska 

Left: 

Carex aquatilis (Water 

sedge), and Saxifraga cernua 

(Drooping Saxifrage) on 

the arctic coastal plain 

Next Page: 

Leymus mollis (Beach 

Wildrye) colonizes a dune 

in the Prudhoe Bay oilfield 

Photo: D A Walker 

53


ARCTIC REGION 

Primary Species: 

• ‘Gruening’ Alpine Bluegrass, Poa alpina 

• ‘Egan’ American Sloughgrass, Beckmannia syzigachne 

• ‘Norcoast’ Bering Hairgrass, Deschampsia beringensis 

• ‘Tundra’ Glaucous Bluegrass, Poa glauca 

• ‘Alyeska’ Polargrass, Arctagrostis latifolia 

• ‘Arctared’ Red Fescue, Festuca rubra 

• ‘Nortran’ Tufted Hairgrass, Deschampsia caespitosa 

Secondary Species: 

• Council Arctic Bluegrass, Poa arctica 

• Tin City Arctic Bluegrass (viviparous form), Poa arctica 

• Annual Ryegrass, Lolium multiflorum 

• Kotzebue Arctic Wild Chamomile, Tripleurospermum maritima 

• ‘Sourdough’ Bluejoint Reedgrass, Calamagrostis canadensis 

• Black Rapids’ Field Oxytrope, Oxytropis campestris 

• Franklin Bluffs Nodding Locoweed, Oxytropis deflexa 

• ‘Caiggluk’ Tilesius’ Wormwood, Artemisia tilesii 

• Safety Viviparous Fescue, Festuca viviparoidea 


54


ARCTIC REGION 

The northern portion of Alaska consists of the Beaufort Coastal Plain, Kobuk Ridges 

and Hills, and the Brooks Range Foothills eco-regions. The climate is dry, and experiences 

extremes of sunlight. During the growing season, the arctic sun does not 

set for several weeks. Summers are short and cool, and winters are long and cold. 

Continuous permafrost often results in saturated organic soils. 

Arctic Alaska supports a mixed shrub-sedge tussock plant community. Vegetation 

communities have low species diversity, low plant biomass & slow rates of growth, 

which results in a delayed recovery from disturbance (Oceanographic Institute of 

Washington, 1979). Many grasses are available in ‘hardy’ varieties that are best 

suited for the harsh conditions on the North Slope of Alaska. 

55


WESTERN REGION 

Photo: Andy Nolan 

Above: Typical Beach Wildrye community, adapted 

to the sandy and gravelly soils of Safety Sound 

Right: Ligusticum scotium (Beach Lovage) 

Below: Both Honckenya peploides (Sandwort) and 

Leymus mollis (Beach Wildrye) are adapted to sandy 

environs, such as this beach near Nome 


56 

Photo: Stoney Wright (AK PMC)



The western Alaska region stretches from the Kotzebue Sound lowlands to the Bristol 

Bay lowlands, encompassing the Seward Peninsula, the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, 

and the Bering Sea islands. Bering tundra is present at Kotzebue, transitioning to a 

subarctic tundra plant community all the way south to Bristol Bay. 







• ‘Kenai’ Polargrass, Arctagrostis latifolia 


• ‘Boreal’ Red Fescue, Festuca rubra 

• Wainwright Slender Wheatgrass, Elymus trachycaulus 



• Teller Alpine Bluegrass, Poa alpina 

• Paxson Alpine Sweetvetch, Hedysarum alpinum 



• Tin City Arctic Bluegrass (vivparous form), Poa arctica 

• Kotzebue Arctic Wild Chamomile, Tripleurospermum maritima 

• Clam Lagoon Beach Fleabane, Senecio pseudoarnica 

• Casco Cove Beach Lovage, Ligusticum scoticum 


• Twenty Mile Boreal Yarrow, Achillea millefolium 

• Kobuk Dwarf Fireweed, Chamerion latifolium 

• Black Rapids Field Oxytrope, Oxytropis campestris 

• Nome Glaucous Bluegrass, Poa glauca 

• Lowell Point Meadow Barley, Hordeum brachyantherum 

• Franklin Bluffs Nodding Locoweed, Oxytropis deflexa 

• Ninilchik‘ Nootka Alkaligrass, Puccinellia nutkaensis 

• Pioneer Peak Nootka Reedgrass, Calamagrostis nutkaensis 

• Nelchina Spike Trisetum, Trisetum spicatum 



• Knik Wild Iris, Iris setosa 

57



Western Alaska has a polar climate. Summer temperatures are moderated by the 

Bering Sea, but winter temperatures are more continental in nature due to sea ice 

that forms in the winter. Precipitation is light in the region, averaging between 12 and 

24 inches per annum. (WRCC, ongoing). Dominant plant species include sedges, 

forbs, and low-shrubs. 

58


SOUTHWEST REGION 

Photo: Stoney Wright (PMC) 

Above: Hypermaritime meadow environment, 

characteristic of southwestern 

Alaska and the Aleutian Islands 

Left: Adak island grassland community 

Below: Beach Wildrye is a large component 

of this hypermaritime grassland on 

Adak Island 

Photo: Karen Boylan (USFWS) 

Photos: (top, bottom of page): Stoney Wright (AK PMC) 

59



The area of southwest Alaska is vast, stretching from Kodiak Island to the island 

of Attu at the end of the Aleutian Chain. This area also encompasses the southern 

edge of Bristol Bay, and is home to several distinct eco-regions, including Bristol 

Bay, the Alaska Peninsula, the Aleutian Islands, and Kodiak Island. The southwest 

region has a maritime climate with seasonal temperatures of 34 to 41 degrees. Climatically, 

the Aleutian islands are classified as arctic environment, based on the 10˚ 

C isotherm, defined as a region where the mean temperature does not go above 

50˚ degrees Fahrenheit in July. Precipitation is abundant and these eco-regions 

are void of permafrost. 












• Adak (viviparous form) Arctic Bluegrass, Poa arctica 




• ‘Benson’ Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis 

• ‘Reeve’ Beach Wildrye, Leymus arenarius 



• Shemya Dusty Miller Artemisia, Artemisia stelleriana 


• Andrew Bay Large-glume Bluegrass, Poa macrocalyx 

• Attu Longawn Sedge, Carex macrochaeta 



• Henderson Ridge Red Fescue, Festuca rubra 



60



Shrub communities of willow, birch, and alder are present along coastlines in the 

eastern portions of the Aleutian island chain (Nowacki, et Al, 2001). Lichen and 

grass communities are also interspersed throughout the region. Moist tundra is 

found along the lower elevations of the Alaska Peninsula. Mixed forests of spruce, 

Balsam Poplar, cottonwood, Quaking Aspen, and Paper Birch are also present. 

Kodiak Island has trees of Sitka Spruce and Black Cottonwood. Shrubs of willow 

and alder thickets as well as forb/grass meadows predominate most of the island. 

61


SOUTHCENTRAL REGION 

Photo: Josh Brekken (Oasis Environmental) 

Above: A vegetation community, consisting 

of Puccinellia, Deschampsia, and 

Leymus species on the coastal mud flats, 

near the Port of Anchorage on Cook 

Inlet 

Right: A spruce - alder community along 

the southern coast of Homer. Note the 

steeply sloping terrain and the Cow 

parsnip in the foreground 

Below: Hairgrass, Fescue, Alkaligrass 

and Beach Wildrye are present in this 

Kenai Peninsula vegetation community 



62




Coastal species visible in this photo of the upper Cook Inlet include spruce, mosses and sedges and grass 


Graphic: Conrad Field - www.cookinletwetlands.info 






• Wainwright Slender Wheatgrass, Elymus trachycaulus 



63



Southcentral Alaska is classified as a temperate coastal hypermaritime forest, although 

the northern portions of Cook Inlet are best described as a continental boreal 

forest. Eco-regions found in southcentral are the Alaska Range, Cook Inlet Basin, 

Chugach-St. Elias mountains and the Gulf of Alaska coast. This region is generally 

free of permafrost, but it does exist in portions of the Alaska Range and Cook Inlet 

basin. 

Willow, birch, and alder occupy the lower valleys of the Alaska Range. Forests of 

spruce can be found growing in the wet organic soils of Cook Inlet with aspen and 

birch growing on less waterlogged soils. Willow and alder communities grow along 

the basin slopes. 



• Paxson Alpine Sweetvetch, Hedysarum alpinum 


• Adak (viviparous form) Arctic Bluegrass, Poa arctica 




• ‘Benson' Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis 

• ‘Reeve' Beach Wildrye, Leymus arenarius 

• Butte Beautiful Jacob’s Ladder, Polemonium pulcherrimum 



• Kobuk Dwarf Fireweed, Chamerion latifolium 


• Tok Jakutsk Snow Parsley, Cnidium cnidiifolium 


• Attu Longawn Sedge, Carex macrochaeta 


• Ninilchik Nootka Alkaligrass, Puccinellia nutkaensis 


• Nelchina Spike Trisetum, Trisetum spicatum 




64



The Gulf of Alaska eco-region is a temperate rainforest of spruce and hemlock with 

wetland sedge and grass communities growing along. Snow is abundant in this region. 

The Chugach-St. Elias mountains are part of a transitional zone, from maritime 

to continental. Alder shrublands grow in the lower elevations with Sitka Spruce and 

Mountain Hemlock growing in the valleys. Temperatures in southcentral Alaska are 

moderated by the Pacific Ocean. 

Grass / sedge meadows are prevalent at low elevations along the coasts (Selkregg, 

1977). Cordova and Valdez, situated along the eastern edge of Prince William Sound, 

hold records for the highest recorded rainfall and snowfall in Alaska, respectively 

(WRCC, ongoing). 

Soils in the Anchorage basin consist largely of glacial silt, with peat bogs existing 

in lowland areas. Mud-flats are prevalent in the intertidal zone in upper Cook Inlet, 

while rocky and sandy beaches define most of Prince William Sound’s coastline. 

65


SOUTHEAST REGION 

Above: 

Honckenya peploides 

(Sandwort), Leymus mollis 

(Beach Wildrye), and Deschampsia 

sp. (Hairgrass) on 

a beach near Petersburg 

Left: 

Characteristic understory 

vegetation in southeast 

Alaska’s coastal temperate 

rainforest 

66 

Photos: Andy Nolan



Southeast Alaska has a maritime climate, with cool summers, warm winters and 

annual precipitation rates reaching 200 inches per year (WRRC, ongoing). The region 

includes the Alexander Archipelago eco-region consisting of large, mountainous 

islands, alluvial fans, uplifted estuaries, and old-growth forests. 

Soils in this region fall into three broad groups: well-drained soils (largely consisting 

of stones), mineral soils of impeded drainage, and organic soils such as peat and 

loam. The mineral soils of impeded drainage tend to occur in drainage ways, outwash 

plains, and the sidewalls of sloping valleys (Selkregg, 1977). 

Southeast Alaska is part of the coastal temperate rain forest. Dominant conifer 

tree species are Sitka Spruce, Western Hemlock, Mountain Hemlock, Western Red 

Cedar and Alaskan Yellow Cedar. Alder, cottonwood, and birch are dominant in low 

lying areas and major river channels. Tree species diversity diminishes as latitude 

increases (Strittholt et al, 2006). 


• ‘Gruening' Alpine Bluegrass, Poa alpina 


• ‘Norcoast' Bering Hairgrass, Deschampsia beringensis 



• ‘Nortran' Tufted Hairgrass, Deschampsia caespitosa 





• ‘Benson’ Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis 

• ‘Reeve’ Beach Wildrye, Leymus arenarius 





• Ninilchik Nootka Alkaligrass, Puccinellia nutkaensis 




67



Wetlands are prevalent across the region. Coastal areas support willows, sedges, 

and mosses. Understory vegetation includes shrubs and young conifers. Shrub species 

include Sitka Alder, Rusty Menziesia, Devils Club, salmonberry, huckleberry, 

and currant. Meadows are found at low elevations along the coast, and consist of 

grasses such as Beach Wildrye, Fescue, and Bluejoint Reedgrass, as well as sedges 

and Arrowgrass (Selkregg, 1977). 

68

Plant Species 

for use in Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control 

Plant species listed in this section are known to be useful in revegetation. 

Each species is listed with the most commonly available varieties 

and cultivars. Primary species - those which should compose the bulk 

of a seed mixture - are also labeled. Tabs at the bottom and top of each 

page indicate the regions of Alaska to which a species is adapted. If not 

all varieties will grow in that region, the variety or varieties that will are 

listed above the tab at the bottom portion of the page. 

69

Boreal Yarrow, 

Achillea millefolium 

Boreal Yarrow does well in coastal settings, but 

has sufficient adaptability to be useful in inland 

areas also. Yarrow has the ability to create 

the appearance of a natural meadow stand in 

reseeded areas; the presence of the white/cream 

flowers breaks up the usual homogeneity of grass 

plantings. 

Boreal Yarrow is a colonizer, found in meadows 

and fields, in both wet and dry areas. It grows on 

soil and gravel. It is a long lived perennial. 

ADAPTED COMMERCIAL VARIETIES OR RELEASES: 

Twenty Mile selected class germplasm 

Twenty Mile Boreal Yarrow, Achillea millefolium 

Availability Growth Form Average 

Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 

Competitiveness 

Poor Sod 24 in. 6.0-8.0 Poor Good Good Strong 

70

Polargrass, 

Arctagrostis latifolia 

Polargrass is a species that is ideal for forage 

and revegetation in Alaska (Mitchell, 1987). Polargrass 

is adapted to moderately wet areas (Wright, 

1992). It is tolerant of low temperatures and acidic 

soils. Polargrass is a pioneer species in disturbed 

areas, especially those that are moist and acidic 

(Walkup, 1991). Polargrass does not grow well 

with fertilization or competition. 


‘Kenai’ is from southern Alaska, and should be 

planted appropriately. 

‘Alyeska’ is suitable for revegetation in western 

and arctic Alaska (Mitchell, 1980). 

Primary 

'Alyeska' Polargrass, Arctagrostis latifolia 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Fair Sod 24 in. 4.9-6.8 Poor Poor Good Weak 

‘Alyeska’ 

‘Alyeska’ 

‘Kenai’ 

‘Kenai’ 

‘Kenai’ 

71

Dusty Miller, 

Artemisia stelleriana 

Dusty Miller can be used in landscape 

applications throughout Alaska where the 

species does well. The best performance can 

be expected on sandy to gravelly soils (Wright, 

2007). Artemisia stelleriana grows naturally in 

sunny, sandy conditions. It is found in coastal 

areas and is tolerant of ocean spray. 

Artemesia stellerania is an interesting species 

because it is native to North America only on 

the western-most Aleutian Islands, including 

Shemya Island. The concept of Dusty Miller being 

native to such a limited region of North America 

discounts the fact that the original Aleut population 

conducted trade with societies in Asia, where the 

species is native and widespread. Other common 

names for this plant are Old Woman, Beach 

Wormwood, and Hoary Sagebrush - all referring 

to the characteristics of it leaves. 


Shemya selected class germplasm 

Shemya Dusty Miller, Artemisia stelleriana 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Stolons 12 in. 5.0-7.5 Good Good Good Strong 

72

Tilesius’ Wormwood, 

Artemisia tilesii 

Tilesius’ Wormwood is a broadleaf forb with a 

wide range of adaptations throughout Alaska 

(Wright, 1992). Tilesius’ Wormwood is a perennial, 

non-woody sagebrush species. It has been found 

on many different soil types. Tilesius’ Wormwood 

prefers sun. The common name, stinkweed, refers 

to its smell when the leaves are crushed. 


‘Caiggluk’ 

'Caiggluk' Tilesius’ Wormwood, Artemisia tilesii 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 20 in. 4.0-8.5 Poor Excellent Good Strong 

73

American Sloughgrass, 

Beckmannia syzigachne 

American Sloughgrass has a high potential for wetland reclamation. 

Additionally, the species benefits wildlife by providing forage and seed 

for waterfowl. Revegetation and erosion control plantings in seasonally 

wet places between 60 degrees north latitude and the Arctic Circle will 

benefit from including Sloughgrass as part of the seed mix. 


‘Egan’ 

Primary 

'Egan' American Sloughgrass, Beckmannia syzigachne 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Good Bunch 18 in. 5.5-7.5 Good Poor Excellent Moderate 

74

Bluejoint Reedgrass, 

Calamagrostis canadensis 

Bluejoint Reedgrass is found throughout Alaska 

on both dry and wet sites. Commercial availability 

can be limited, and the seed expensive. Bluejoint 

provides good erosion control because of its aggressive 

rhizomes and root structure. It can be 

used to successfully reclaim strip mine sites and 

oil spills. Bluejoint Reedgrass can thrive in very 

cold conditions. 


‘Sourdough’ 

Primary 

'Sourdough' Bluejoint Reedgrass, Calamagrostis canadensis 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Fair Sod 36 in. 4.5-8.0 Poor Good Good Strong 

75

Nootka Reedgrass, 

Calamagrostis nutkaensis 

Nootka Reedgrass is appropriate for revegetation 

throughout southeast and southcentral Alaska. Nootka 

Reedgrass is a perennial, tufted grass with short rhizomes. 

It grows in clumps, and requires wet soil (NRCS, 2007). 

This reedgrass species is found in bogs, marshes, and freshwater 

swamps. 


Pioneer Peak selected class germplasm 


Height 

Pioneer Peak Nootka Reedgrass, Calamagrostis nutkaensis 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Sod 24 in. 5.5-8.0 Good Poor Excellent Strong 

76

Longawn Sedge, 

Carex macrochaeta 

Longawn sedge is quite common along coastal 

areas of Alaska, growing in wet places both in the 

mountains and along the shore. It is rare inland. 

Longawn Sedge is suggested for use in revegetation 

if coastal wetlands are impacted. It is best for 

revegetating disturbed and eroded coastal grasslands. 


Attu selected class germplasm 

Attu Longawn Sedge, Carex macrochaeta 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 



77

Dwarf Fireweed, 

Chamerion latifolium 

Dwarf Fireweed is a common species found 

on river gravel bars throughout Alaska; hence 

it’s other common name - river beauty. Dwarf 

Fireweed grows on sandy river bars, roadsides, 

and foothills (Hunt & Moore, 2003). It grows where 

the soil is dry to medium-wet. Dwarf Fireweed is 

a natural perennial colonizer; it will live for several 

years and helps stabilize the soil. 


Kobuk selected class germplasm 

Primary 

Kobuk Dwarf Fireweed, Chamerion latifolium 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 12 in. 4.8-7.0 Poor Poor Good Weak 

78

Bering Hairgrass, 

Deschampsia beringensis 

Bering Hairgrass is recommended for revegetation use in 

coastal regions of western and southwestern Alaska, and 

in some northern maritime regions (Mitchell, 1985). Bering 

Hairgrass is found along muddy shores in southern Alaska. It 

grows well in waterlogged soils. Bering Hairgrass is tolerant 

of moist and salty conditions. 


‘Norcoast’ 

Primary 

'Norcoast' Bering Hairgrass, Deschampsia beringensis 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Good Bunch 20 in. 5.5-7.2 Excellent Poor Good Strong 

79

Tufted Hairgrass, 

Deschampsia caespitosa 

Tufted Hairgrass is well adapted to northern 

regions of Alaska (Mitchell, 1985). Tufted Hairgrass 

is a cool season bunch grass. It will grow in most 

any soil. In the wild, Tufted Hairgrass is found in 

moist or boggy areas. An arctic species, Tufted 

Hairgrass is well suited for many of Alaska’s 

harshest environments. It is not recommended 

for revegetation of streambank areas, however, 

since the tufted fibrous roots provide limited bank 

stabilization (Mitchell, 1986). 


‘Nortran’ 

Primary 

'Nortran' Tufted Hairgrass, Deschampsia caespitosa 


Height 

PH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Good Bunch 20 in. 4.8-7.2 Poor Good Good Strong 

80

Slender Wheatgrass, 

Elymus trachycaulus 

Slender Wheatgrass is a natural colonizer, adapted to dry 

rocky and gravelly soil. Slender Wheatgrass is the largest 

commercially produced perennial grass in Alaska, both in 

volume and in the number of producers. This species can be 

found in the wild on moist to dry soils, under trees and in full 

sun. Slender Wheatgrass grows on either alkaline or acidic 

substrate. Although it is short lived, Slender Wheatgrass can 

colonize and stabilize an area, allowing other plants to subsequently 

become established. 


Wainwright selected class germplasm 

Primary 

Wainwright Slender Wheatgrass, Elymus trachycaulus 


Height 

PH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Excellent Bunch 20 in. 5.6-9.0 Excellent Excellent Good Strong 

81

Red Fescue, 

Festuca rubra 

Red Fescue is outstanding for erosion control, although 

the overly aggressive, sod-forming nature of this species 

often makes the species unacceptable in reclamation. Red 

Fescue’s aggressive nature may be utilized to prevent the 

invasion of native shrub species such as alder and willow. 

Red Fescue is a colonizer of disturbed areas, and it provides 

long-term stabilization as well. It needs little maintenance, establishes 

quickly, and survives for many years. Red Fescue 

will survive in sun and shade; in cold and hot; in dry and moist; 

and in a broad range of pH (in both acidic and alkaline soils). 


Primary 

‘Arctared’ is the most 

winter-hardy variety of Red 

Fescue. It is especially well 

adapted to the harsh arctic 

environment. 

‘Boreal’ is adapted for use 

across Alaska, including 

western Alaska and along 

the southern coast. 

Henderson Ridge selected 

class germplasm is best 

adapted to the western 

Aleutians. In coastal and 

southcentral Alaska, Henderson 

Ridge can be used 

for revegetating mines, highways, 

and similar sites. 

'Arctared’ Red Fescue, Festuca rubra 


Height 

Poor - 

Excellent 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Sod 14 - 18 in. 5.0-7.5 Poor Good Good Strong 

‘Arctared’ 

‘Boreal’ 

‘Arctared’, 

‘Boreal’ 

Henderson 

Ridge 


‘Boreal’ 

Henderson 

Ridge 


‘Boreal’ 


82

Viviparous Fescue, 

Festuca viviparoidea 

Viviparous Fescue reproduces by an asexual means called 

vivipary. Instead of producing seed, Viviparous Fescue produces 

small plantlets where the seed heads would be in 

other grasses. When these plantlets are sufficiently developed, 

they separate from the parent to fall to the ground. If 

the plantlet finds a suitable habitat, it will grow. Viviparous 

Fescue is intended for use in arctic, western, southcentral, 

and southwest Alaska. Viviparous Fescue can be a colonizer 

in mountainous country. In the wild, it is found in alpine 

tundra and on rocky slopes. If the purpose of a revegetation 

project is to stabilize soil in an arctic to sub-arctic area, then 

Viviparous Fescue is ideal. 


Safety selected class germplasm 

Safety Viviparous Fescue, Festuca viviparoidea 


Height 

PH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 6 in. 6.0-7.5 Poor Excellent Poor Strong 

83

Alpine Sweetvetch, 

Hedysarum alpinum 

Alpine Sweetvetch is an easily recognized and 

frequently encountered legume. This species is 

most often found on dry, gravelly soils, especially 

near rivers. It is suspected of being a nitrogen-fixing 

species. Alpine Sweetvetch is recommended 

for use in southcentral and western Alaska. 


Paxson selected class germplasm 

Paxson Alpine Sweetvetch, Hedysarum alpinum 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 24 in. 6.0-8.0 Poor Poor Good Strong 

84

Meadow Barley, 

Hordeum brachyantherum 

Meadow Barley is an important coastal grass 

species, frequently found in wet areas and often 

on fine soils such as clays. Meadow Barley 

is not found north of the Brooks Range. At times, 

it grows on rocky or gravelly sites, provided adequate 

moisture exists. Meadow Barley has a moderate 

lifespan, and it propagates well by seed. It 

starts growth after snowmelt, with seed maturing 

in September. Meadow Barley is competitive with 

annual grasses. 


Lowell Point selected class germplasm 

Lowell Point Meadow Barley, Hordeum brachyantherum 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 24 in. 6.0-8.5 Good Good Good Weak 

85

Wild Iris, 

Iris setosa 

Wild Iris is best used on wet soil and in seed 

mixes with non-competitive grasses. It is best 

adapted for southcentral, southeast, and southwest 

Alaska. Wild Iris can be found throughout 

most of Alaska in bogs, meadows, and on lake 

shores. It is also found in drier areas where the 

seed has taken hold. 


Knik selected class germplasm 

Knik Wild Iris, Iris setosa 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 



86

Beach Wildrye, 

Leymus arenarius 

Beach Wildrye has high potential in coastal restoration, 

especially in foredunes and other sandy 

sites throughout coastal Alaska (Wright, 1994). 

Beach Wildrye grows wild in Alaska mainly along 

the coast on sandy beaches. It can successfully 

revegetate areas unsuitable for other species. 

Prior planning is essential, however, as Beach 

Wildrye does not tolerate excessive foot traffic. 

Beach Wildrye does not compete well with other 

grasses (Wright, 1994). 


‘Reeve’ is available as seed. This cultivar was developed 

from European sources. 

'Reeve' Beach Wildrye, Leymus arenarius 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Sod 24 in. 6.0-8.0 Excellent Good Good Weak 

87

Beach Wildrye, 

Leymus mollis 

Beach Wildrye should be used in sandy areas with 

high erosion potential. Revegetation with sprigs is 

a preferred method of revegetating highly erodible 

areas (Wright, 1994). Beach Wildrye sprigs can 

effectively and quickly recolonize coastal areas, 

especially where there are dunes and blowing 

sand conditions. It provides good erosion control 

because of its aggressive vegetative growth. 


‘Benson’ is available only from vegetative cuttings 

(sprigs). Seed is not available. 

'Benson' Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Sod 24 in. 6.0-8.0 Excellent Good Good Weak 

88

Beach Lovage, 

Ligusticum scoticum 

Beach Lovage is in the parsley family. The 

species is quite common on coastal sites and is 

an important native plant to include in revegetation 

seed mixes. Along the sea coast look for Beach 

Lovage in crevices where rocks have eroded, 

with soils formed. This plant can grow in many 

locations, but prefers sunny, well-drained soil. As 

its name implies, Beach Lovage can withstand 

salt sprays from the ocean. 


Casco Cove selected class germplasm 

Casco Cove Beach Lovage, Ligusticum scoticum 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 16 in. 6.0-8.5 Excellent Poor Good Strong 

89

Annual Ryegrass, 

Lolium multiflorum 

Annual Ryegrass provides a quick, temporary cover. It 

should be limited to 10% or less of a seed mix, because 

Annual Ryegrass uses nutrients intended for the perennial 

species in the mix. Also, a heavy plant cover can slow the 

growth of perennial species. Annual Ryegrass is also very 

attractive to herbivores, which can increase potential vehicle/ 

animal conflicts. 

Annual Ryegrass, Lolium multiflorum 

Annual Ryegrass, Lolium multiflorum 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Excellent Annual 16 in. 5.0-7.9 Excellent Poor Good Moderate 

90

Field Oxytrope, 

Oxytropis campestris 

Field Oxytrope is a legume adapted to rocky and 

gravelly dry soils. Field Oxytrope is an early colonizer 

of disturbed sites. As with most legumes, 

Field Oxytrope fixes nitrogen in the soil, and may 

increase soil fertility. 


Black Rapids selected class germplasm 

Black Rapids Field Oxytrope, Oxytropis campestris 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 8 in. 5.5-8.5 Poor Excellent Poor Strong 

91

Nodding Locoweed, 

Oxytropis deflexa 

Nodding Locoweed is highly adapted to gravelly 

sites, and it is intended for use in reclamation and 

revegetation in the northern and western portions 

of Alaska. Nodding Locoweed is a perennial legume 

found growing along riverbanks, meadows, 

and waste places in nature (Hulten, 1968). It is a 

natural colonizer of dry, rocky soils. Many of its 

characteristics are common to many arctic plants; 

low-growth habit, taproot, hairy leaves, and prolific 

flowering. 

Large seeds enable Nodding Locoweed to survive 

in inhospitable environments. Since it is a 

legume, it adds nitrogen to the soil, helping other 

plants to survive and create a healthy ecosystem. 

Arctic plant studies of nitrogen fixing plants 

in Alaska have found that rhizobia are associated 

with locoweed (Allen et al., 1995). This indicates 

the importance of adding legumes to a revegetation 

mix. 


Franklin Bluffs selected class germplasm 

Franklin Bluffs Nodding Locoweed, Oxytropis deflexa 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 8 in. 6.5-8.0 Poor Excellent Poor Weak 

92

Alpine Bluegrass, 

Poa alpina 

Alpine Bluegrass is a species widely adapted 

throughout Alaska. As the name implies, the species 

is adapted to high elevation areas. It also 

performs well on drier sites. Seed availability is 

limited. Availability of seed should be researched 

before Alpine Bluegrass is included in a planting 

plan. 

Alpine Bluegrass grows in a wide range of habitats 

and soil conditions in the wild. Some of these are: 

dry slopes, gravelly sites, rocky sites, alpine and 

sub-alpine sites, and meadows. Poa alpina is a 

perennial grass that can serve as the pioneer species 

for a revegetation project. Once established, 

other plants can follow. Poa alpina is tolerant to 

climatic, soil, fire, and drought conditions. This 

flexibility makes the species important for high 

altitude revegetation. Alpine Bluegrass also has 

low nutrient needs. 


Primary 

‘Gruening’ is a variety that 

can be established on dry 

soil as long as there is some 

irrigation. 

Teller selected class germplasm 

is a native collection 

of Poa alpina intended 

for general revegetation 

projects throughout Alaska. 

'Gruening' Alpine Bluegrass, Poa alpina 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor - Fair Bunch 6 - 8 in. 5.0-7.2 Poor Good Poor Weak 

‘Gruening’ 

Teller 

Teller 


Teller 



93

Arctic Bluegrass (viviparous form), 

Poa arctica 

Arctic Bluegrass (viviparous) is unique in that it 

reproduces via asexual reproduction. These varieties 

produce small plantlets in the seedhead in 

place of true seed. These varieties are adapted 

to the entire Aleutian Archipelago, performing best 

on dry upland sites in the region. Adak and Tin 

City Arctic Bluegrass are both the same species 

- the difference is the environmental conditions 

where they were collected. 

In the wild, viviparous Arctic Bluegrass is found as 

raised clumps on gravel, wet meadows, and soils 

near wetlands. It is a cosmopolitan species, being 

able to grow on both acidic outcrops and calcareous 

substrate. Viviparous Arctic Bluegrass can be 

found on rocks, gravel, soil, 

moss, sand, silt, and clay 

(Aiken, et al., 1995). Geese 

graze specifically on Poa 

arctica, which means that, in 

terms of restoration, viviparous 

Arctic Bluegrass will 

attract geese to the projectthus 

creating a more diverse 

habitat (Aiken et al., 1995). 

ADAPTED COMMERCIAL VARI- 

ETIES OR RELEASES: 

Adak selected class 

germplasm 

Tin City selected 

class germplasm 

Tin City Arctic Bluegrass (viviparous form), Poa arctica 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 12 in. 5.0-7.8 Good Good Good Strong 

94 

Adak 

Adak 

Tin City 

Tin City

Arctic Bluegrass, 

Poa arctica 

Seed producing varieties of Arctic Bluegrass 

are available. This species can be used on a wide 

variety of soils throughout Alaska, but it will work 

best in the western and arctic regions. In the wild, 

Arctic Bluegrass is found as raised clumps on 

gravel, wet meadows, and soils near wetlands. 

It is able to grow on both acidic outcrops and 

calcareous substrate. It can be found on rocks, 

gravel, soil, moss, sand, silt, and clay (Aiken, et 

al., 1995). Arctic Bluegrass’s tolerance of acidity is 

an important characteristic for mine reclamation. 

A wetness loving species, Arctic Bluegrass, can 

effectively grow where other grasses might die 

due to too much water. 


Council selected class germplasm produces true 

seed. 

Council Arctic Bluegrass, Poa arctica 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 12 in. 5.0-7.8 Poor Good Good Strong 

95

Glaucous Bluegrass, 

Poa glauca 

Glaucous Bluegrass can be found on many 

types of soil - from slightly acidic to slightly basic; 

in very dry to slightly moist areas; and on gravel, 

sand, or organic matter. It is a pioneer species, 

forming tussocks in disturbed areas. This provides 

a cover where willows and forbs can become 

established (Aiken, et al., 1995). In the extreme 

arctic, Glaucous Bluegrass’s growth form is short 

and erect. In other areas of Alaska, it is more 

spreading. 


‘Tundra’ is a variety best suited for revegetation 

in extreme northern areas with severe environmental 

conditions (Mitchell, 1980). 

Primary 

Nome selected class germplasm 

is a relatively common 

grass on dry mineral 

soils in the state. This variety 

has a wider use range 

than ‘Tundra’; however, it is 

not recommended for use in 

the arctic region. 

‘Tundra’ Glaucus Bluegrass, Poa glauca 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor - Fair Bunch 10 - 12 in. 5.0-8.0 Good Excellent Poor Strong 

Nome 

Nome 

‘Tundra’ 

Nome 

‘Tundra’ 

96

Large-glume Bluegrass, 

Poa macrocalyx 

Large-glume Bluegrass is a perennial bunch 

grass found along coastlines inland of the primary 

coastal dunes and Beach Wildrye communities. 

It is found wild in Alaska along seashores from 

the Panhandle to the Aleutians and along western 

Alaskan coastlines. For coastal tundra and 

seashore revegetation with a native grass, Largeglume 

Bluegrass requires very little maintenance. 

It grows well on sandy beaches, marshes, slopes, 

and medium wet substrate. 


Andrew Bay selected class germplasm is intended 

for use in revegetation and erosion control in 

coastal regions of Alaska from the Juneau area 

westward through the Aleutians, and northward 

on the western coast to roughly Scammon Bay. 

Andrew Bay Large-glume Bluegrass, Poa macrocalyx 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 16 in. 5.0-8.0 Excellent Excellent Good Strong 

97

Beautiful Jacob’s Ladder, 

Polemonium pulcherrimum 

Beautiful Jacob’s Ladder is highly 

adapted to gravelly soils. It has a colorful 

appearance, and can add to 

the visual impact to a revegetation 

project. Using this species enhances 

diversity, in addition to aesthetic 

considerations. It grows in alpine, subalpine, 

mid and low elevation sites. 

When used in seed mixes at 5% by 

weight, Beautiful Jacob’s Ladder performs 

vigorously. 

ADAPTED COMMERCIAL VARIETIES OR 

RELEASES: 

Butte selected class germplasm 

Butte Beautiful Jacob’s Ladder, Polemonium pulcherrimum 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 16 in. 6.5-8.5 Good Excellent Poor Weak 

98

Nootka Alkaligrass, 

Puccinellia nutkaensis 

Nootka Alkaligrass is a species that occupies a 

very specific niche in coastal Alaska. It is used on 

revegetation projects where the site is sometimes 

flooded by extremely high tides or storm surges. 

This species does best on silty or gravelly coastal 

soils and is most often found in southcentral and 

southeast Alaska. Puccinellia nutkaensis is a 

common grass found in the nooks and crannies of 

rocks and boulders in the tidal zone. 

Since Nootka Alkaligrass is a grass of the seacoast 

and salt marshes, it grows naturally in salty soil; it 

requires lots of water to grow, but does not like to 

be submerged (USDA, 2004). Plants that coexist 

with Nootka Alkaligrass, and yet do better in 

submerged, more salty areas, are Carex lyngbyei 

and Poa eminens (Snow et al., 1984). 


Ninilchik selected class germplasm 

Ninilchik Nootka Alkaligrass, Puccinellia nutkaensis 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Sod 8 in. 6.0-8.5 Excellent Poor Excellent Weak 

99

Beach Fleabane, 

Senecio pseudoarnica 

Beach Fleabane commonly occurs in coastal 

areas of Alaska, often in association with 

Beach Wildrye (Leymus mollis). Beach 

Fleabane is used primarily for revegetation and 

erosion control, but may have some secondary 

value as an ornamental. This forb is a rhizomatous 

perennial in the composite (aster) family. Growing 

on gravelly and sandy seashores, Beach Fleabane 

withstands the salt spray from the ocean. 


Clam Lagoon selected class germplasm 

Clam Lagoon Beach Fleabane, Senecio pseudoarnica 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Sod 24 in. 6.0-8.0 Excellent Excellent Good Strong 

100

Arctic Wild Chamomile, 

Tripleurospermum maritima 

Arctic Wild Chamomile, a perennial forb, grows 

on Alaska’s northwestern seashores and the arctic 

coast. This species is used for revegetation, 

restoration, and landscape seeding. Arctic Wild 

Chamomile seeds are often incorporated into 

revegetation mixes for northern Alaska. It grows 

on most types of soil and drainage. Arctic Wild 

Chamomile will add color and beauty to vegetation 

establishment. 


Kotzebue selected class germplasm 

Kotzebue Arctic Wild Chamomile, Tripleurospermum maritima 


Height 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 8 in. 4.0-8.5 Good Excellent Good Strong 

101

Spike Trisetum, 

Trisetum spicatum 

Spike Trisetum is used for revegetation of dry 

sites with mineral soils. The species has nearly a 

world-wide distribution and is one of the more cosmopolitan 

grasses. Trisetum spicatum is a common 

grass, found in the wild on disturbed sandy 

or silty soils, on both acid and alkaline substrates, 

and on rocks, gravel, clay, or tilled earth (Aiken et 

al., 1999). Spike Trisetum has a high root / shoot 

ratio. This enables it to be useful for soil building 

and erosion control (Hardy, 1989). 


Nelchina selected class germplasm 


Height 

Nelchina Spike Trisetum, Trisetum spicatum 

pH Range 

Saline 

Tolerance 

Drought 

Tolerance 

Wet Soil 

Tolerance 


Poor Bunch 18 in. 4.9-7.5 Poor Good Good Strong 

102

Case Studies 

Photo: Larry Geise 

Kongiganak airport apron protected with jute matting, two weeks after seeding with Puccinellia nutkaensis 

Section 4: 

1. Arctic Region 

• Arctophila fulva, Kuparuk 

• Vegetation Study, Sagavanirktok River 

• Project Chariot Site, Ogotoruk Valley 

2. Western Region 

• Red Dog mine port site, NW Alaska 

• M/V All Alaskan Cleanup, St. Paul 

3. Southwest Region 

• Lateral Clear Zone, Shemya 

• Natural Reinvasion, Shemya 

• Coastal Dune Restoration, Adak 

• Pringle Hill Sand Quarry, Adak 

• Landfill Restoration, Adak 

• Wetland Revegetation, Kodiak 

4. Southcentral Region 

• Sedge Restoration, Girdwood Area 

• Chester Creek Restoration, Anchorage 

• Fish Creek Wetland, Anchorage 

• Jet Fuel Pipeline Restoration, Anchorage 

5. Southeast Region 

• Jordan Creek Wetland, Juneau 

• Nancy Street Wetland, Juneau 

• Airport Estuary Restoration, Gravina 

103

Case Studies 

Acknowledgements: 

The case studies section of this publication would not have been possible 

without the participation and involvement of professionals across the state. 

Special thanks go to John Hudson and Neil Stichert at the USFWS, 

Shannon Seifert & Beverly Schoonover of the Juneau Wetlands 

Partnership, Michele Elfers with the City & Borough of Juneau, Dave Ward 

with Jacobs Engineering, Estrella Campellone at the US Army Corps 

of Engineers - Alaska District, Josh Brekken with Oasis Environmental, 

Sirena Brownlee of HDR Engineering, Stacy Havron, from Alaska Pacific 

University, Phil Smith of PSA Inc., Jon Houghton of Pentec Environmental, 

and Jane Gendron from the Alaska Department of Transportation. 


104 

Kongiganak airport apron vegetation growth, six weeks after seeding with Puccinellia nutkaensis

Case Studies 

Usage Notes: 

The following case studies are grouped by region, organized by the same 

color-coded tabs used previously in this guide. The map below shows the 

borders of each region. Be aware that vegetation communities and climate 

zones do not adhere to cartographic distinctions; it may therefore be helpful 

to review case studies from adjacent regions when planning a revegetation 

project. Each case study includes an analysis of methods of revegetation, 

species used, results, conclusions, and lessons learned. 

These case studies are also available on the Coastal Revegetation & Erosion 

Control Guide section of the Alaska Plant Materials Center website: 

plants.alaska.gov. 

105

Case Studies of Revegetation Projects 

Arctic Coastal Plain 

The Arctic coastal plain extends west from the border with Canada, to Cape Krusenstern on 

the Bering Sea. Permafrost, tundra, and low elevations are the norm for the North Slope, interrupted 

only by the Brooks Range Foothills south of Point Hope. 

Projects in this area generally come about because of the resource development industries. 

Demonstration projects for oil and gas industry have done much to advance the science of 

revegetation in the region. 

1. Revegetation with Arctophila fulva, Kuparuk 

2. Floodplain Vegetation Establishment, Sagavanirktok River 

3. Project Chariot Site Revegetation, Ogotoruk Valley 

2 

1 

106 

3

Revegetation with Arctophila fulva, Kuparuk 

Introduction / Objective: 

From 1985 to 1989, the Plant Material Center in 

cooperation with Arco Alaska conducted studies 

investigating techniques for transplanting Arctic 

Pendant Grass, Arctophila fulva, in the Kuparuk 

Oil Field on the North Slope of Alaska. This area 

is immediately west of Prudhoe Bay. The study 

was primarily focused on the harvest, preparation 

and transplanting of Arctic Pendant grass 

into natural or man-made lakes primarily for waterfowl 

enhancement or habitat mitigation. 

Species Used: 

The species used was Arctic Pendant Grass, Arctophila 

fulva 

Coastline Type: 

The Kuparuk field is part of the Arctic Coastal 

plain. Vegetation in this area generally consists of 

coastal tundra. 

Methods of Revegetation: 

Annual plantings of Pendant grass took place from 

1985 -1988. The plantings were made in lake environments 

having water depths of 45 centimeters or 

less. Planting and harvesting was conducted both 

spring and fall. No plantings were made in 1989 

in order to evaluate the success of the previous 

years’ plantings. 

Two harvesting and planting methods were tried. 

The first harvest method used a potato harvest fork 

to lift Arctic Pendant Grass sprigs from the collection 

site. This effort resulted in an entangled mat 

of shoots and roots. This mat was then divided into 

planting units (individual sprigs) which consisted of 

culm and a new shoot. Separating and preparing 

the units took twice as much time as the digging 

process. Digging and preparation of 100 planting 

units took less than three man-hours. 

The second harvesting technique employed a 

3-inch, portable water pump. This technique relied 

on discharged water to flush the substrate from 

the root mass. After hydraulically up-rooting the 

clumps of pendant grass they were lifted from the 

lake bottom with a potato fork. These clumps were 

planted without additional separation, eliminating 

the extra step of further dividing the clumps into 

sprigs, therefore saving time and making large 

scale revegetation more feasible and economical. 

Strong wind created considerable wave action 

during planting, making it difficult to assure the 

pendant grass would remain in place. This was 

mitigated by securing the grass to the lake bottom 

with six-inch rolled erosion mat staples. Fertilizer 

was in the form of 20-10-5 tablets. The tablet was 

dropped in the water next to the sprig or clump and 

stepped on so it would become embedded in the 

lake bottom. Planting was conducted by two people. 

One person would lay a sprig or clump on the 

surface of the water while the other would secure it 

to the lake bottom with a staple. 

Results: 

The study identified the most successful transplanting 

techniques which had the least impact on 

the donor community. The following points summarize 

the findings of the study: 

1. Arctic Pendant Grass should be harvested 

with a potato harvest fork and separated 

into clumps consisting of shoots, roots, and 

rhizomes. 

2. Plantings made with clumps have had higher 

survival rates and vigor than plantings with a 

smaller, single sprig planting unit. 

3. Plantings should occur at sites with minimal 

wave energies and preferably at sites with a 

relatively firm lake bottom. 

4. Each clump should be anchored to the lake 

substrate with one or two rolled erosion mat 

staples, and fertilized. 

5. Harvesting and planting is best conducted by 

teams of two. 

6. Plantings can occur in either fall or spring, 

however, harvesting is easier in the fall. 

Roots may still be embedded in ice during the 

spring. 

Conclusions / Lessons Learned: 

The study indicated that transplanting Arctic 

Pendent Grass, Arctophila fulva, for revegetation 

is feasible from the biological perspective; i.e., it 

is possible to successfully transplant the species. 

The economic feasibility of transplanting the species 

was not determined by the study. However, 

the group that funded the project retained the right 

107

to determine economic feasibility. 

There was no advantage in using either an individual 

sprig or a clump of Arctic Pendent Grass 

in terms of speed of harvesting and planting. The 

primary advantage of the clump, again, appears to 

be a higher survival rate and vigor which would allow 

clumps to be planted at a lower density than 

individual sprigs to provide the same cover per unit 

area. Also, clumps are easier to work with because 

they require less work to prepare than an individual 

sprig which requires careful separation. 

References: 

Moore, N. J., and Wright, S. J., 1991. Revegetation 

with Arctophila Fulva, a Final Report 1985-1989 for 

ARCO, Alaska Inc. State of Alaska, Division of Agriculture, 

Plant Materials Center, 50 pp. 

Project Location : 

Mouth of the Kuparuk River. 

North slope of Alaska 

Site Photos : 

Individual Arctophila fulva sprig 

Uprooting Arctophila fulva root clumps using the 

hydraulic extraction method 


Clumps of Arctophila fulva 

Collecting root clumps of Arctophila fulva 

Transect 2, Nest Lake - July 1, 1985 

108 

Transect 2, Nest Lake - Mid August, 1985 

Arctophila fulva in fall colors - August, 2009

Floodplain Vegetation Establishment, North Slope 


Traditionally, the Alaska Plant Materials Center 

(PMC) did not become involved in transect-oriented 

studies. However, this study looked at the three 

most important practices associated with revegetation: 

seeding, fertilization and scarification. By 

contrasting individual processes and combinations 

of processes, techniques were evaluated against 

each other. This made the study an important resource 

for future projects in the region. 

The purpose of this study, required by permit conditions 

from Alaska Department of Fish and Game 

and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, was to determine 

the effectiveness of various treatments in 

vegetation establishment and natural reinvasion of 

species native to an Arctic floodplain environment: 

The following alternatives were considered 

1. Natural invasion (no treatment) of newly deposited 

gravel resulting from construction of river 

training structures in the Sagavanirktok River. 

2. Soil amendments (fertilizer) 

3. Surface alteration (scarification) 

4. Determine the feasibility of a light supplemental 

seeding of at least two naturally occurring 

floodplain species. 


The study was located on a gravel bed deposited 

on the north side of a river training structure 

the Sagavanirktok River, near Trans Alaska Pipeline 

mile post 22. This study was stipulated in the 

permit allowing Alyeska Pipeline Service Company 

to construct an overflow channel adjacent to Spur 

Dike 3. 


The study plot was approximately one acre in 

size, with twelve sub-units representing the various 

treatments. Within each sub-unit, twelve long-term 

photo plots were established. 

Within each sub-unit, a single one-meter squared 

photo plot was permanently established and documented. 

Annual photos were taken and compared 

to evaluate percentage cover. This process continued 

for five years starting in 1995. Three photo 

points were also established to provide a distant 

view of the overall plot. 

Five transects were established, traversing each 

sub-unit. Species identifications were made and 

species variation documented along these paths. 

Records were maintained of all vegetation and 

cover encountered along the length of each 360- 

foot transect. Data collection continued for a total 

of five years starting in 1996. 

The study culminated in a single report following 

the last growing season of the study. The report’s 

intent was to document and evaluate the variation 

in plant density and plant species diversity on the 

sub-plots over the study period. 

Species Used: 

A minimum of two species were targeted for collection 

and, if field conditions permitted, additional 

species associated with flood plains would also be 

collected. It was anticipated that the two primary 

species would be Hedysarum alpinum and Artemisia 

arctica. 

A seed collection trip occurred during mid August, 

1995. Seed collected in 1995 was planted in July 

of 1996. 

The table below lists the amounts and species 

used in the supplemental seeding aspects of the 

study. N represents the number of collections, % 

G represents the average percentage germination, 

and % Mix denotes the percentage of the species 

used in the resultant seed mixture 

Species 

Clean 

Seed (g) 

N 

% 

G 

% 

Mix 

Astragalus alpinus 121.7 3 45 8 

Hedysarum alpinum 130.5 2 50 9 

Hedysarum mackenzii 34.8 1 66 2 

Oxytropis campestris 259.3 7 30 17 

Oxytropis deflexa 86.0 4 14 6 

Oxytropis visicida 475.0 1 79 31 

Artemisia arctica 308.8 2 92 21 

Artemisia borealis 89.6 2 93 6 

Total 1505.7 100 

Results: 

This study was conducted on a single site without 

replication on other gravel bars in the area. Therefore, 

all results and conclusions can be viewed 

as very site specific. During the study unforeseen 

factors became apparent. The first was the grad- 

109

110 

ual downhill grade leading to the river. Dynamic 

change and yearly variation of the physical properties 

of the site were expected. However, these 

were assumed to be uniform over the entire site. 

This presumption proved false. The transects closest 

to the river were affected more by erosion than 

the more elevated transects. This had an obvious 

effect on the data as the study progressed. 

Another factor not initially considered was the 

stilling affect on flowing water of the existing vegetation 

and inanimate objects, such as the rebar 

plot corner markers. This stilling affect allowed 

for silt and fines to drop out of the water column 

during high water periods. This resulted in a tail of 

silt down-stream from each rebar post. Therefore 

a degree of bias was built into the study, based 

on the location and elevation of the plots. These 

factors may have influenced the results. Multiple 

plots, varied plot location, and varied orientation 

would have clarified the issue. Unfortunately, this 

was a single plot study. 

The most significant oversight in plot design was 

the failure to adjust for age of the non-scarified portion. 

By whatever measure, the non-scarified portion 

of the plot is significantly older than the newly 

scarified section. The untreated area represented 

a plant community perhaps 25 years old, albeit on 

a very dynamic land form. The newly scarified portion 

was at most representative of a four-year old 

plant community. Expecting them to match in cover 

or diversity is questionable. 


The study, while somewhat flawed, did lead to 

conclusions. Keeping in mind the limited coverage 

and lack of sufficient replication inherent in the 

study, the following conclusions were reached: 

1. Supplemental seeding did increase plant cover 

and the number of individual plants encountered 

on the transects. The value of this increase could 

not be approximated. Nor could the long-term 

effects of the increased populations on overall 

community health and vigor be determined. 

2. Scarification of the soil surface had a more 

positive impact on re-establishing the vegetation 

community than any other treatments, as 

compared to a stand of existing vegetation. 

3. Fertilizer application had no positive overall 

affect on the results. 

4. This study, though valuable, was unfortunately 

too small in scale. An expanded, more sophisticated 

study could fully answer remaining 

questions and verify the conclusions reached. 

A more in-depth study could also quantify the basic 

question of habitat value. If a habitat value for 

the floodplain communities can be established, the 

direct habitat improvement values of constructing 

river training structures can be quantified and documented. 

Improving habitat through terrain modification 

is a proven method of aiding waterfowl and 

other species. Future river training structures may 

serve a two-fold purpose: habitat improvement and 

protection of a man-made structure. 

References: 

Wright, S. J., 2000. Final Report – Mile Post 22 Revegetation 

Study. State of Alaska, Division of Agriculture, 

Plant Materials Center. 24 pp. 

Project Location: 

Sagavanirktok River, 

North Slope. Near milepost 

22 of the Trans- 

Alaska Pipeline System 

Site Photos: 

Satellite Image: 

SDMI | AlaskaMapped.org 


Gravel bed along river bank, characteristic of area

Plot 6 - July, 1996 

(seeded once, fertilized twice, scarified ) 

Plot 1 (scarified only ) - September, 1996 

Plot 6 - September, 2000 

(seeded once, fertilized twice, scarified ) 

Plot 1 (scarified only) - August, 2000 

Plot 10 (seeded, fertilized once ) - July, 1996 

Plot 8 (control - no treatment) - September, 1996 


Plot 10 (seeded, fertilized once ) - September, 2000 

Plot 8 (control - no treatment) - August, 2000 

111

112 

Project Chariot Site Revegetation Program 



In April 1993, the Alaska Department of Environmental 

Conservation (ADEC) and the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (USFWS) requested that the 

Alaska Plant Materials Center (PMC) assist with 

the revegetation of the Project Chariot site. The 

PMC’s role was limited to developing seed and 

fertilizer specifications. The PMC also agreed to 

supervise the revegetation work and monitor vegetation 

growth following the seeding program. 

The 1993 Project Chariot Rehabilitation project 

was initiated to remove soils contaminated by radioactive 

experiments conducted at the Project 

Chariot site in 1959-1962. The clean-up project 

was requested by the villages of Point Hope, Kivalina, 

Kotzebue, Barrow and others on the North 

Slope and Northwest Arctic Boroughs. 

In 1957, the Atomic Energy Commission started 

the Plowshare Program to study and develop 

peaceful uses for nuclear explosives. In 1958, 

the Ogotoruk Valley in northwest Alaska was selected 

for the Project Chariot site. The plan was to 

detonate a nuclear device and form a commercial 

deep-water harbor in northwest Alaska. 

The Project Chariot site was in a region that had 

no prior nuclear test experimentation, and no scientific 

baseline existed to determine environmental 

effects or even if the blast or blasts could be safely 

conducted. Researchers conducted over 40 environmental 

studies on the site during a period from 

1959-1962. 

These research projects included quantities of 

radioactive material and roughly 15 pounds of soil 

containing radioactive fallout from other nuclear 

tests in Nevada. This contaminated soil material 

was buried in the soil mound left on the site after 

the experiments were concluded. 

Local residents and other groups questioned the 

merits of blasting a harbor in the region. The project 

was dropped in 1962, due to public pressure 

and lack of state support for the plan. 


The Ogotoruk valley is part of the Arctic Coastal 

plain. Vegetation in this area generally consists of 

coastal tundra. 

The revegetation and restoration specifications 

and suggestions used for on the project were codeveloped 

by the PMC and USFWS. The following 

practices were employed: 

After grading, areas to be seeded were in a 

smooth, non-compacted condition. Final contours 

and elevations needed to match surrounding undisturbed 

tundra as much as possible. Seeding with 

native species occurred at a rate of 30 pounds per 

acre, followed by application of 20-20-10 fertilizer 

at a rate of 600 pounds per acre. 

Following the seed and fertilizer application, one 

layer of Excelsior blankets was placed over the 

disturbed areas and pinned according to manufacturer’s 

specifications. In areas where the potential 

for severe thermal erosion existed, two layers of 

blankets were used. 

Seed and fertilizer application was accomplished 

using broadcast methods. The primary application 

method was to use heavy duty cyclone type 

chest seeders. A secondary method was 4-wheeler 

mounted, electrical cyclone type seeders. The Excelsior 

blankets were placed by hand. 

The seed and fertilizer program started on August 

27, 1993. Deep mud at the site (over two feet in 

some areas) created problems for the labor crew. 

When using hand spreaders, maintaining a constant 

stride is critical to successful and effective 

operation. Application of seed and fertilizer was 

less than satisfactory. However, seed and fertilizer 

application was completed in one day. 

Spreading the excelsior blankets started on the 

28th of August. Shortly thereafter, the labor crew 

looked back on the previous day’s work with envy. 

The excelsior was very difficult to apply in the muddy 

conditions. Placement of the excelsior blankets 

was completed on the morning of August 29. This 

was an operation that was not conducted according 

to “text book” standards. 

Species Used: 

% Common Name Scientific Name 

30 ‘Norcoast’ 

Bering Hairgrass 

Deschampsia 

beringensis 

20 ‘Arctared’ Red Fescue Festuca rubra 

20 ‘Alyeska’ Polargrass Arctagrotis latifolia

20 ‘Egan’ American 

Sloughgrass 

10 ‘Tundra’ Glaucous 

Bluegrass 

Beckmannia 

syzigachne 

Poa glauca 

The seeded grass mix was applied at a rate of 30 

pounds per acre. 

Results: 

During the initial August 26, 1993 site assessment, 

it was noted that the tundra damage was 

more severe than anticipated. Frequent passes by 

tracked vehicles and four wheelers had churned 

the access trail into a muddy strip of land. In an effort 

to minimize damage on some areas of the trail, 

traffic lanes were widened in an attempt to avoid 

creating deeper mud-holes. This action helped to 

some extent, although in two areas it simply enlarged 

the surface area of the mud-hole. 

The extremely muddy condition of the trail was 

not anticipated in plan development. In present day 

Alaska, it is not common to find surface damage to 

the degree present at the Project Chariot site. In 

fact, the form of overland travel used at the Chariot 

site is permitted in very few Arctic areas. The 

majority of the surface damage could have been 

easily avoided by using the gravel bed and flood 

plain of Ogotoruk Creek as an access route for the 

mound site. 

Two post-restoration evaluations of the site occurred. 

The final evaluation was on July 15, 1995. 

July is not an optimum time to evaluate an Arctic 

plot. Traditionally, by this date very little vegetative 

growth has occurred in Arctic areas; however, 

the evaluation was conducted in conjunction with 

a planned site visit from the Alaska DEC and the 

U.S. Department of Energy. 

The mound area revegetation was found to be 

performing well. Most of the seeded grass had not 

yet grown above the excelsior blankets by July 15. 

When detailed examinations were conducted and 

the excelsior moved back, better measurements 

were taken. The southwest quadrant of the mound 

exhibited the best growth, achieving approximately 

70% cover. This was followed by the southeast 

quadrant with 20-50% cover, the northwest quadrant 

with 25% cover and the northeast quadrant 

with approximately 20% cover. 

Composition of the seeded grasses was 60% 

Hairgrass, Deschampsia beringensis, 20-30% 

Red Fescue, Festuca rubra, and 5-10% each of 

Sloughgrass, Beckmannia syzigachne, and Po- 

largrass, Arctagrostis latifolia. Tundra Bluegrass, 

Poa glauca, although seeded, was not observed. 

The trail leading to the mound site exhibited areas 

of excellent growth and areas of very poor growth. 

This was similar to observations made in 1994. 

The trail showed signs of reinvasion similar to the 

mound site. The ground cover for the trail ranged 

from 90% to less than 5%, with an overall cover of 

approximately 50% 

No large areas of erosion were noted in 1995. 

One small area of thermal degradation was noted 

on the west side of Snowbank Creek. This may 

stabilize with time. Cross flow drainage patterns 

seemed to be reestablished. 

Decomposition of the excelsior blankets did not 

occur at an acceptable rate. The plastic netting 

on the blankets tore loose from the excelsior and 

created mounds of netting. This plastic material 

resembles a gill net lying on the tundra. No wildlife 

was observed in the plastic netting, however, a 

potential for small animal entanglement did exist. 


• Excelsior blankets should be avoided in Arctic 

areas. 

• The revegetation effort was successful in controlling 

erosion and thermal degradation. 

• Overall, ground cover achieved by seeding the 

site was superior to simply allowing for natural 

reinvasion. 

• Species used performed as well as expected. 

• The revegetation project did not preclude the reinvasion 

or establishment of other native species. 

• Allowing vehicular travel on the trail caused unnecessary 

surface damage. 

• Excelsior blankets may have accelerated or encouraged 

moss growth on the disturbed soils. 

• Tundra damage could have been prevented by 

routing overland travel to the mound site along 

the Ogotoruk Creek floodplain and riverbed to 

prevent tundra damage. 

References: 

Wright, S. J. 1995. Project Chariot Revegetation Program 

1993 – 1995 Final Report. State of Alaska, Division 

of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center, Palmer, 

Alaska. 26 pp. 

O’Neill, D. 1994 The Firecracker Boys St. Martin’s 

Press, New York. 418 pp. 

U.S. Department of Energy 1994. Project Chariot 

Site Assessment and Remedial Action Final Re- 

113

port. U.S. Dept. of Energy, Nevada Operations 

Office, Environmental Restoration Division. DOE/ 

NV-386 UC70 226 pp. 


The site is located in northwestern Alaska, four 

miles to the southeast of Cape Thompson, and 

130 miles northwest of Kotzebue, within the Cape 

Thompson subunit of the Alaska Maritime National 

Wildlife Refuge. 


Single species evaluation plot - August, 1993 



Site Photos: 

Flooded study plots - July, 1995 

Trail and mound area, view to the west - August, 1994 

114 

Graphic: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 

United States Department of Energy 

Map of proposed harbor. The outer outline shows the 

“full scale” plan, with detonations totaling 2.4 megatons. 

The inner outline, a scaled down version, would 

have required blasts of 460 kilotons. 

Close-up of mound area, view to the east - August, 1994

Trail after placement of excelsior mat - August, 1993 

Mound area - view to the east - August, 1994 

Trail, showing effects of heavy traffic - August, 1994 

Mound area - view to the northeast - July, 1995 


Area of massive cross-flow on trail - August, 1993 

Cross-flow area of trail, view east - July, 1995 

Portion of trail, view to the east - August, 1994 

Portion of trail, view to the east - August, 1995 

115


Western Region 

Western Alaska stretches from Cape Steppings to Bristol Bay, and encompasses Bering 

Sea islands such as St. Lawrence, St. Matthew, and the Pribilofs. 

Projects in this area include the cleanup of the MV All Alaskan, on St. Paul Island, and an 

evaluation of reclamation grasses at the Red Dog Mine port site. 

1. Red Dog Mine Port Demonstration Site 

2. M/V All Alaskan, St. Paul Island 

1 

2 

116

Red Dog Mine Port Demonstration Site 


In 1987 Cominco Alaska and the Plant Materials 

Center entered into a partnership that benefited 

both parties. Cominco provided the Plant Materials 

Center with test plot sites at the Red Dog Mine 

and port site for advanced evaluations of potential 

and existing reclamation grasses. 

In addition, Cominco provided a disposal site for 

a demonstration planting. This port site disposal 

site is the subject of this case study. During winter 

of 1988 the PMC developed a restoration plan for 

the solid waste disposal site. This trial intended to 

demonstrate methods of restoration and revegetation 

using adapted native species. 

Coast Type: 

The project site can be characterized as a Coastal 

Tundra lagoon. Coastal barriers trap water above 

the high tide, impounding sea water. This can 

create a brackish mix of salt and fresh water. 


Prior to seeding the abandoned disposal site, 

the existing berms of spoil along the edges were 

pushed back into the pit and the pit was then contoured 

to specification. Specifications called for 

the site to be blended into the surrounding tundra 

landscape. 

Following the earth work, the site was fertilized 

using shoulder-held, broadcast spreaders. Granular 

20-20-20 fertilizer was applied at a rate of 450 

pounds per acre. The areas were seeded at a rate 

of 40 pounds per acre, followed by raking so that 

the seed and fertilizer were incorporated into the 

soil. 

Species used on the site: 

The contoured and graded disposal site was 

seeded with three different seed blends to account 

for differing levels of moisture in the pit. The project 

used the following species native to the region: 




• ‘Norcoast’ Bering Hairgrass, 


• ‘Egan’ American Sloughgrass, 


• Tilesy Wormwood, Artemisia Tilesii 

Results: 

After one growing season the disposal pit seedings 

were performing well. Roughly 75% of the pit 

showed good to excellent stands of grass. This increased 

to 90% in 1989, with a final cover estimate 

of 95% in 1990. The site continued to be monitored 

until 1998. Eventually the site started matching the 

surrounding tundra in both appearance and species 

composition. 


The Cominco/Red Dog Port Disposal Site project 

allowed for the evaluation of newly developed native 

species cultivars in Northwestern Alaska. The 

plant material performed well and survived the rigors 

of the climate and soil conditions. While a cover 

of plants native to the region was established on 

the site, they were not necessarily native to the site. 

Over time the site did revert to a plant composition 

more closely matching the surrounding tundra. 

The rate of re-colonization by the surrounding 

sedge community was observed to be more rapid 

than similar areas where non-native species were 

used in revegetation efforts. The use of species not 

specifically native to the site did not prevent native 

species from reclaiming the disturbance. It can only 

be assumed however, that the seeding effort aided 

in the process in either reducing the time needed 

or actual cover attained by the sedge reinvasion. 

References: 

Wright, S. J. 1990. Final Report on Data and Observations 

Obtained From the Red Dog Mine Evaluation 

and Demonstration Plots. State of Alaska, Division of 

Agriculture, Plant Materials Center. 16 pp. 


The demonstration plots were located just south of 

Point Hope, on the north western coast of Alaska. 

117

Site Photos : 

Disposal area prior to revegetation - July, 1988 

Disposal area, view to the east - September, 1989 


Performance of seeded grasses - September, 1990 

Stand of native grass near port site - July, 1988 

Grass cover estimated at 95% - September, 1990 

Seeding site using broadcast method - July, 1988 

Disposal area, view to the east - September, 1989 Vegetation fully established - September, 1996 

118

M/V All Alaskan Cleanup, St. Paul Island 


On March 20th, 1987, a 340 foot long fish processor 

became grounded on the north shore of St. 

Paul Island, part of the Alaska Maritime National 

Wildlife Refuge. The ship and cargo became a total 

loss, and the wreck was subsequently cut up 

and removed. 

Immediately after the grounding, the coast guard 

began removing volatile POLs – Petroleum, Oil, 

and Lubricants, from the ship. Once the immediate 

danger of contamination was over, cleanup of the 

M/V All Alaskan waited several years to commence. 

Tanadgusix Corporation (TDX), a local contractor, 

was hired to construct roads from the beach where 

the shipwreck occurred to the village of St. Paul, 

so that the pieces of the ship could be removed by 

barge. This necessitated cutting a sizeable hole in 

the dune formations on the island, as well as creating 

road beds strong enough to bear the weight of 

steel sections of the dismantled ship. Road beds 

were constructed of sand and scoria, a volcanic 

rock. 

In 1993, the removal of the M/V All Alaskan was 

complete, and restoration efforts began on both 

the road bed and the damaged coastal dune. 

Coast Type: 

This cleanup effort took place on St. Paul Island, 

in the Bering Sea. St. Paul is the northernmost island 

in the Pribilofs, volcanic islands dominated 

by tundra and meadow vegetation. The coastline 

where the vessel ran aground was sandy, with 

large coastal dunes supporting a community of 

Beach Wildrye, Elymus arenarius. 


The dune area was reconstructed, and subsequently 

revegetated using sprigs of locally harvested 

Beach Wildrye. Sprigs were planted on 18’ 

centers. 

Natural reinvasion was the chosen method of revegetation 

for the .9 mile access road, augmented 

with 20-20-10 fertilizer at a rate of 400 lbs / acre. 

Fertilizer was applied using hand-held broadcast 

spreaders. Snow drift control fabric was erected 

as barrier fencing to prevent vehicular traffic from 

interfering with natural reinvasion. 


Beach Wildrye, Elymus arenarius, was the only 

species used on the site. 

Results: 

The coastal dune along the beach was rebuilt from 

each side. Some doubt existed as to whether the 

sprigged vegetation would take hold on the beach 

side of the dune, and a gap was left in transplanted 

vegetation. Upon subsequent examinations, this 

was the only area where vegetation did not establish, 

underscoring the high saline tolerance of the 

species. 


Sprigging with Beach Wildrye was an effective 

means of restoring coastal dunes. 

References: 

Smith, Phil. 1993-1994 Personal Communications 

Whitney, John. 1987 F/V All Alaskan Incident Report. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

2pp. 


St. Paul Island, Western Alaska 

Site Photos: 


The M/V All Alaskan, shipwrecked on St. Paul Island 

Photo: Art Sowls (US FWS) 

Grounded M/V All Alaskan, Beach Wildrye community 

119

Photos: Phil Smith (PSA Inc.) 

Hairgrass and dunegrass community on St. Paul 

Newly sprigged roadway area protected from drifting 

sand using snow drift control fabric 

Areas damaged in the initial shipwreck response 

Sprigged Beach Wildrye along disused roadbed 

Beach dune ridge, before construction of roadway 

120 

20 foot gap in dune ridge, along former roadbed 

Overview of project area, after sprigging


Southwest / Aleutians Region 

The Aleutian Islands and Southwest Alaska are filled with history. From the Japanese invasion 

of Kiska and Attu during the Second World War, to the US nuclear activities on Amchitka 

and throughout the Cold War; this westernmost area of the United States has been a key 

strategic outpost. With the advent of long-range weapons radar and weapons systems, much 

of the military infrastructure in this region has fallen into disuse. Federal law requires that formerly 

used defense sites are restored to their pre-disturbance condition, wherever possible, 

and that was the impetus behind several projects reviewed in this section. 

Two other projects were necessitated by safety considerations on Shemya and Adak Islands. 

Both made use of transplants of Beach Wildrye, a process that can greatly enhance sand retention 

on erosion prone beaches. For more in-depth information about sprigging with Beach 

Wildrye, please refer to Appendix A: Beach Wildrye Planting Guide. 

1. Lateral Clear Zone, Shemya Island 

2. Natural Reinvasion of Peat Soils, Shemya Island 

3. Coastal Dune Restoration, Adak Island 

4. Pringle Hill Sand Quarry, Adak Island 

5. Landfill Restoration, Adak Island 

6. Coastal Wetland Revegetation, Kodiak Island 

3,4,5 

6 

1,2 

121

Lateral Clear Zone (LCZ) , Shemya Island 


Initial Shemya Air Force Base, Lateral Clear Zone 

(LCZ) safety enhancement began in 1982. Clearing 

and grading of existing vegetated dunes exposed 

a sand layer to wind erosion and transport. 

Attempting to fix the problem of dunes in the LCZ 

created the more severe problem of sand on the 

active runway surface. This created a maintenance 

problem for Air Force personnel assigned to keep 

the runways clear. In addition, mechanical damage 

by the sand to aircraft was a concern. 

Initial erosion control seeding took place in 1983, 

but failed as wind erosion would strip seed beds 

prior to establishment. In 1985, the Air Force contracted 

the services of the Plant Materials Center 

so that a revegetation and erosion control plan 

could be developed for the LCZ. A Beach Wildrye 

sprigging demonstration program was initiated utilizing 

Air Force personnel. A major contract was 

later awarded to a resident contractor on Shemya. 

Typical cross-section of Lateral Clear Zone (LCZ) 

A small bulldozer was modified by placing ‘tiger 

teeth’ along the bottom of the blade. Back-blading 

on float with these teeth welded in place was found 

to be an effective means of creating furrows that 

met design planting criteria. 

Sprigs were planted using the “drop and stomp” 

method. The on-site Brillion drill seeder was inoperable 

for seed distribution, so the seed mixture 

was applied using a broadcast method. Seed was 

incorporated into the soil by running the Brillion 

seeder over the broadcast seed. 

Cross-section of LCZ Beach Wildrye planting plan 

Species Used: 

Graphic: US Army Corps of Engineers 

Beach Wildrye sprigs were planted first, and the 

area was subsequently over-seeded with the following 

mixture at a rate of 60 lbs / acre. 


Graphic: US Army Corps of Engineers 

Shemya Island receives less than 28 inches of 

precipitation per year. Seasonal variations in temperature 

are small, with average daily temperatures 

ranging from 31 degrees fahrenheit in January to 

45 degrees in July. Soils consist of 83% sand, 12% 

silt, and 5% clay. The most prevalent climatic factors 

are wind and fog. 

Severe winds, at times in excess of 70 knots, can 

lash the island, easily transporting erodible sands. 

The strongest winds occur during late fall, winter, 

and early spring. 


Beach Wildrye sprigs were harvested from natural 

stands. One harvested clump of grass typically 

provided three usable sprigs. Mechanical harvesting 

was achieved using a standard track-mounted 

backhoe or front-end loader. 

122 



35 ‘Norcoast’ Bering 

Hairgrass 

Deschampsia 

beringensis 

5 Annual Ryegrass Lolium multiflorum 

Fertilizer was applied over the seed mixture at a 

rate of 400 lbs / acre. The fertilizer had a composition 

of 14-30-14. A single application of ammonium 

nitrate was applied 6 weeks after seeding and the 

initial fertilizer application. 

Results: 

The site was monitored from 1986 until 2008. The 

east end of the LCZ maintained an effective vegetative 

cover, redeveloped an effective and natural 

foredune and maintained the desired and designed 

ten percent grade. The west end of the LCZ did 

not receive the Beach Wildrye treatment and has 

reverted to natural dune complex similar to what 

existed prior to the safety enhancement project 

conducted in 1982. 

Species composition, as examined in September 

1987, was as follows:

75% Perennial grass, including Beach Wildrye 

18% Annual grass 

5% Bare ground 

2% Invading plants 

The overall ground cover was 80-85%, with the 

following composition: 

41% Beach Wildrye 

43% Perennial grass 

15% Annual grass 

Approximately 90% of the Beach Wildrye sprigs 

had become established by September 1987. 

The west end of the LCZ continued to perform as 

planned up to the last evaluation in 2008. The ten 

percent grade has been maintained by the vegetation 

cover, the nearly 100 percent vegetative cover 

has prevented erosion and Beach Wildrye dominates 

the site. 


Leymus mollis is an effective species for revegetation 

and erosion control on coastal dunes. 

• Transplanting the species is cost effective: 

350-400 sprigs can be planted per man hour. 

• 90% survival can be expected. 

• A one-acre natural stand of Beach Wildrye will 

provide enough material to plant 7 acres. 

• Uniform spacing of planted sprigs produces 

uniform sand accumulation. 

• Clump planting produced dune or irregular 

sand accumulation. 

• Leymus can be used as an engineering tool to 

control or build dunes. 

Beach Wildrye sprigging is a viable method to 

control erosion in areas that can support the species. 

This technique for dune / coastal restoration 

has, as a result of the Shemya and other similar 

projects, become a well-established practice, and 

the department of defense deserved credit for allowing 

this progressive research to continue. 

References: 

Wright, S. J., 2008. Long-term Monitoring of Dune Stabilization 

on the Eareckson AFS Lateral Clear Zone on 

Shemya Island, Alaska. 2008 Proceedings for American 

Society of Agronomy Annual Meeting. Houston, Texas. 

Wright, S. J., 1998. Results of a Ten-Year Study of 

Beach Wildrye Establishment and Sand Control on the 

Eareckson AFS Lateral Clear Zone-Shemya Island, 

Alaska in Abstracts of the 1998 American Society of 

Agronomy Annual Meeting. Baltimore, Maryland. 1 pp. 

Wright, S. J., 1987. Sand Stabilization Within the Lateral 

Clear Zone on Shemya Air Force Base. Abstracts 

of the American Society of Agronomy Annual Meeting, 

November 30, 1987, Atlanta, GA. 

Wright, S. J., 1986. Beach Wildrye (Elymus arenarius) 

Sprigging on Shemya Air Force Base, Lateral Clear 

Zone – A Qualitative Study in Response to Questions 

Arising From Contract DACA 85-86-C-0042. State of 

Alaska, Division of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center, 

37 pp. 

Wright, S. J., Fanter, L. H. & Ikeda, J. M., 1987. Sand 

Stabilization Within the Lateral Clear Zone at Shemya 

Air Force Base, Alaska Using Beach Wildrye, (Elymus 

arenarius). State of Alaska, Division of Agriculture, 

Plant Materials Center and U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Alaska District. 16 pp. 


Shemya Island, Aleutians west region 

Aeriel Photo: 

Site Photos: 

US A.C.E. 

Photo: Stoney Wright ( AK PMC) 

Mechanical trenching with ‘Tiger Teeth’ - May, 1987 

123

Hand-sprigging underway at the LCZ - May, 1987 


‘Drop and Stomp’ planting technique - May, 1987 

Beach Wildrye roots and rhizomes stabilize erodible soils 

Sprigging of Beach Wildrye completed - May, 1987 

Vegetative cover, 20 years after project - June, 2006 

Four months after planting - September, 1987 

Top of LCZ, abutting runway - September, 2008 

124 

Vegetation on the LCZ - June, 1995 

View of west end of LCZ - September, 2008

Natural Reinvasion of Peat Soils, Shemya Island 


Species Used: 

The revegetation effort took place on the island 

of Shemya, near the western edge of the Aleutian 

Chain. The entire four mile long and two mile wide 

island is a U.S Air Force installation. 

In 1991, the Alaska Plant Materials Center received 

a request to help the USAF close unnecessary 

roads on Eareckson Air Station, Shemya 

Island. These roads were deemed to be problematic 

because they traversed a watershed area that 

supplied water needed to operate facilities. Fuel 

spilled from vehicles using these unnecessary 

roads would have put the total potable water supply 

of the island at risk. 

To render the roads impassable, peat blocks from 

excavation activities on the island were dumped on 

the existing road surfaces. This action made driving 

on the roads impossible. 


Shemya is a small island near the west end of 

the Aleutian Island chain with harsh environmental 

conditions. The island receives less than 28 inches 

of precipitation per year. Seasonal variations in 

temperature are small, with average temperatures 

ranging from 31 F in January to 45 F in July. The 

project area was located in upland sedge and grass 

communities. 


The Air Force was presented several options, 

including seeding, enhanced natural reinvasion, 

sprigging with Beach Wildrye, and charged overburden 

veneer. 

The option selected was charged overburden 

veneer; the spreading of topsoil (containing naturally 

occurring seed and other propagules) over the 

abandoned roads. No efforts were made to scarify 

or otherwise prepare the underlying gravel road 

bed; peat from another construction project was 

simply dumped into place. 

The process was observed for two years before all 

the other options previously mentioned were totally 

dismissed. At that point the natural reinvasion of 

native species was determined to be progressing 

at an acceptable rate. 

This project relied upon natural reinvasion. 

The peat used was neither seeded nor fertilized. 

Results: 

The following species were first to establish a 

presence in the transplanted soils, as observed in 

1993: 

Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis, 

Spike Bentgrass, Agrostis exarata, 

Cow Parsnip, Heracleum lanatum, 

Beach Lovage, Ligusticum scoticum, 

Kamchatka Thistle, Cirsium kamtschicum 

In 1995, vegetative cover was approaching 60% 

on approximately 80% of the area. Several new 

species had colonized the area, including: 

Alpine Timothy, Phleum alpinum, 

Large-glume Bluegrass, Poa macrocaylx, 

Arctic Rush, Juncus articus, 

Pearly Everlast, Anaphalis magaritaceae, 

Unalaska Mugwart, Artemisia unalaskensis 

By the final evaluation (conducted in 1996), a 90- 

95% vegetative cover existed, and species composition 

had increased to 31 species: 

Scientific Name 

Leymus mollis 

Poa macrocaylx 

Conioselinum chinense 

Geranium erianthum 

Trisetum spicatum 

Lupinus nootkatensis 

Carex macrocheta 

Luzula multiflora 

Lathyrus maritimus 


Heracleum lanatum 

Cacalia auriculata 

Taraxicum officinale 

Atremisia unalaskensis 

Anapholis margenatius 


Achillea borealis 

Agrostis exarata 

Common Name 

Beach Wildrye 

Big-leaf Bluegrass 

Hemlock Parsley 

Geranium 

Spike Trisetum 

Nootka Lupine 

Longawn Sedge 

Woodrush 

Beach Pea 

Beach Lovage 

Cow Parsnip 

Indian Plantain 

Dandelion 

Unalaska Artemesia 

Pearly Everlast 

Beach Fleabane 

Boreal Yarrow 

Spike Bentgrass 

125

Juncus arctica 

Juncus falcate 

Festuca altaica 

Festuca rubra 

Carex aqutaalis 

Taraxacum sp. 

Galium sp. 

Cardamine sp. 

Angelica lucida 

Phleum alpine 

Equisetum sp. 

Epilobium sp. 

Mosses 

Arctic Rush 

Rush 

Altai Fescue 

Red Fescue 

Water Sedge 

Dandelion sp. 

Bed Straw 

Cardamine 

Angelica 

Alpine Timothy 

Horsetail sp. 

Fireweed 

Wright, S. J. and Moore, N. J., 1994. Revegetation 

Manual for Eareckson Air Force Station Shemya, Alaska; 

State of Alaska, Division of Agriculture, Plant Materials 

Center, Palmer, Alaska. 65 pp + appendices. 


Shemya Island, 

Aleutians West region. 

Site Photos: 

Hospital lane with peat overburden - 1992 


The fill material used was taken from a more 

upland site, which resulted in a drastically different 

species composition, as compared to the surrounding 

tundra wetlands. An additional evaluation 

in 2008 reported a 100 percent cover on the 

former roads and charged overburden veneer. 


Allowing natural reinvasion to occur on peat soils 

was very successful. Often blocks of material dry 

out and become difficult to re-wet, however this 

was not a concern on Shemya, due to the island’s 

wet climate. This method of restoration should be 

considered for use on sites in the Aleutian chain or 

areas with climates similar to the Aleutians. 

Future users of the charged overburden veneer 

technique need to be aware of the potential hydrologic 

effects of using fill from different areas, as well 

as the likelihood that aggressive invaders may be 

present in the species composition of transplanted 

soils. 

References: 

Wright, S. J., 1997. Final Report – Natural Revegetation 

of Peat Soils on Eareckson Air Station, Shemya Island, 

Alaska – A Qualitative Study of a Natural Process. 


Center, Palmer, AK. 21 pp. 

Wright, S. J., 1995. Natural Revegetation of Peat Soils 

on Eareckson AFS, Shemya, Alaska, Abstracts of the 

1995 American Society of Agronomy Meeting, St. Louis, 

MO. Oct. 30-Nov. 3, 1995. 1 pp. 

Hospital lane, vegetation cover - 1996 

Terminal way, view to the north - 1993 

Terminal way, view to the north - 1996 

126

Barst lane, view to the north - 1992 

Terminal way, vegetation cover - 1996 


Terminal way, vegetation cover - 1996 



Area east of Hanger 4 - September, 1992 

Area east of Hanger 4 - 1996 

Barst lane, vegetation cover - 1996 

Barst lane, vegetation cover - 1996 

127

128 

Coastal Dune Restoration, Adak Island 


This dune restoration project was intended to rebuild 

and protect a coastal foredune adjacent to a 

road on Adak Island. A major storm in 1987 destroyed 

most of the existing foredune formation 

through wind and wave action, and resulted in 

sand blowing onto the roadway. 


Adak Island is characterized by severe winter 

storms and heavy ocean surf. The project site 

was on an open bay with significant fetch, allowing 

for severe storms to cause direct impact on 

the shoreline. During the study period it was determined 

the 94% of annual sand accretion or accumulation 

occurs between September and May. 


Beach Wildrye was chosen because it is native to 

the area, well adapted to sandy soils, and is usually 

found on foredunes and active dunes. Its aggressive 

growth tendencies and ability to survive 

burial by blowing and accumulating sand made it 

the best choice to quickly stabilize and re-establish 

the foredune. 

Sprigs of Beach Wildrye were planted by hand, 

in rows spaced between 12 and 18 inches apart. 

Sprigging was the chosen method of planting due 

to the high likelihood of wind erosion and sand accretion. 

Availability also was a factor in the decision 

to use Beach Wildrye sprigs; seed of Beach 

Wildrye was simply not available. 

Height markers were placed into the dune during 

re-planting, and used to measure sand accumulation. 

In 2009, final dune height measurements 

were taken using indirect measurements, as the 

fixes elevation markers were removed during metal 

clean-up programs. 

Species Used: 

The only species used on this project was Beach 

Wildrye, Leymus mollis. No seeded grasses were 

used in the project. The area was fertilized once at 

the time of planting with 20-20-10 granular fertilizer 

at a rate of 500 pounds per acre. 

Results: 

The plantings were successful in re-establishing 

the coastal foredune. Areas closest to the road 

and more distant from the coastline had the highest 

initial cover. However, the vegetation began 

to advance towards the ocean over time. Most 

importantly, the height of the foredune increased 

significantly, as shown in the following chart: 

(created in 1998, based on 1990-1994 data) 

The height of the foredune, when measured in 

2009, nearly matched the height predicted in 1998. 

Also, the prediction of road inundation did come to 

pass and clearing the road of sand is now a constant 

maintenance issue. 


Long-term revegetation with Beach Wildrye is an 

effective and practical means of stabilizing coastal 

dunes in sandy soils. 

References: 

Wright, S. J. 2009., Long-Term Monitoring of Dune 

Re-Establishment and Sand Quarry Restoration Utilizing 

Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis On the Former Adak 

Naval Air Station On Adak Island, Alaska. in Proceedings: 

2009 Annual Meeting of the American Society of 

Agronomy, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 

Wright, S. J., 2007. Alaska Coastal Dune Restoration 

and Stabilization with Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis. In 

Proceedings: International Coastal Dune Restoration 

Conference, 3-5 October, 2007. Santander, Spain. 

Wright, S. J., 1994. Effects of Beach Wildrye on Foredune 

Dynamics on Adak Naval Air Station, Adak, Alaska. 

Abstracts of 1994 American Society of Agronomy 

meeting. Seattle, WA. November 13-18, 1 pp. 

Wright, S.J., 1989. Sand Control on Adak Naval Air 

Station. Abstracts of the 1989 Annual Meeting of the 

American Society of Agronomy, October 17, 1989, Las 

Vegas, Nevada. 


Adak Island, West Aleutians

Site Photos: 

Photo: US Navy 

Photo: US Navy 

Foredune after major storm - 1987 


Coastal dunes during winter of 1987 


Foredune development - 1992 

Sprigs of Beach Wildrye planted - 1989 





Formation of coastal dune - 1994 




Coastal dune formation - 2008 


129

130 

Pringle Hill Sand Quarry, Adak Island 


This project was initially conceived as a standard 

erosion control seeding with supplemental Beach 

Wildrye sprigging. The project took place at an 

abandoned sand quarry on Adak Island, approx. 

1200 miles southwest of Anchorage. The quarry 

had been in use since World War II. The northern 

half of Adak island was at the time an active military 

installation, and the fifth largest town in Alaska. 

The southern half of the island is part of the Alaska 

Maritime National Wildlife Refuge, administered by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

The erosion control effort was initiated to closeout 

the quarry and prevent the pit from becoming 

a source of fugitive sand. Wind transport of sand 

was a constant maintenance problem. A more far 

reaching goal was the capture and recruitment of 

new sand from the windward beach in order to 

eventually replenish the sand quarry for future use. 


The project site is a large coastal dune that has been 

mined to near sea-level. Adak Island experiences 

severe winds and consistent overcast conditions. 

Fog is present for approximately 1/2 of the year. 

The climate is moderate, with temperatures ranging 

from 20 - 60 degrees Fahrenheit, and 64 inches 

of precipitation received each year. Vegetation 

consists of mostly grasses and tundra, and is 

classified as a hypermaritime meadow. 


The revegetation program at the quarry was a 

three-year effort relying on local Navy Sea Bees 

as the planting crews. During one week periods 

in May 1993-1995 the quarry was fully seeded 

and sprigged. Back blading with a loader bucket 

created the trenches for the Beach Wildrye sprigs. 

The Beach Wildrye sprigs were planted by the 

‘drop & stomp’ method. 

Each year following the sprigging effort, the newly 

planted sprigs were over-seeded with commercially 

supplied ‘Norcoast’ Bering Hairgrass and two 

varieties of Red Fescue; ‘Boreal’ and ‘Arctared’. 

Seed was applied at a rate of 30 pounds per acre 

and a ratio of 60% Hairgrass and 20% for each of 

the Red Fescue varieties. 

Fertilizer was applied once at a rate of 500 pounds 

per acre. The locally acquired sprigs of Beach Wildrye 

were transplanted uniformly across the area 

on 3 to 4 foot centers. 

Species Used: 

Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis was the species 

of choice. The majority of the revegetation effort 

was dedicated to work with this species. All Beach 

Wildrye was collected near the planting site. Harvest 

areas received an application of fertilizer to 

encourage rapid regrowth to replace harvested 

transplants. 

Commercial seed mix used on the project 

consisted of a ratio of 60% ‘Norcoast’ Bering 

Hairgrass, Deschampsia beringensis; 20% ‘Boreal’ 

Red Fescue, Festuca rubra and 20% ‘Arctared’ 

Red Fescue, Festuca rubra. 

Results: 

As expected the Beach Wildrye dominated the 

project area, a site to which it was highly adapted. 

Surprisingly, native species not seeded or sprigged 

started invading treated areas immediately after 

revegetation. Each year, the frequency and diversity 

of invading species increased. Neither the Red 

Fescue nor the Beach Wildrye seemed to preclude 

the natural reinvasion process. Red Fescue has 

often been criticized for being too aggressive and 

sod forming to allow the re-establishment of less 

aggressive native species. 

By 2009, virtually none of the seeded grasses 

were observed in the revegetated areas. The 

sprigged Beach Wildrye was universally present, 

and several native species had colonized the area. 

Invading native species consisted primarily of: 


Heracleum lanatum 


Honckenya peploides 

Calamagrostis 

canadensis 


Lathyrus maritimus 

Poa macrocalyx 

Festuca vivipara 

Common Name 

Cow Parsnip 

Beach Fleabane 

Sea Sandwort 

Bluejoint Reedgrass 

Beach Lovage 

Beach Pea 

Big-leaf Bluegrass 

Viviparous Fescue

Agrostis exarata 

Bromus sitchensis 

Luzula multiflora 

Spike Bentgrass 

Sitka Brome 

Woodrush 


Long-term revegetation with Beach Wildrye is effective 

and practical on dunes and sandy soils. The 

seeded grasses, though they did not persist, did 

stabilize the planting site in the early stage. Natural 

reinvasion of species native to the island could 

be attributed to the creation of a favorable microenvironment 

suitable for seed catch and germination. 

Fertilizer application may also have played a 

role in the success of invading species as they only 

appear in areas that were fertilized. The latter observation 

was clear and striking. 

References: 

Wright, S. J. 2009. Long-Term Monitoring of Dune Re- 

Establishment and Sand Quarry Restoration Utilizing 

Beach Wildrye, On the Former Adak Naval Air Station 

On Adak Island, Alaska. Proceedings for the 2009 Annual 

Meeting of the American Society of Agronomy, 

Pittsburgh, PA. (Abstract). 

Wright, S. J. 1995 Final Report – Pringle Hill Sand 

Quarry Restoration Project. Alaska Dept. of Natural Resource, 

Plant Materials Center, Palmer, AK. 36 pp. 

Wright, S. J. 1995. Restoration of a Sand Quarry Located 

at Adak NAF, Adak, Alaska. Abstracts of the 1995 

American Society of Agronomy Meeting, St. Louis, MO. 

October 30 - November 3, 1995. 1 pp. 


Adak Island, Aleutians west region 

Pringle Hill sand quarry prior to revegetation - 1993 

Quarry area preparation and sprigging - May, 1994 

Sprigging the quarry area by hand - May, 1994 


Site Photos: 

Beach Wildrye after one seasons growth - May, 1995 

131

Area over-seeded with seed mix - September, 1995 

September, 1999 


One year after seed mix applied - September, 1996 

Seeded grass presence nearly zero - August, 2009 


132 


Sand quarry species diversity - August, 2009

Landfill Restoration, Adak Island 

of 450-500 pounds per acre. 


Results: 

In 1997, the Alaska Plant Materials Center entered 

into an agreement with the U.S. Navy to monitor 

and assist in the revegetation of four abandoned 

landfills on Adak Island. These landfills ranged in 

size from 9 acres to 70 acres. 

The PMC was tasked with project plan review and 

field quality control assessment. This entailed reviewing 

project documents and making recommendations 

regarding revegetation methods, specifications, 

scheduling, and material procurement, as 

well as assessing site preparation, application and 

execution of the plan, and success of the revegetation 

activity. 


The coastline type on Adak Island varies greatly. 

The abandoned landfills were located primarily on 

upland coastal areas, though some were on the 

coastline or in alpine environments. 


Construction services were contracted for hydroseeding. 

All sites were contoured and graded prior 

to seeding. 

The White Alice and Roberts landfills were 

mulched with straw and covered with excelsior 

blankets after seeding. This resulted in poor vigor 

of the grasses, attributable in part to the insulating 

effect of the straw mulch and excelsior blankets. 

Species Used: 

The native seed mix used for the Palisades, White 

Alice, and Roberts’s landfill consisted of: 


60 

‘Norcoast’ 

Bering Hairgrass 

Deschampsia 

beringensis 

20 ‘Boreal’ Red Fescue Festuca rubra 



Only erosion prone areas of the Metals Landfill 

were seeded. The majority of the site was identified 

for natural reinvasion by native species. Seeded areas 

received the seed mixture noted above. 

The landfills were to be fertilized once at the time 

of planting with 20-20-10 granular fertilizer at a rate 

The Palisades landfill was revegetated in 1996, 

and by 1998 supported nearly a 100% cover of 

perennial grasses. Vegetation cover was thriving 

and reinvasion by other native species was noted. 

There were no signs of erosion. 

Slope areas that were revegetated in 1997 at 

the Metals landfill supported a cover of 85-90% in 

1998. No erosion was observed in these areas. Areas 

set aside for natural revegetation showed signs 

of initial reinvasion, although very minimal (

References: 

Wright, S. J. 1999. Final Report – Landfill Restoration on 

Adak Island. State of Alaska, Division of Agriculture, Plant 

Materials Center. 31 pp. 

Wright, S. J. 1991. Assessment of Revegetation on the 

Aleutian Islands – Adak, Amchitka, Shemya, and Attu. 


Center. 12 pp. 


Adak Island, Aleutians west region 

Excelsior matting on White Alice landfill - 1997 


\ 

Satellite Photo: SDMI | AlaskaMapped.org 

Site Photos: 

White Alice landfill after grading - 1997 

Budding Annual ryegrass emerging through excelsior 

matting, White Alice landfill - Fall, 1997 

Annual ryegrass emergence, Roberts landfill - 1998 

Unraveling excelsior at White Alice landfill - 1998 

Vegetation in decline, Roberts landfill - 1999 

134 

Excelsior matting bunched up along fence - 1998 

Vegetation stand in decline after 1998 seeding, at 

Roberts landfill - 1999

Coastal Wetland Revegetation, Kodiak Island 

By Dave Ward (Jacobs Engineering) & Estrella Campellone (USACE, AK District) 


Under the Formerly Used Defense Sites Program, 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers contracted with 

Jacobs Engineering to clean-up and restore the 

Asphalt Disposal Area (ADA) located in Kodiak, 

Alaska. This effort sought to excavate pervasive 

heavy petroleum contamination and re-establish 

conditions similar to those which may have existed 

prior to contamination of the site by Kodiak Naval 

Station during or following World War II. The lowest 

portion of the 1.6-acre valley was probably a 

wetland while higher areas graded toward upland 

vegetation (grass, alder, and Sitka spruce). 


The ADA Valley, located between Buskin Hill and 

Artillery Hill about 1 mile north of the Buskin River 

and 4 miles south of the city of Kodiak, opens onto 

St. Paul Harbor and Chiniak Bay. Although protected 

from the open ocean by a series of islands and 

reefs, the shingle beach and beach ridge at the 

mouth of the valley is occasionally overtopped by 

surf and storm surges created by hurricane-force 

easterly winds. The valley itself is sheltered by adjacent 

hills. Seawater usually seeps through the 

beach ridge at high tide, maintaining brackish conditions 

in a 0.45-acre pond. Heavy rains can raise 

the pond level, reversing the direction of seepage 

and thoroughly flushing the pond with fresh water. 

Precipitation at the nearby Kodiak Airport averages 

over 77 inches per year, with as much as 5 inches 

falling in 24 hours. 


In 2005, four years after the ADA valley was excavated 

and backfilled with shot rock, the Corps 

Environmental Resources Section and Jacobs 

Engineering teamed to design and re-establish 

emergent wetlands at the site. Work began by 

spreading a 6 to 12 inch layer of gravelly silty 

sand as subsoil followed, in the wetland area, by 

approximately 1 foot of organic-rich sandy silt topsoil. 

The topsoil was salvaged from a development 

project on Spruce Cape, a few miles to the north, 

and probably contained a significant bank of native 

seed, which augmented the intentional plantings. 

The upland area was hydroseeded with a standard 

Alaskan mix of equal parts perennial Ryegrass 

(Lolium perenne), Arctared Fescue (Festuca rubra), 

and Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensis) plus 

mulch and fertilizer, applied at a rate of 20 pounds 

per 1,000 square feet. 

In June 2006, the first attempt to revegetate the 

wetland utilized seed and commercially grown 

seedlings of species observed in other Kodiak wetlands. 

Species were planted in zones around the 

pond based on hydrology and soil conditions. The 

zones ranged from brackish and waterlogged soils 

at the normal pond level to soils saturated with 

fresh water during flooding, to well-drained soils 

at the edge of the uplands. From pond to upland, 

the project planted Lyngbye’s Sedge (Carex lyngbyei, 

seedlings), Awl-fruited Sedge (Carex stipata, 

seedlings), American Sloughgrass (Beckmannia 

syzigachne as seed, 0.7 pounds per 1,000 square 

feet), Bering Hairgrass (Deschampsia beringensis, 

seedlings), and Large-flower Speargrass (Poa eminens 

as seed, 0.2 pounds per 1,000 square feet). 

Seedlings were planted on a 1.5 foot grid. 

In late August 2006, when it became apparent that 

the planting was growing slowly, 20-20-10 fertilizer 

was applied at a rate of 13 pounds per 1,000 

square feet (2.6 pounds nitrogen per 1,000 square 

feet). A gentle 0.5-inch watering followed. Although 

a significant portion of the planting appeared to be 

established by the end of the growing season in 

late September, winter wiped out most of the plants 

through frost-kill, ice movement, and heavy rains. 

Bare areas were reseeded in June 2007 with a 

grass-seed mixture designed to grow over the full 

range of conditions ranging from brackish and 

palustrine wetlands to uplands. Seed was distributed 

at a density of approximately 2 pounds per 

1,000 square feet and covered with approximately 

1/8 inch of peat moss. In conjunction with reseeding, 

six large vegetative plugs from the Monashka 

Creek estuary tested the viability of transplantation. 

Four plugs of Lyngbye’s Sedge from the upper 

intertidal zone were planted at the low-water edge 

of the pond, and two plugs of beach wild rye from 

the supra-tidal zone were planted at an elevation 

approximately 1 foot higher. 

After reseeding, 8-32-16 fertilizer was applied to 

both uplands and wetlands at a rate of 12 pounds 

per 1,000 square feet (1 pound of nitrogen per 

1,000 square feet). Although grasses require nitrogen 

primarily, this balanced fertilizer should continue 

to provide some benefit, especially to non- 

135

136 

grasses, after the nitrogen is exhausted. 

Species Used: 

Palustrine-Upland Seed Mix: 


40 Arctared Fescue Festuca rubra 

25 Wainwright Wheatgrass Elymus trachycaulus 

25 Bering Hairgrass 

Deschampsia 

beringensis 


Transplanted Plugs*: 

Quantity Common Name Scientific Name 

4 Lyngbye’s Sedge Carex lyngbyei 

2 Beach Wildrye Leymus mollis 

* Each plug consisted of a rootball approximately 8 inches in 

diameter, containing a mature clump of the given species. 

Results: 

Abundance* 

Dominant Species after Two Seasons 

Common Name 


5 Arctared Fescue Festuca rubra 

4 

American 

Sloughgrass 

Beckmannia 

syzigachne 

3.5 Rough Bentgrass Agrostis scabra 

3.5 

Moss 

(undifferentiated) 

— 

2 

Wainwright 

Wheatgrass 

Elymus 

trachycaulus 

1.5 Timothy Phleum pratense 

1 Bering Hairgrass 

Deschampsia 

beringensis 


1 Sedge Carex sp. 

0.5 Scurvy Grass 

Cochlearia 

sessifolia 

* Five zones; awarded 0, 0.5 or 1 point per zone. 0 = absent or 

poor growth, 0.5 = acceptable growth with areas exceeding 25% 

cover, 1 = excellent growth with areas exceeding 75% cover. 

Mulching, fertilization, irrigation, and wet weather 

produced lush growth by August 2007. Seed and 

plugs planted in June 2007 grew well along with 

American Sloughgrass (a survivor from June 2006 

revegetation), Timothy (probably a contaminant in 

the seed mix), and Rough Bentgrass and moss 

(natural volunteers). Other survivors from 2006 

included sedges and Bering Hairgrass. A site visit 

in 2008 showed that this assemblage survived the 

winter and appeared to be on its way to becoming 

naturalized. 


Restoration of the ADA wetland accelerated ecological 

succession and fostered the establishment 

of a diverse and adaptable assemblage of plant 

species. This was achieved by planting multiple 

species native to the region, each with distinct environmental 

preferences. Forage value was also 

considered in order to maximize habitat quality. 

American Sloughgrass seed is especially attractive 

for restoration when conditions vary widely or 

are poorly known conditions. From light seeding 

in one zone in 2006, American Sloughgrass occurred 

in four of the five zones in 2007. Although 

the American Sloughgrass that sprouted in 2006 

did not produce seed before the onset of winter, a 

portion of the seed remained dormant until scarified 

and scattered by winter conditions, resulting in 

wide distribution in 2007. 

The excellent survival and growth of large plugs 

of sedges and Beach Wildrye transplanted from 

a nearby wetland suggest that a sparse distribution 

of such plugs would have revegetated the site 

more effectively than the dense planting of bareroot 

sprigs. Large plugs could be planted on a 4 

or 5 foot grid, and the intervening areas could be 

seeded with a suitable mix of grasses. 

Commercially grown ecotypes may not be suitable 

for local conditions. The seedlings planted in 2006, 

obtained from a nursery in Oregon, succumbed at 

least in part to an unusually cold winter. Coordination 

with local nurseries could yield better results if 

the material produced comes from local ecotypes 

adapted to harsh winters. 

References: 

Crayton, W., D.B. Ward, E. Campellone, and M. Te- 

Vrucht., 2007 (January). “Wetland Restoration of a Remediated 

World War II Dump on Kodiak Island, Alaska.” 

In Proceedings of the Remediation of Contaminated 

Sediments Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, 22-25 January 

2007. 8 pp. 

U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska, 2008 (January). 

2007 Wetlands Monitoring Report, Asphalt Disposal 

Area, Kodiak, Alaska. Prepared by Jacobs Engineering, 

Anchorage, Alaska. 59 pp. 


Kodiak Island, Southwest Alaska



Site Photos: 

Photo: Jacobs Engineering 

Subsoil and topsoil enhancement - August, 2005 


Planting seedlings of Bering Hairgrass - June, 2006 


Project area, view to the west - October, 2006 


Sedge at end of first season - August, 2006 


Shot-Rock backfill before restoration - August, 2005 

Photo: Estrella Campellone (USACE) 

Second season reseeding - 2007 

137

Photos: Jacobs Engineering 

Transplanted Sedge plug - August, 2007 

Transplanted plugs of Rye and Sedge - June, 2007 

Transplanted Rye plug - August, 2007 

High pond level after heavy rain - July, 2007 

138 

Second-season growth - August, 2007 

Third-season naturalization - June, 2008


Southcentral Region 

Southcentral Alaska is home to the Chugach National Forest, which stretches from the 

western Kenai Peninsula to the Copper River Delta, encompassing all of Prince William Sound. 

This region is rich with wildlife and plant diversity. Steep mountains and glaciers are prevalent 

along the entire south coast, notably along the Turnagain arm of Cook Inlet, and the northern 

edge of Prince William Sound. The Kenai Fjords feature rocky cliffs rising straight up from sea 

level, covered with vegetation. 

This region is also home to two-thirds of the state’s population, including Alaska’s largest city, 

Anchorage. The infrastructure required to support this population causes this region to experience 

significant vegetation disturbance. Many of the projects reviewed in this section were 

brought about to mitigate the aesthetic effects of these construction projects. Specifically, revegetation 

projects near Girdwood and along the Anchorage coastal mud flats were designed 

with aesthetic enhancement in mind. 

2,3,4 

1. Girdwood Area Sedge Restoration 

2. Chester Creek Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration 

3. Fish Creek Coastal Wetland Restoration 

4. Anchorage Coastal Mud Flats Restoration 

1 

139

Girdwood Area Sedge Restoration 


This revegetation project was designed to address 

surface damage as a result of transmission 

line infrastructure maintenance between Girdwood 

and Ingram creek. The disturbed lands were primarily 

coastal wetlands. 

Chugach Electric Association (CEA) contacted 

the Alaska Plant Material Center to assist in revegetation 

of the area. Quickly reducing visual impact 

was a major consideration for this project, as the 

adjacent Seward highway is heavily travelled by 

the general public and visitors to Alaska. 


The eastern edge of Cook Inlet is an intertidal 

wetland zone. Soils in the area are composed of 

fine silts and clays. The area is also affected by 

extreme tidal fluctuations. 

Maximum tides in the Turnagain Arm of Cook Inlet 

can exceed 42 feet, resulting in periodic flooding 

of the project area. The August, 1996 photo of access 

point 20-1A shows the effect of this exceptionally 

high tide has on the project area. 


Native species growing near the site were harvested 

mechanically or by hand, and then processed 

at the Alaska Plant Materials Center. Once 

the collected native species seed was cleaned 

and tested for both germination and purity, specific 

seed mixtures were developed for direct sowing at 

the disturbances. 

The local availability of wild harvest native seed 

was very opportune and greatly enhanced the 

chances of successful revegetation. The use of 

native species also reduced the visual impact of 

introduced species in the more upland sites. Seed 

mixes were complemented with commercially produced 

native seed. 

An error (spilled bag of fertilizer) on another coastal 

wetland revealed that unusually large quantities of 

fertilizer can be required for vegetation response. 

This is due in large part to the tight silty soils and 

tidal impact on these areas. The wetland areas received 

fertilizer at a rate of 1,000-1,500 lbs / acre. 

Both 8-32-16 and 20-20-10 fertilizer formulations 

were used on various sites. The 8-32-16 seemed 

to be more effective than 20-20-10 fertilizer for the 

140 

restoration of disturbances in the lower elevation 

intertidal wetland areas. 

Species Used: 

The following locally collected native species were 

used on the project: 

Lyngbye’s Sedge, Carex lyngbyei 

Boreal Yarrow, Achillea borealis 

Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis 

Nootka Lupine, Lupinus nootkatensis 

Largeflower Speargrass, Poa eminens 

Lyngbye’s Sedge was the target species in the 

restoration effort. This decision was based upon 

the species predominance and endemic distribution 

within the project area, especially near Girdwood. 

Most Lyngbye’s Sedge seed was used in 

single species applications; not in a mix with other 

species. 

The remainder of the collected species were incorporated 

into mixes with commercially acquired 

Bering Hairgrass (Deschampsia beringensis), 

Bluejoint Reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis), 

and a portion of the remaining Lyngbye’s Sedge 

seed. This mix was reserved for higher elevation 

sites within the project area. 

Results: 

The seeded and fertilized areas performed well 

with regard to the restoration effort. All the seeded 

and fertilized areas supported strong stands of 

Lyngbye’s Sedge one year after the initial seeding. 

The seeded sedge accounted for approximately 

80% of the observed vegetation. Nearly 20% of the 

growth in some areas was Seashore Arrowgrass, 

Triglochin maritima, a species which was not seeded. 

Those areas not seeded showed poor seedling 

growth relative to the seeded areas. Those areas 

not receiving fertilizer showed very little growth 

even if seeded. This indicated that heavy application 

of fertilizer in the area (1000 lbs / acre) was 

a crucial component in revegetation success. The 

unexpected growth of Seashore Arrowgrass can 

be directly tied to fertilizer application. 

The access point around the circuit switcher was 

initially the least responsive area of the project. 

This site was seeded and fertilized twice, however 

growth did not recur as quickly at this site as it had

at other areas within the project. Evidence suggests 

that equipment induced compaction and tidal 

exposure negatively affected plant establishment. 


Seeding Lyngbye’s Sedge is practical and effective. 

Managing and harvesting natural stands appears 

to be the best approach for obtaining significant 

quantities of the seed. High rates of fertilizer 

(1000-1,500 lbs / acre) produce excellent results. 

8-32-16 fertilizer seems to be more effective than 

20-20-10 fertilizer for the restoration of disturbed 

intertidal wetland areas. 

Girdwood switching station - September, 1995 

Low impact practices employed by Chugach Electric 

Association aided in restoration. Fewer passes 

over an area allowed better final results. Rutting 

the soil produced the most obvious disturbances 

and this was minimized on the project by Chugach 

Electric Association’s directive to the contractor. 

The low impact seed harvest technique and 

equipment used to obtain the seed provided excellent 

results both in quality and quantity of seed and 

resulted in no harm to the existing vegetation or 

environment. 

References: 

Wright, Stoney J. 1998. Girdwood to Ingram Creek 

Restoration. Land and Water, Vol.42, No.4, pp. 26-28. 

Vegetative cover completely re-established. 

Girdwood switching station - September, 1996 

Wright, Stoney J. 1996 Final Report – Chugach Electric 

Association, Inc. – Girdwood – Ingram Creek Restoration 

Project. State of Alaska, Division of Agriculture, 

Plant Materials Center, Palmer, AK. 39 pp. 


Eastern edge of Turnagain arm, Cook Inlet 

Access point 21-1A - September, 1994 

Site Photos: 





141

Access point 20-1A, prior to restoration - July, 1995 


Access point 20-2A - September 1995 



Access point 20-1A, at extreme tide - August, 1996 


142 


Seed stripper harvesting Lyngbye’s sedge - 1995 

Note: The flattened sedge in the photograph was due to 

construction equipment, not the harvester.

Chester Creek Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration 


Chester Creek was once a productive and diverse 

tidal estuary, but development activities (embankment 

construction, dam construction, etc.) starting 

in the 1930s and continuing until the early 1970s 

closed off the natural tidal flow to the area. This 

resulted in a loss of species diversity and colonization 

by less salt-tolerant plant species. Tidal flushing 

had once mitigated colonization attempts by 

these ‘weedy’ species. The installation of multiple 

culverts and an inoperable fish ladder had restricted 

fish passage between Cook Inlet and Chester 

Creek. The aforementioned development did, however, 

create Westchester Lagoon, a popular recreational 

area. 

This project is located near the mouth of Chester 

Creek in Anchorage. Chester Creek originates 

in the Chugach Mountains and passes through a 

highly urbanized area, until draining into the Cook 

Inlet. The lower portion of the creek at the west end 

of Westchester Lagoon where it drains into Cook 

Inlet was the focus of restoration efforts. 

The habitat restoration project was a collaborative 

effort between the Municipality of Anchorage 

(MOA), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 

MOA Department of Parks and Recreation, and 

HDR Alaska, Inc. In 2008, a new creek channel 

was created to provide fish passage between 

Chester Creek and Cook Inlet. 

There were two wetland areas disturbed by construction 

activities that were the focus of revegetation 

efforts. These two areas are the freshwater 

wetland community between the Alaska Railroad 

Corporation and the lagoon and the Cook Inlet tide 

flats. The goal was to control erosion and produce 

a self-sustaining vegetation community reflecting 

the natural conditions of the surrounding undisturbed 

community. This was vital because of the 

high public usage and exposure of the area. 


Westchester Lagoon is a tidal influenced freshwater 

emergent wetland and tidal flat. 


HDR Alaska Inc. surveyed the tide flats and freshwater 

wetland areas that were to be disturbed in 

Contributor: HDR Alaska, Inc 

order to define the existing vegetation communities. 

Species documented during these surveys 

were used to revegetate the areas. Both seeding 

and transplant methods were used. 

Tide Flats: 

Approximately 5 acres of tidal flats were disturbed 

during project construction. They were restored to 

their pre-disturbed condition by grading, seeding, 

sprigging, and fertilizing. The Alaska Plant Materials 

Center (PMC) recommended collecting Plantago 

maritima and Triglochin maritima seed for use 

revegetating the disturbed area. These species 

were harvested in the fall of 2008 from coastal tide 

flats near Fish Creek. Collections of Carex lyngbyei 

seed were also obtained. Upon collection, 

seeds were delivered to the PMC for processing 

and winter storage. 

A hand operated broadcast spreader was used 

for applying the seed and fertilizer. Fertilizer application 

was done once at the time of planting with 

20-20-10 granular fertilizer at a rate of 800 pounds 

per acre. 

Seed of Plantago and Triglochin collected in 2008 

were propagated at the Plant Materials Center, 

yielding containerized seedlings. The seedlings 

were then transplanted at the site. Plantings were 

spaced three feet apart and above mean high tide 

line. Planting was followed by application of the 

20-20-10 N:P:K granular fertilizer using broadcast 

methods. 

Freshwater Wetland: 

Grading of the site took place before seeding. 

Topsoil was spread evenly over the site with settlement 

achieved by rolling the topsoil with a water 

filled drum. Seed was applied at a rate of 5 lbs / 

1,000 s.f. Straw/coconut erosion control blankets 

were placed within forty-eight hours after grading 

of the topsoil was completed and the seed mix was 

applied. To ensure good soil contact, the surface 

was smoothed (all rocks and clods removed) before 

the erosion control blankets were applied. 


Seed mix for tide flat: 

Seaside Plantain, Plantago maritima 

Seashore Arrowgrass, Triglochin maritima 

143


Seed mix for freshwater wetland community: 

40% 

35% 

15% 

5% 

5% 

Results: 

‘Norcoast’ Bering Hairgrass, 


‘Egan’ American Sloughgrass, 


‘Nortran’ Tufted Hairgrass, 

Deschampsia caespitosa 

‘Sourdough’ Bluejoint Reedgrass, 

Calamagrostis canadensis 

‘Reeve’ Beach Wildrye, 

Leymus mollis 

Revegetation took place in summer 2009, and 

complete results are not available at the time of 

this publication. Monitoring of the tide flats will take 

place in summer 2011 and 2012 and include cover 

sampling and area-wide observations. Success 

criteria for the revegetated tide flats state that total 

cover of all vegetation must exceed 30%. Areas 

that naturally have less than 30% cover will considered 

a success when at least 15% of the total 

vegetative cover is native vegetation. 

A fish passage channel was constructed to allow 

tidal flooding to occur in freshwater wetlands possibly 

affecting vegetation communities. Salt intolerant 

species will be replaced by more salt-tolerant 

species. Freshwater wetland monitoring will occur 

for a period of seven years or until success criteria 

are met. The objective of this monitoring will be 

to evaluate the natural progression of salt-tolerant 

and native species and to determine if additional 

efforts are needed to establish vegetation in areas 

that do not naturally revegetate with native species. 

Monitoring will begin in 2010 and end in 2017. Success 

will be established for the wetlands when native 

vegetation predominantly covers the ground 

surface and when there are no “dead” zones. 


Initial public reaction to the restored ecosystem 

has been positive. Vegetation growth is occurring 

at acceptable rates. 

References: 

Brownlee, Sirena, 2009 Final Chester Creek Aquatic 

Ecosystem Restoration Revegetation and Monitoring 

Plan, HDR Alaska, Anchorage AK 22pp. 


Tidal flats near 

Westchester Lagoon, 

Anchorage 

Satellite Image: SDMI | AlaskaMapped.org 

Westchester Lagoon, prior to the reconnection of the 

lagoon with Cook Inlet, as detailed in this case study 

Site Photos: 

Photo: Don C. Knudsen 

Mouth of Chester Creek in the 1940s, showing the 

newly constructed railway bridge. The man-made 

lagoon was constructed in the 1970s. 

Photo: Stacie Havron ( APU) 

Chester creek spillway at high tide - July, 2009 

144

Photo: Stacie Havron (APU) Photo: Stacie Havron (APU) 

Transplanted vegetation along bank - July, 2009 Grass cover established along stream outfall - July, 2009 


Transplanted vegetation performance - September, 2010 


Stream outfall vegetation performance - May, 2010 


Vegetated slope, spillway outfall into Cook Inlet tidal 

mud flats - September, 2010 

Photo: Stacie Havron (APU) 

Steep vegetated grade, erosion matting - July, 2009 


Photo: Stacie Havron (APU) 

Flooding of spillway during high tide - July, 2009 

Erosion control matting near view platform - May, 2010 

145


Photo: Sirena Brownlee (HDR Inc.) 

Erosion control matting near view platform - July, 2009 

Vegetation along bank of spillway - May, 2010 


Vegetation along bank of spillway - September, 2010 


Vegetation under view platform , September, 2010 


146 

Vegetation fully established between view platforms - September, 2010

Fish Creek Coastal Wetland Restoration 


rates (900-1500 pounds per acre) of fertilizer were 

applied to selected areas of the project. Both 8-32- 

16 and 20-20-10 fertilizers were used. All seeded 

areas were hand raked before and after seed application. 


In 1990 Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility 

requested assistance from the Plant Materials 

Center for the restoration of a waterline adjacent 

to the Tony Knowles Coastal Trail and Fish Creek. 

Construction activities and additional site modifications 

left the area denuded of vegetation. 

One feature of the mitigation effort for disturbing 

the wetland was a request by an adjacent land 

owner. The request was that small levees be constructed 

so water from high tides would be retained 

for waterfowl after the tide fell. This of course was 

problematic as the levees then needed protection 

from the erosive forces of the tides. 

The Plant Materials Center developed a plan to 

reintroduce native species on to the disturbed soils 

and the newly created berms/levees. In addition, 

the PMC monitored the site through 1995. 


Prior to construction, the site was a tidal influenced 

sedge/scirpus wetland common in the Upper 

Cook Inlet. The soils were consistent with tidal 

areas around Anchorage; tight fine silty-clay. 


Initially the project relied on seeded grasses and 

greenhouse grown seedlings for the sedges and 

other broadleaf species. Traditional fertilizer rates 

and formulations were used during the first phase 

(1991) of the Fish Creek Project. 

In early 1992 the project was failing and plants 

were not surviving or growing well. The condition 

of the plants suggested low nutrient levels and 

salt/drought stress. However, one area was growing 

exceptionally well. That area was where a 

forty pound bag of fertilizer had been accidentally 

spilled. Normally this would have been a true dead 

spot with no vegetation. 

On July 13-14, 1992, phase II started with additional 

seeding of hairgrass, sprigging of Beach 

Wildrye and transplanting container grown sedges 

(300 seedlings) and other native broadleaf species 

(200 seedlings of Triglochin and 100 Plantago 

seedlings) found in the area. In addition a few sedges 

were transplanted using a clam-gun to extract 

the sedges from adjacent stands. And to break with 

all traditional, practical and academic training; high 

The Fish Creek project relied on species native 

either to the site or region. Those materials native 

from the site were: 

Lyngbye’s Sedge, Carex Lyngbyei 

Bulrush, Scirpus validus 

Seaside Plantain, Plantago maritima 

Seashore Arrowgrass, Triglochin maritima 

Beach Wildrye, Leymus mollis 

Bluejoint Reedgrass, Calamagrostis canadensis 

Tufted Hairgrass, Deschampsia caespitosa 

Results: 

By sheer accident this project succeeded. Had 

the bag of fertilizer not spilled, the need for the high 

fertilizer rates would have likely not been explored 

or tried. By September 1995 the area was well vegetated 

with in excess of 85% cover. The diversity 

reflected what was planted or seeded. The hair 

grass however, as expected did not persist in the 

lower areas and only remained on the berms. 

This was the first project conducted by the Plant 

Materials Center that relied so heavily on greenhouse 

produced seedlings. This was also the first 

attempt to restore a coastal wetland. 


The significant lesson learned on the Fish Creek 

project was that the species used did in fact work 

as seedling transplants and to a lesser degree direct 

seeding. Coastal wetlands are capable of being 

restored by artificial means. The other major 

finding was the interesting observation that the 

high rates of fertilizer seemed to aid the revegetation 

work. More research needs to be done in this 

area before the practice is widely recommended. 

Another interesting observation on this project 

was the importance of Pucinnella nutkaensis on 

tidelands. This species was selected for collection 

and study as a result of its active natural colonization 

of the site. 

References: 

147

S.J. Wright, Field Book 1990-1995 

Parry, B.L & Seaman, G. 1994 Restoration and enhancement 

of aquatic habitats in Alaska: case study 

reports, policy guidance and recommendation. Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage AK p 51-53 


Mouth of Fish Creek, 

Anchorage 


Fish creek area, looking inland - June, 1988 

Transplanting seedlings, looking inland - June, 1991 

Vegetation cover, view to the north - June, 1991 

148 

Satellite Photo: 


Aerial view of the mouth of Fish Creek, Anchorage 

Site Photos: 

Vegetation cover, looking inland - September, 1995

Transplanting in process - May, 1991 

Newly transplanted sprigs along creek - June, 1990 

Vegetation cover - October, 1995 

Transplanting Beach Wildrye sprigs - May, 1991 


Transplanted sprigs, fertilizer applied - May, 1991 

Grass cover, looking seaward - August, 1991 

Rock levee during high tide - October, 1992 

149



Rototilling one of the upland areas - July, 1992 


Waterfowl habitat created by impounded water 

Grass cover, looking seaward - September, 1992 


Levee, vegetation cover - September, 2010 


Established plant cover - September, 1994 


Project area, looking upland - September, 2010 


150 


Revegetated creek area - October, 1995 

Closeup of rock levee bordering creek - September, 2010

Anchorage Coastal Mud Flats Restoration 


In the fall of 1998, a 7.6-mile jet fuel pipeline was 

constructed between the Port of Anchorage and the 

Anchorage International Airport. A 3.5 mile segment 

of this pipeline was buried beneath intertidal mud 

flats in Knik Arm of Cook Inlet. 

Physical disturbance resulted from construction 

activities. Heavy equipment travel created prominent 

ruts in the travel corridor, and persistent emergent 

vegetation was affected by equipment in the 

upper intertidal zone. 

Reclamation and monitoring efforts began in June 

1999, with the construction of silt dams at the north 

end of the corridor to inhibit further erosion. Signs 

of natural reinvasion were evident along the entire 

pipeline corridor. Seeding of vegetated areas of the 

upper intertidal zone began in July, and monitoring 

continued until October. 


The intertidal substrates of upper Cook Inlet are 

characterized by silt, sand, and mud deposits. The 

silt and mud are primarily of glacial origin, deposited 

by ocean currents and tides. Areas crossed 

by the pipeline corridor are primarily unvegetated, 

although seasonal algal beds become established 

during the summer. 

Within the project area, most of the persistent 

emergent vegetation is found above the mean high 

water line and is often associated with fresh water 

draining from storm sewers and creek outlets. Persistent 

emergent vegetation at the mouth of Fish 

Creek was avoided by the pipeline corridor. 


Seed collection occurred in summer 1998 & 1999. 

Final Grading and Scarification occurred in Fall 

1998. Revegetation began in summer 1999. 

Seeds of Seashore Arrowgrass, Seaside Plantain, 

and Bayonet grass were collected in the summer 

of 1998 and 1999. Mature seed and stalk were 

collected from the mud flats and placed in paper 

bags. The seeds were then removed from the stalk 

by hand, and stored in a cool, dry place. Seed was 

mixed in five-gallon buckets and distributed using 

a hand held spreader. 

Contributor: Oasis Environmental, Inc 

Due to limited germination and growth of seeded 

Alkali Grass at the southwest end of the corridor, 

the sprigging (transplanting) method was used. 

Transplants were obtained from within the permitted 

construction corridor. Field staff scooped entire 

blades and root systems from the top one to two 

inches of the mud flat surface. Small holes were 

dug and root clusters placed directly into mud flats. 

Mud was then compacted around the roots, leaving 

the blades exposed to the surface. These plantings 

occurred in areas where alkali grass was present 

prior to construction. 

In August, 2000, Approximately 400 Carex plants 

were planted in the triangular area offshore and 

to the north of AWWU pump house. Plants were 

grown in a greenhouse until they had achieved a 

height of eight inches, and then transplanted to the 

mud flats. 

In June, 2001, further planting occurred in the 

triangular area offshore from AWWU pump house. 

Triglochin and Puccinellia seeds were spread over 

the entire triangle, while Carex and Scirpus were 

planted in the NE corner of the triangle. Plantago 

was seeded in drier areas and near the rocks and 

rip-rap close to the Coastal Trail. 

Species Used: 

OASIS Environmental consulted Stoney Wright 

of the Alaska Plant Materials Center for species 

recommendations as well as the appropriate fertilizer 

type and amount to use. Based on these 

suggestions, the following species were selected 

for revegetation: 

Triglochin maritima, Seashore Arrowgrass 

Plantago maritima, Seaside Plantain 

Scirpus paludosus, Bayonet Grass 

Puccinellia phryganodes, Alkaligrass 

Carex sp., sedge 

A low-nitrogen (8-16-32) fertilizer mix was applied 

evenly across the project area at a rate of approximately 

1,300 pounds per acre. 

Results: 

Pre-construction and post-construction vegetation 

cover surveys were conducted by direct visual inspection 

of the pipeline route. A botanist inspected 

each segment and documented the relative cover 

of each habitat type. 

151

Between Chester Creek and Hood Creek, a combination 

of vehicle ruts and trench subsidence occurred, 

causing receding tidewater or upland freshwater 

to be retained in construction ruts. Algae 

(Vaucheria longicaulis) cover was well established 

in pools, both inside and outside the corridor. 

Seeding / sprigging of wetlands near the Port of 

Anchorage began in July of 1999. By July 2000, 

vegetative cover of over 50% was observed. 1999 

seeding and sprigging activities were successful in 

this section of the corridor. 

The 1999 vegetation survey indicated: 

• Emergent vegetation occurring mostly at the 

north and south ends of the mud flats was 

impacted by construction activities including 

vehicle travel, trenching, and backfilling. 

• The effects included burial, which crushed 

most of the vegetation within the corridor. 

• In some areas, vegetation survived vehicle 

travel and shallow burial. This was most apparent 

in the south end where the substrate 

was frozen during construction. 

• Vegetative reproduction resulted in some 

natural re-growth in all previously vegetated 

areas, providing a significant amount of 

biomass for future growth and reproduction. 

This was evident with the Slender Glasswort, 

which forms a dense cover throughout 

the disturbed areas of the north end. 

• Vegetation loss of 75% - 95% total cover, 

compared to pre-construction cover, in 

northern portion of corridor. 

• Vegetation loss of 40% - 65% total cover, 

compared to pre-construction cover, in 

southern portion of corridor. 


• Vegetative reproduction, which provided 

a significant amount of biomass for future 

growth, has resulted in substantial plant 

cover in the north end of the corridor. 

• Seeding, sprigging, fertilizing, and natural 

reinvasion have been successful in revegetating 

the north and south end of the corridor 

to pre-construction cover levels. 

• Vegetation is recovering or has recovered 

in the northern portion of the corridor, compared 

to pre-construction cover. 

• Vegetation cover is greater than or within 

5% of pre-construction total cover, in southern 

portion of corridor. One exception is a 

small pond of about 500 square feet in size 

that was created next to the bluff in segment 

S1 (reduces the available area for vegetation). 

Bayonet grass (Scirpus paludosus) 

has colonized the pond and is used quite 

frequently by resting ducks. 


• Emergent vegetation where algal beds previously 

were found has continued to surpass 

pre-construction cover in sections of 

the construction corridor where drier areas 

were created by the ditch spoils. 

• Vegetation has recovered or is near recovery 

in the northern portion of the corridor. 

• Vegetation in the southern portion of the 

corridor has recovered or is near recovery. 

Plugging of Alkaligrass proved to be the 

most successful method of revegetation for 

the south end of the construction corridor. 

• Ponding of tidal water in the corridor has 

eliminated approximately 40% of the available 

area for vegetative growth in the north 

segments and 30% in segment S1. 

• The pioneering plants for the drier portions 

of the affected mud flats are Sea Milkwort 

(Glaux maritima), Slender Glasswort (Salicornia 

europaea) and Seaside Plantain 

(Plantago maritima). 


The 1999-2001 post-construction monitoring results 

indicate that wetland functions had been reclaimed 

in all but the north segment, which comprises 

20% of the mud flats corridor. 

Between the lagoon and Chester Creek, construction 

impacts are still visible, but the depth of the 

trench is substantially mitigated. South of Chester 

Creek, visual effects are minimal. Visible signs of 

trench subsidence diminished over three monitoring 

seasons and are expected to continue. 

Revegetation efforts were very successful. Natural 

reinvasion is occurring through growth of seeded 

and transplanted material, as well as through 

colonization in all areas of the corridor. Ponding 

of water has limited the area available for plant 

colonization, although these effects are minimized 

through natural sedimentation. 

References: 

Athey, Patrick & Brekken, Josh. 2001 Post Construction 

Reclamation Monitoring Report. OASIS Environmental, 

Inc. 35 pp. 

152


Anchorage, Alaska. 

Coastline & mud flats, 

from Port of Anchorage 

to near Point Woronzof. 

Site Photos: 

Triangle area north of AWWU pump house - 2001 

Site S2, view to the south - 1998 

Site N5, view to the south - 1998 

Site N5, view to the south - 2001 

Site S2, view to the south - 2001 

Photos: Oasis Environmental 

Panoramic photo point #8, view to the west. Very little vegetation present prior to construction - 1998 

Photo: OASIS Environmental 

Panoramic photo point #8, view to the west. Note growth of algae along pipeline corridor - 2001 

153

Panoramic photo point #20, view to the west - 2001 

Photos: Oasis Environmental 

Panoramic photo point #20, view to the west. Vegetation growth on both sides of channel - 2001 




154 

Panoramic photo point #30, view to the west - 2001


Southeast Region 

Southeast Alaska is one of only six or seven coastal temperate rain forests in the world. 

Much of the region is a part of the Tongass National Forest, and is thus closed to development. 

Revegetation projects in this part of Alaska are near cities, and may not always be caused 

by a proximate disturbance. Unavoidable impacts to coastal wetlands can be mitigated with 

compensatory wetland creation. Improvements to the Nancy Street wetland in Juneau, for example, 

came about because of expansion of the airport, some distance away. 

Both projects in the Juneau area were designed to enhance or repair existing wetland areas. 

The Gravina Island project was a truly massive undertaking, requiring a stream and an estuary 

to be moved to facilitate expansion of the Ketchikan Airport. 

1,2 

3 

1. Jordan Creek Wetland Creation, Juneau 

2. Nancy Street Wetland Enhancement, Juneau 

3. Ketchikan Airport Estuary Restoration, Gravina Island 

155

156 

Jordan Creek Floodplain Rehabilitation, Juneau 

By John Hudson and Neil Stichert (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) 


Jordan Creek is an anadromous stream located 

on the east side of Mendenhall Valley in Juneau, 

Alaska. A major tributary, the East Valley Reservoir 

(EVR) Tributary, flows into Jordan Creek 

near Jennifer Drive. Historically, this tributary had 

deposited a large alluvial fan of sediment next to 

Jordan Creek. In recent years, the sediment has 

encroached upon Jordan Creek filling the channel 

with sediment and altering aquatic and riparian 

habitat. Of particular concern to the City and Borough 

of Juneau and nearby landowners was the 

increased flood risk caused by the fan’s damming 

effect on streamflow. Eliminating the flood risk and 

managing future encroachment of the EVR Tributary 

fan provided an opportunity to revegetate the 

area with the goal of restoring important instream 

habitat and riparian functions. 

With funding from the Alaska Department of Environmental 

Conservation (Alaska DEC), the Juneau 

Watershed Partnership (JWP) hired Inter-Fluve, 

Inc. to study the problem and provide several design 

alternatives to meet the project goals. The selected 

alternative entailed physically removing the 

fan sediment from the creek channel and floodplain 

and reconstructing both features. Revegetation of 

the site was essential to stabilize exposed soil and 

create a functional riparian community. Two additional 

project elements included the placement of 

rootwads in the channel and the construction of 

two sediment traps on the EVR Tributary. The root 

wads improved channel complexity by creating 

scour pools and overhead cover for fishes while 

the sediment traps were critical in managing future 

sediment transport from the tributary. 

Species Used: 

The project area soils and hydrology influenced 

the selection of plant species. Streambanks and 

other areas where the groundwater table was high 

were planted with leafed-out Barclay Willow and 

Red Osier Dogwood stakes. Live staking is typically 

done with dormant stakes collected in late winter 

and held in coolers until planting; this project provided 

an opportunity to test a simpler technique by 

using cuttings obtained on-site. Wetland species 

like Small Leaf Bulrush and Sitka Sedge seeds 

were broadcast along the stream, drainages, and 

the forest edge. Sitka Spruce and Western Hemlock 

were collected as young conifers and transplanted 

on the site. Lady Fern, Marsh Marigold, 

Sitka Sedge, Small Leaf Bulrush, and Skunk Cabbage 

from the surrounding area were transplanted 

on the site as plugs. 


Planting was done in three phases. The first phase 

involved a day of seed collection in late summer 

prior to stream channel construction. Using the 

help of local volunteers, seed was collected by 

hand, processed to remove impurities and then 

stored for use during the following summer. 

The second phase involved applying a topsoil layer 

over the reconfigured stream channel and floodplain. 

A hydro-seeding mixture of Hairgrass, Fescue, 

Bluejoint, and Ryegrass was applied at a rate 

of 1 pound per 1,000 square feet. The Ryegrass 

was added for its fast growth and ability to stabilize 

the site. The site was then covered with coir fabric 

to protect seedlings and prevent erosion. 

Seed mix for Jordan Creek floodplain: 

50% Tufted Hairgrass, Deschampsia caespitosa 

30% Red Fescue, Festuca rubra 

10% Bluejoint Reedgrass, Calamagrostis canadensis 

10% Annual Ryegrass, Lolium multiflorum 

The final phase involved planting transplanted 

plugs along with the willow and dogwood cuttings. 

Transplanting was conducted by a SAGA Americorps 

crew. 

Results: 

Removal of the fan sediment from the channel 

and floodplain and construction of a new channel 

increased conveyance for Jordan Creek flow and 

mitigated flood risk. The excavated fan allowed for 

the creation of a floodplain adjacent to the channel. 

The placement of root wads in the channel created 

some channel complexity and provided pool habitat 

and overhead cover that was used immediately 

by juvenile coho salmon. Survival of rooted transplants 

and live stakes was highest in saturated 

soils. Growth of seeded grasses was excellent, 

with 80% cover achieved 3 months after seeding.


No seed had to be ordered as local seed collection 

practices were an effective means of obtaining 

adapted seed. Leafed-out willow and dogwood cuttings 

from the site can be used as an alternative to 

the use of dormant cuttings obtained in late winter. 

Care must be taken to place cuttings in saturated 

soil and 75% of leaves should be removed to ensure 

proper water balance within the cutting. 

References: 

Inter-Fluve, 2008. Hydrologic and Geomorphic Evaluation 

& Alternatives Analysis for Stream Rehabilitation 

for East Valley Reservoir Tributary Alluvial Fan on Jordan 

Creek, Juneau, Alaska. Inter-Fluve Inc. 73pp. 

Inter-Fluve, 2008 Plan Documents, Jordan Creek Rehabilitation 

– Phase II. Inter-Fluve, Inc 15 pp. 


Mendenhall Valley, Juneau, Alaska. 

Site Photos: 

Floodplain seeded, coir fabric applied - July, 2009 

Revegetation processes complete - August, 2009 

Alluvial fan sediment in Jordan Creek - April, 2006 

Vegetation cover after 3 months - October, 2009 

Photos: John Hudson (USFWS) 

Late stage of channel rehabilitation - July, 2009 

Seeded grasses after 1 year - August, 2010 

157

158 

Nancy Street Wetland Enhancement, Juneau 

the Highbush Cranberry died in storage. 


A SAGA crew contracted by the US Fish & Wildlife 

Service planted 3,600 plugs, shrubs, and small 

trees, and also seeded some of the wetland area. 

Plants were taken and moved from the source wetland 

and replanted on the remediation site. 

Species Used: 

The Nancy Street wetland enhancement project is 

the result of a partnership formed around the need 

for a waste disposal site for material extracted 

from the Mendenhall Valley high school construction 

project at Dimond Park. The City and Borough 

of Juneau (CBJ) purchased 6 acres of wetland to 

provide a fill disposal site only one mile from the 

construction site, satisfying development needs. 

Conservation goals from the Juneau Management 

Wetland Plan were also met because the fill material 

would improve wildlife habitat and water quality 

of the Nancy Street Wetland. 

The Nancy Creek Wetland is located in Mendenhall 

Valley 10 miles northwest of Juneau, Alaska. 

In the 1950s-60s, the land was dredged for the extraction 

of gravel deposits and then left to fill with 

groundwater high in iron and low in dissolved oxygen 

content. This affected fish and other animals 

that require high levels of oxygen for survival. This 

contaminated water would eventually flow into the 

Mendenhall wetlands. Adding fill material to this 

site created a wetland community and provided 

plants that filter the water, thereby increasing overall 

habitat area for birds and salmon. 

The manner in which fill was added to the Nancy 

Street wetland determined habitat diversity. Protruding 

fingers were created to allow access for 

equipment dumping the fill material in the middle of 

the wetland. The fingers became the low and high 

marsh habitat zones. Hauling and placing of fill material 

took place in September 2005. The fingers 

then received 6 to 8 inches of low organic rock/ 

cobble topsoil to aid revegetation efforts. 

Dam and channel outlet construction began in 

July 2006. Fill material was placed, the stream 

channel excavated, and the dam shaped in less 

than 2 weeks. 


Volunteers, members of the Southeast Alaska 

Guidance Association (SAGA), and Trail mix workers 

all participated in the revegetation effort. 

Cuttings were taken on April 8. Barclays Willow, 

High Bush Cranberry and Black Cottonwood 

stakes were collected using hand pruners. These 

cuttings were kept in a cold storage facility until 

they were planted on June 7. Unfortunately, all of 

Plants were selected based on success in previously 

constructed wetland sites in the region. The 

plants’ ability to be transplanted or seeded, as well 

as potential for phyto-remediation of iron was also 

considered. Transplanting plugs was the primary 

method of revegetation. Cuttings of willow & cottonwood 

were also used, with some seeding. 

The focus of the revegetation effort was transplanting 

local plants to preserve local gene stock 

and minimize the need to purchase plants. This is 

feasible for a 6 acre site, but for a larger freshwater 

wetland, a different strategy may be required. 

Availability, accessibility and diversity of source 

wetlands determined the species chosen. Acquiring 

revegetation material was difficult because source 

wetlands were chosen to minimize cost and driving 

time. Only wetland accessible by a crew with a 

vehicle were considered, and obtaining permission 

was a challenge, due to the number of land owners 

involved. 

Plants were divided into zones based on the depth 

of water in which they grow. 

Low and High Marsh: 

Marsh Marigold, Caltha palustris 

Sitka Sedge, Carex sitchensis 

Spike Rush, Eleocharis palustris 

Small Leaved Bulrush, Scirpus microcarpus 


Wet Meadow : 

Western Columbine, Aquilegia formosa 

Bluejoint Reedgrass, Calamagrostis canadensis 


Chocolate Lily, Frittilaria camschatcensis 

Wild Iris, Iris setosa 

Nootka Lupine, Lupinus nootkatensis 

Sweet Grass, Hierochloe odorata 

Upland Shrub : 

Sitka Alder, Alnus viridus, 

Goat’s Beard, Aruncus dioicus 

Red Twig Dogwood, Cornus stolonifera,

Salmonberry, Rubus spectabilis 

Barclay’s Willow, Salix barclayi 

Red Fescue, Festuca rubra 

Thimbleberry, Rubus parviflorus 

Red Alder, Alnus rubra 

Upland : 

Red Alder, Alnus rubra, 

Sitka Alder, Alnus viridus 

Red Twig Dogwood, Cornus stolonifera 

Sitka Spruce, Picea sitchensis 

Black Cottonwood, Populus balsamifera 


Barclay’s Willow, Salix barclayi 

Thimbleberry, Rubus parviflorus 

Red Fescue, Festuca rubra 

Cornus stolonifera plugs were purchased by CBJ 

and planted. The species was chosen because it 

grows rapidly, provides berries for birds, and controls 

erosion. 

CBJ also purchased and spread seed throughout 

the five month period of revegetation for erosion 

control and habitat enhancement. 

Results: 

At the end of the 2006 planting season there was 

approximately 70% survival rate of transplanted 

species. 


Community involvement showed great support 

and enthusiasm for the creation of a wetland. Local 

volunteers and community groups donated their 

time and money. Nearby property owners and the 

community at large have expressed appreciation 

for the completed wetland. 

Choosing to fill and complete each finger and 

section of wetland individually allowed the species 

habitat to thrive. The other option; filling the entire 

site and returning to dredge the stream channel later 

would have resulted in less diversity of habitat. 

A dry sunny period in June almost resulted in 

failure of the newly transplanted plants. The soil 

dried and cracked around the plantings. An irrigation 

plan would help to mitigate similar events that 

may arise at the site. Delaying the transplanting to 

a period of more favorable conditions (July), would 

assure more frequent precipitation. Applying topsoil 

with higher organic matter content will also 

help with moisture retention. 

Lack of proper gear & equipment for the crew 

made harvesting and planting more difficult. Waterproof 

gloves, waders, rubber boots, and bigger 

buckets for transporting plants would have allowed 

the revegetation effort to progress more efficiently. 

References: 

Michele Elfers, 2006,Nancy Street Wetland Enhancement: 

Assessment of Design and Construction. City and 

Borough of Juneau, Engineering Department, 69pp. 


The Nancy Street wetland 

is located in the Mendenhall 

Valley, in the city and 

borough of Juneau, Alaska. 

Existing Vegetation 

Upland 30’ - 33’ 

Upland Shrub 29’ - 30’ 

Wet Meadow 28’ - 29’ 

High Marsh 27.5’ - 28’ 

Low Marsh 27’ - 27.5’ 

Deep Water 24’ - 27’ 

Site Photos: 

Photo: Michele Elfers (CBJ) 

Nancy Street Pond 2005, prior to reclamation 

159


Planting willow & cottonwood cuttings - June, 2006 

Aerial view of Nancy Street wetland area. 


Leaves emerge from cuttings - August, 2006 

Photo: Neil Stichert (USFWS) 

Early stages of filling - November, 2005 


Sedges being extracted from nearby wetland - 2006 

160 


Digging outlet stream channel - July, 2006 


Volunteers planting wet meadow grasses - 2006

Alders transplanted along stream channel - 2006 

Transplanted cuttings bordering trail - October, 2006 

Created fingers, view to the south - October, 2006 

Low marsh & high marsh sedges, bulrushes - 2006 

Photos: Michele Elfers (CBJ) 

Wetland vegetation establishment - October, 2006 

Finished observation deck & gathering area - 2006 

161

162 

Government Creek Relocation, Gravina Island 



In 2007, the Alaska Department of Transportation 

and Public Facilities (DOT) began construction at 

the Ketchikan International Airport (KTN) to meet 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) design and 

safety standards. These improvements included 

expanding the Runway Safety Area (RSA) approximately 

2000 feet to the southeast; which required 

the relocation of Government Creek. The creek 

was rerouted into a created stream channel, 1,250 

feet in length, which enters the Tongass narrows 

along the previous alignment of Boulder Creek 

(modified to handle additional flow volume). Flow 

was diverted into the newly constructed channel on 

August 15, 2007. 

The North Tributary to Government Creek was 

also impacted by the RSA improvements, and was 

subsequently rerouted into an 800-foot-long new 

channel that flows into the Government Creek 

channel at the upper limit of construction disturbance. 

Flow was diverted into the constructed 

North Tributary channel of Government Creek on 

June 1, 2008. Previously, flow from the North Tributary 

was delivered to the main creek via a pipe. 

Additionally, the existing 0.7 acres of estuarine 

wetlands at the mouth of Boulder Creek 

was expanded to 1.6 acres, to replace the estuarine 

habitat lost due to the placement of 

fill for the RSA in the historical Government 

Creek estuary and to provide protection of marine 

resources including marshes and eelgrass. 

Project goals included the following requirements: 

• At least two pioneering species of trees or 

shrubs established within cut slopes and overbank 

areas by 2010, and at least four species 

of native trees or shrubs established by 2012. 

• Stability of upper intertidal areas, such that 

these areas are not subject to wave erosion. 

• Cut slopes will not display excessive gullying 

or erosion. 

• The new estuarine area will have at least 

4,000 square feet (0.1 acre) of salt-marsh area 

with at least 25 percent coverage by saltmarsh 

species by 2010. 

• Monitor construction impacts on eelgrass 

adjacent to the project. 

This area of Alaska, bordering the Tongass national 

forest, is characterized as temperate coastal 

rainforest. The estuary area is typified by salt 

marsh vegetation and eelgrass. The tidal area is 

rich in aquatic resources, including clam beds and 

fish habitat. 


During construction of the estuary, sod-like clumps 

of existing salt marsh vegetation were spread 

throughout each of three distinct areas, at different 

densities. Vegetation, applied as sod, was also 

placed on the cut slopes of the North Tributary during 

channel construction. 

As part of the adaptive management associated 

with the creek reroute, seven vegetation islands 

were constructed in the Government Creek floodplain 

during the summer of 2008. The vegetation 

islands consisted of soil and large clumps of native 

vegetation placed within an armored protective 

barrier of logs and/or boulders, or placed in areas 

where erosive forces were not a concern. 

Additional work was conducted in August 2008 to 

place pockets of topsoil in the floodplain. Topsoil 

placement took advantage of higher elevation locations 

and included some light armoring, such as 

anchored trees, to allow vegetation to establish. After 

construction, hydroseeding occurred, followed 

by erosion control blanket placement on the majority 

of cut slopes. 

Species Used: 

Salt Marsh Vegetation (Estuary): 

Pacific Silverweed, Argentina egedii 



Rushes, including Juncus effuses, J. balticus 

Constructed Vegetation Islands: 

The clumps of vegetation used in construction of 

the islands were taken from nearby stockpiles of 

undisturbed vegetation left after initial clearing. 

Alder, Alnus sp. 

Hemlock, Tsuga sp. 


Labrador tea, Ledum sp. 

Huckleberry, Vaccinium sp.

Results: 

In general, the rerouted Government Creek and 

the associated expanded estuary appeared to be 

performing as designed and expected immediately 

after construction, and in September 2009. 

The sod clumps of vegetation continued to appear 

healthy and were exhibiting signs of spreading, 

particularly Pacific Silverweed, which continued 

to send off very long runners, often greater than 5 

feet. The original sod species likely have played a 

key role spreading seed and rhizomes for desired 

salt-marsh species, including Tufted Hairgrass, 

Lyngbye’s Sedge, and the two dominant Rushes. 

Estuary: 

Vegetation in the recently expanded estuary has 

become substantially established. A number of 

colonizing species have become widespread, particularly 

alder. Several of the salt-marsh species 

transplanted during construction have expanded 

into the bare ground between the original sod 

placements. 

The inner estuary and the upper portion of the 

outer bench exhibited similar vegetative characteristics, 

with species generally associated with 

freshwater riparian conditions interspersed with 

the transplanted salt marsh sod and expanding 

salt-marsh vegetation. 

The upper portion of the inner estuary is the highest 

in elevation, and hence is inundated with saltwater 

less frequently than other portions of the estuary. 

This portion of the estuary also received the 

fewest salt marsh plants during construction. The 

area supported Tufted Hairgrass, Lyngby Sedge, 

and other native grasses, as noted during 2009 

monitoring. 

The lower portion of the inner estuary has an increased 

density of plants spreading from the initial 

sod transplants, compared to the upper portion. 

The vegetation consisted of 8- to 12-inch diameter 

plugs of sod (at approximately 5-foot spacing) of 

Tufted Hairgrass, Lyngbye’s Sedge, Pacific Silverweed, 

and Rushes. Plant vigor, as observed 

in 2009, was generally good in this portion of the 

estuary. 

The outer bench not immediately adjacent to the 

low tide portion of the rerouted channel had the 

greatest density of transplanted sod. The vegetation 

in this area also appeared the healthiest at 

least along the lower half of the outer bench area. 

The vegetation consisted of Sedges and Hairgrass 

at 1- to 2-foot spacing with woody debris and a few 

shrubs interspersed between. 

During the 2009 monitoring, it was apparent from 

the presence of recent algal deposition, that the 

lower portions of this area are routinely inundated 

with salt water. At higher elevation sections of the 

estuary, some upland or riparian vegetation was 

beginning to colonize, such as salmonberry and 

horsetails. 

Constructed Vegetation Islands: 

Vegetation on these islands generally consisted of 

individual trees and/or shrubs and associated soil 

and ground cover species. Observed plant species 

included: trees, such as alder, hemlock, and Sitka 

Spruce (Picea sitchensis); a variety of shrubs, 

such as willows (Salix sp.), Salmonberry, Labrador 

tea, Red Huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), and 

Salal (Gaultheria shallon); and numerous ground 

cover species, such as fireweed (Epilobium spp.), 

horsetails (Equisetum sp.), clubmoss (Lycopodium 

sp.), and several fern species. 

The hydroseeded grass seed had become well 

established in locations where suitable topsoil existed. 

Stability of the vegetation islands appeared 

to be good, with all but one island maintaining their 

original soil, with minimal erosion, as observed in 

September 2009. 

In 2009, no significant vegetation growth or establishment 

was observed in the Government Creek 

floodplain. The floodplain consisted of bare glacial 

till soils and bedrock. As such, soil is lacking, and 

the mineral nature of the soils that do exist is not 

conducive to vegetation growth. A few plants have 

been observed in rocky portions of the floodplain, 

growing from soil trapped in crevices in the bedrock. 

An additional concern is the water height during 

large storm events, which inundates almost the 

entire floodplain and can scour away any topsoil or 

seedlings. 

The hydroseeding and erosion control blankets 

worked well. Some erosion and gully formation 

on cut slopes was noted during initial monitoring 

in 2008. During subsequent site visits, additional 

locations of erosion were noted along the slopes, 

though erosion was minimal. Side channel slopes 

of the North Tributary, cut into bedrock, did not experience 

any significant erosion or accretion. 

The majority of the eelgrass observed in 2006, 

where the low tide channel of Boulder Creek en- 

163

tered Tongass Narrows, is no longer present. Of 

the nearly 8,000 square feet of eelgrass, only 

about 600 square feet remained in 2008, and this 

had diminished to only 350 square feet by 2009. 


The hydroseeding and erosion control blankets 

placed on cut slopes performed well. Hydro seeded 

areas exhibit a nearly continuous grass cover. 

Vegetation islands appear to be an adequate solution 

for the lack of vegetation in the floodplain, 

and have the potential to become a seed source 

for adjacent areas. 

As of September 2009, the lower intertidal zone 

did not meet the project goals in two areas: existing 

eelgrass resources were negatively impacted, 

and significant erosion had occurred. The extent of 

erosion and the overall area of impact are greater 

than initially estimated. It is expected that the low 

tide channel will stabilize over time and eelgrass 

beds will colonize the new delta. Loss of eelgrass 

in this area was anticipated prior to construction 

and is reflected in the Monitoring Plan and success 

criteria. 

The loss of the eelgrass patches has resulted 

from a combination of channel erosion and new 

sediment deposition. Uniformly sandy substrate in 

the delta area suggests that eelgrass will become 

re-established in this area once the low tide portion 

of the creek and delta become more stable. 

The transplanted salt marsh vegetation in the estuary 

appeared to be in good health shortly after 

construction. Some areas had greater coverage 

of transplanted vegetation than others, but it is assumed 

that the remaining areas will become colonized 

over time. The constructed elevation of some 

of the intended salt marsh areas may be too high to 

allow regular inundation by saltwater. It is likely that 

upland or riparian vegetation may establish over 

portions of the intended salt marsh. 

Salt-marsh vegetation has become more established 

since monitoring began in 2008, however riparian 

vegetation has flourished in areas originally 

intended to provide salt-marsh cover. Future monitoring 

will determine which of these two somewhat 

competing interests will dominate. 

Substantial portions of the floodplain continue to 

receive routine overbank flows that scour many areas 

and hinder the formation of topsoil. The placement 

of additional boulders and large logs in selected 

overbank areas has improved the situation, 

but riparian vegetation cover adjacent to the creek 

remains sparse. Over time, perennials like alder or 

willows that can withstand the overbank flows may 

become rooted in the fractured rock and begin to 

accumulate soil so other plants can grow. 

References: 

Pentec Environmental / Hart Crowser Inc., 2009. 

Ketchikan International Airport Runway Overlay and 

Safety Area Upgrade Government Creek Relocation 

Year 0 and Post-High Flow Mitigation Monitoring Report. 

Prepared for Alaska Department of Transportation 

and Public Facilities. 78pp. 

Pentec Environmental / Hart Crowser, Inc., 2010. 

Ketchikan Airport Runway Upgrade and Safety Area 

Upgrade Government Creek Relocation Year 2 Monitoring 

Report. Prepared for Alaska Department of Transportation 

and Public Facilities. 62pp + Appendices 

Houghton, J., Cherry, S., Ormerod, D., Mearig, L., 

2010. Re-inventing Government Creek - lessons from 

a successful salmon stream and estuary relocation on 

Gravina Island. Abstract of Oral Presentation at 2010 

Alaska Marine Science Symposium, Anchorage AK. 


Ketchikan International Airport, Gravina Island, AK 

Low Tide Channel Alignment: Changes in the 

alignment of the new Government Creek channel 

exposed during low tide caused erosion of adjacent 

intertidal areas and the deposition of channel 

sediments on the adjacent eelgrass beds. Erosion 

and deposition have impacted eelgrass that was 

previously in the footprint of the low-tide delta, although 

the situation is improving. 

Site Photos: 

164

Aerial view of site showing runway expansion, 

rerouted Government Creek Channel (foreground) 

Satellite Image : SDMI | AlaskaMapped.org 

Aerial view of site in pre-disturbance condition 

Clumps of sod on outer salt marsh area - July, 2007 

Photos: Pentec Environmental / Hart Crowser Inc. 

165

Cut slopes across from photo point 2 - August, 2008 

Photo point 4, view downstream - September, 2007 


Cut slopes across from photo point 2; Vegetation island, 

installed in summer ‘08 - September, 2009 

Photo point 4, view downstream - August, 2008 

Photo point N4 (North Tributary) - August, 2008 

166 

Photo point N4 (North Tributary) - September, 2009 

Photo point 4. Note performance of vegetation island, 

installed in summer ‘08 - September, 2009

Photo point 5, view downstream - August, 2007 

Constructed channel, looking upstream - July, 2007 

Photo point 5, view downstream - September, 2009 

View of estuary from photo point 8 - August, 2007 


Across from photo point 8 - August, 2007 

Across from photo point 8 - September, 2009 

View of estuary from photo point 8 - August, 2008 

View of estuary from photo point 8 -September, 2009 

167

168

Further Information 


A lagoon on the Baldwin Peninsula, south of Kotzebue, bordered by a gravel bar supporting stands of 

Beach Wildrye (Leymus mollis) and Seaside Sandplant (Honckenya peploides) 

Section 5: 

1. Works Cited 

2. Partner Agencies 

169

Works Cited 

Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide 

Aiken, S.G., Consaul, L.L., Dallwitz, M.J. (1995 onwards) Paoace of the 

Canadian Arctic Archipelago, Descriptions, Illustrations, Identification, and 

Information Retrieval. 

Link: www.mun.ca/biology/delta/arcticf/ 

Aiken, S.G., Dallwitz, M.J., Consaul, L.L., McJannet, C.L., Gillespie, L.J., 

Boles, R.L. Argus, G.W., Gillett, J.M., Scott, P.J., Elven, R., LeBlanc, 

M.C., Brysting, A.K., and Solstad H. ,(1999 onwards). Flora of the 

Canadian Arctic Archipelago: Descriptions, Illustrations, Identification, and 

Information Retrieval. 

Link: www.mun.ca/biology/delta/arcticf/ 

AK Department of Law. (1990). Report on the EVOS quantity. In Files on 

‘ACE’ Investigation, ACE 10864138–10864143. ARLIS, Anchorage, AK. 

Allen, E. K., Allen, O.N., Klebesadel, L. J. (1995) An Insight into Symbiotic 

Nitrogen-Fixing Plant Associations in Alaska. In Dahlgren, G. Science 

in Alaska, proceedings of the 14th Alaskan Science Conference p. 54-63 

Bird, E.C.F. (2008), Coastal Geomorphology, An Introduction. John Wiley 

and Sons. Chichester, England. 

Burton, C.M. & Burton P.J. (2003), A Manual for Growing and Using Seed 

from Herbaceous Plants Native to the Northern Interior, British Columbia. 

Symbios Research and Restoration; Smithers, BC. p- 63-66 

Coppin, N. & Stiles, R. (1995) Ecological principles for vegetation 

establishment and maintenance. In Slope Stabilization and Runoff Control: 

A Bioengineering Approach. p. 59-93. New York, E & FN Spon. 

Davis, R.A., & Fitzgerald, D.M. (2004), Beaches and Coasts. Blackwell 

Science Ltd. Malden, MA. 

Dewald, C.L. & Beisel, A. (1983). The Woodward Flail-Vac Seed Stripper. 

in Transactions of the ASAE 26:1027-1029. 

Eliason, S.A., & Allen, E.B., 1997 Exotic Grass competition in suppressing 

native shrubland reestablishment, in Restoration Ecology, 5. p. 245 255 

170

Ffolliolt, P.F., K.N. Brooks, H.M. Gregersen & A.L. Lundgren. (1994). Dryland 

Forestry: Planning and Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 

Hardy, B. (1989), Manual of Plant Species Suitability for Reclamation in 

Alberta, Second Edition, RRTAC Report # 89-4. Alberta Land Conservation 

& Reclamation Counil. Edmonton, Alberta. 

Harris, P. M. (2008, onwards) Habitat Assessment & Marine Chemistry: 

Eelgrass Monitoring Alaska Fisheries Science Center - NOAA Fisheries 

Juneau, AK [online] 

Link: www.afsc.noaa.gov/ABL/Habitat/ablhab_eelgrass.htm 

Hoag, J.C. (2003). Willow Clump Plantings in Plant Materials Technical Note 

No. 42. USDA National Resource Conservation Service. Boise ID. 8p 

Holten E. (1968) Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Leland 

Stanford Junior University, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA . 

Hunt, M. and Moore, N.J. (2003), Propagation protocol for production of 

container Chamerion latifolium (L.) Holub plants; State of Alaska, Dept. 

of Natural Resources, Div. of Agriculture, Palmer, Alaska. In: Native Plant 

Network. Moscow (ID): University of Idaho, College of Natural Resources, 

Forest Research Nursery. [online] 

Link: www.nativeplantnetwork.org. 

Jones, B. M., C. D. Arp, M. T. Jorgenson, K. M. Hinkel, J. A. Schmutz, and 

P. L. Flint (2009), Increase in the rate and uniformity of coastline erosion in 

Arctic Alaska, in Geophysical Reseach. Letters., 36 

Maia, P. L., Herrmann, H., Drude de Lacerda, L. Modeling Dune Reactivation 

as a Tool for Assessing Climate Changes and Environmental Implications of 

the Aeolian Sand Encroachment in the Coast of Northeastern of Brazil. In 

proceedings of the International Conference on Management and Restoration 

of Coastal Dunes, Santander Spain, 3-5 October, 2007. 2 pp. 

Mason, O., Neal, W. J., Pilkey, O. H. (1997), Living with the Coast of Alaska. 

Duke University Press Durham, NC. 

McCracken, B. W. (2007). Aquatic resources implementation plan for 

Alaska’s Comprehensive Wildlife Strategy, Appendix 5.4 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Anchorage.AK 

Mitchell, W. (1985), Notice of Release of Nortran Tufted Hairgrass, in 

Agroborealis, July 1986. AF School of Natural Resources & Agricultural 

Sciences. AFES Publications, Fairbanks AK. 

171

Mitchell, W. (1985), Registration of Norcoast Bering Hairgrass, in Crop 

Science, Vol. 25, July-Aug, 1985. p.708-709 

Mitchell, W. (1980), Registraion in Alyeska Polargrass, in Crop Science vol. 

20 p.671 

Mitchell, W. (1987), Notice of Release of Kenai Polargrass, in Agroborealis, 

Vol. 19, number 1. p.5 UAF School of Natural Resources & Agricultural 

Sciences. AFES Publications, Fairbanks AK. 

Mitchell, W. (1980), Registration of Tundra Bluegrass. in Crop Science 20 

[5] p.669 

Moore, N. J., Walter, J., Hughes, D., Muhlberg, G. 2005. Streambank 

Revegetation and Protection, A Guide for Alaska, Alaska Department of Fish 

& Game, Division of Sport Fish. 91pp. 

Link: www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/saff/restoration/techniques/techniques.cfm 

Munshower, F.F. (1994), Practical Handbook of Disturbed Land Revegetation. 

Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (2005), 

Remaining Impacts | Assessing Environmental Harm. [online] 

Link: response.restoration.noaa.gov/ 

NOAA Ocean Service Education (2007, ongoing), Estuaries Tutorial. 

Link: oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/tutorial_estuaries/ 

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (1997), NRCS Irrigation 

Guide. US Department of Agriculture. 

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (2000), USDA National 

Plant Data Center. [online] 

Link: plants.usda.gov/ 

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (2004), The Plants 

Database. [online] US Department of Agriculture, National Plant Data 

Center, Baton Rouge, LA. 


Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (2007), The Plants 

Database. [online] US Department of Agriculture, National Plant Data 

Center, Baton Rouge, LA. 


Nature Conservancy (2010) Estuaries are ‘Nursuries of the Sea’ [online] 

Link: www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/ 

states/alaska/preserves/art27140.html 

172

Nowacki, G., Spencer, P., Fleming, M., Brock, T., & Jorgenson, 

T. (2001), Ecoregions of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. 

Forest Service, National Parks Service, & The Nature Conservancy. 

Link: agdc.usgs.gov/data/usgs/erosafo/ecoreg/ 

Pye K., and Neal, A (1994) Coastal dune erosion at Formby Point, 

Mereseyside, England: Causes and mechanisms, in Marine Geology vol. 

119 pp-39-56 

Oceanographic Institute of Washington. (1979), Alaska north slope 

wetlands study. Prepared for USACE, Alaska District. Contract DACW85- 

79-C-0007 

Ott, R. (1996) Sound Truths and Exxon Myths--The 15 Year Dark Anniversary of 

the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill and Beyond - Information Sheet Prepared by Alaska 

Forum for Environmental Responsibility and Alaska Community Action on Toxics. 

Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment Working Group [PAME] (ongoing) 

The Selendang Ayu Disaster in the Alaska Arctic in Focus [online]. Nordurslod, 

Iceland 

Link: www.pame.is/amsa/on-focus/49-the-selendang-ayu-disaster-in-the-alaskaarctic 

Ransom, J. E. (1940) Derivation of the Word ‘Alaska’ in American 

Anthropologist n.s., 42: pp. 550-551 

Rooney, J. P. Dune Restoration in Britain: moving forward looking forward. 

In Proceedings of the International Conference on Management and 

Restoration of Coastal Dunes, Santander Spain, 3-5 October, 2007. 2 pp. 

Schwartz, M.L. (1972) Spits and bars. Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, 

Publishers. Stroudsburg, PA. 

Selkregg, L. L. (1977) Alaska Regional Profiles | Southeast Alaska. University 

of Alaska | Arctic Environmental Information Data Center. 233pp. 

Society for Ecological Restoration Science & Policy Working Group. 

(2002), The SER Primer on Ecological Restoration. 

Link: ser.org/ 

Steinfeld, D.E., Riley, S.A., Wilkinson K.M., Landis, T.D., Riley, L.E. 

(2007), Roadside Revegetation, An Integrated Approach to Establishing 

Native Plants. Federal Highway Administration | Western Federal Lands 

Highway Division. Vancouver, WA; 424 pp. 

173

Strittholt, J., Nogueron, R., Bergquist, J., Alvarez, M. (2006), Mapping 

Undisturbed Landscapes in Alaska – Overview Report. World Resources 

Institute Washington, D.C. 78 pp. 

Link: pdf.wri.org/gfw_alaska_final.pdf 

Sullivan, J. (1993), Elymus Macrourous in Fire Effects Information Systems 

[online] United States Department of Agriculture. 

Link: www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ 

U. S. Dept. of Interior. Environmental Assessment of Proposed Radioactive 

Soil Removal from the Project Chariot Site at Cape Thompson. (1993) USDI, 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge, Homer, 

AK. 

Vallentine, J.F. (1989), Range Developments and Improvements. New York: 

Academic Press 

Walkup, C. (1991), Arctagrostis latifolia in Fire Effects Information System 

[online] USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire 

Sciences Laboratory. 

Link: www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ 

Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC) 1986, ongoing [online] 

Link: www.wrcc.dri.edu/narratives/ALASKA.htm 

Whisenant, S. G. (2005) Repairing Damaged Wildlands, A Process 

Orientated, Landscape Scale Approach. Cambridge University Press, New 

York 

174

Partner Agencies 

in Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control 

Seldom does a revegetation or restoration project occur in a vacuum. 

The following list includes state and federal agencies that may need to be 

consulted. Academic and private organizations are also listed. 

Alaska Department of Fish & Game 

adfg.alaska.gov/ 

The mission of the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) is to protect, 

maintain, and improve the fish, game, and aquatic plant resources of the state, 

and manage their use and development in the best interest of the economy and 

the well-being of Alaskans. 

Alaska Department of Natural Resources 

dnr.alaska.gov/ 

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has a mission to develop, conserve, 

and enhance Alaska's natural resources for the benefit of all Alaskans. 

DNR manages all state-owned land, water and natural resources, except for fish 

and game, on behalf of the people of Alaska. 

Division of Agriculture 

dnr.alaska.gov/ag/ 

The Division of Agriculture works with local producers to promote and support 

Alaska's agricultural industry through financing for farmers and processors, plant 

material development, conservation education, marketing assistance, inspection 

and farm product certification. The Division of Agriculture houses the Alaska Plant 

Materials Center. 

Division of Mining, Land, and Water 

dnr.alaska.gov/mlw/ 

The Division of Mining, Land, and Water (DMLW) is the primary manager of Alaska's 

land holdings. Responsibilities include preparing land-use plans and easement 

atlases; classifying, leasing and permitting state land for recreation, commercial 

and industrial uses, as well as coordinating and overseeing water rights. 

175

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 

dec.alaska.gov/ 

The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has the mission of conserving, 

improving and protecting Alaska’s natural resources and environment 

to enhance the health, safety, economic and social well being of Alaskans. The 

DEC houses the divisions of Air Quality, Environmental Health, Water, and Spill 

Prevention and Response. 

US Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District 

www.poa.usace.army.mil/ 

The US Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District provides a full spectrum of 

quality engineering, technical, and construction support services in support of 

peacetime and contingency operations in Alaska and throughout the Pacific Region. 

Major programs focus on military construction, civil works and environmental 

cleanup. 

National Climatic Data Center 

www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html 

The National Climate Data Center (NCDC) develops both national and global 

data sets used by both government and the private sector to maximize the resource 

provided by our climate and minimize the risks of climate variability and 

weather extremes. The Center has a statutory mission to describe the climate of 

the United States and the NCDC keeps track of trends and anomalies of weather 

and climate. The NCDC maintains the world’s largest archive of climate data. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

www.noaa.gov/ 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has responsibilities 

that include daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings and climate 

monitoring, as well as fisheries management, coastal restoration and supporting 

marine commerce. 

National Marine Fisheries Service, AK Regional Office 

www.fakr.noaa.gov/ 

NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is dedicated to the stewardship 

of living marine resources through science-based conservation and management, 

and the promotion of healthy ecosystems. The Alaska Region of NOAA 

Fisheries works to protect and enhance Alaska’s marine habitat, and has responsibilities 

covering 842,000 square nautical miles off Alaska. 

176

NMFS Habitat Conserveration Divison 

alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/habitat/ 

NMFS’ Habitat Conservation Division (HCD) works to avoid, minimize, or offset 

the adverse effects of human activities on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) and living 

marine resources in Alaska. This work includes conducting and/or reviewing 

environmental analyses for activities ranging from commercial fishing to coastal 

development to large transportation and energy projects. HCD identifies technically 

and economically feasible alternatives and offers realistic recommendations 

for the conservation of valuable living marine resources. The Habitat Conservation 

Division also maintains the ShoreZone mapping system, which combines 

low-tide oblique angle aerial imagery with geomorphic and biological data. 

ShoreZone is located at: 

alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/shorezone/ 

NMFS Habitat Restoration Center 

alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/habitat/restoration.htm 

The NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) Restoration Center restores coastal habitats and 

provides technical restoration expertise on restoration planning, implementation 

and monitoring, as well as financial assistance through various grant programs. 

Since 1996, the NMFS Restoration Center has supported nearly 70 community 

restoration projects in Alaska, benefiting more than 560 acres of estuarine and 

riparian habitat. 

Natural Resource Conservation Service 

www.nrcs.usda.gov/ 

The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) is a program of the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA). NRCS works with landowners through conservation 

planning and assistance designed to benefit the soil, water, air, plants, 

and animals that result in productive lands and healthy ecosystems. NRCS works 

at the local level, maintaining field offices at 12 locations across Alaska. To find 

the closest service center for your region, refer to the map at: www.ak.nrcs.usda. 

gov/technical/fo.html. The Natural Resource Conservation Service provided the 

funding to produce this publication. 

NRCS Soils Website 

soils.usda.gov/ 

This NRCS soils website is part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, an effort 

of Federal and State agencies, universities, and professional societies to deliver 

science-based soil information. 

177

US Forest Service 

www.fs.fed.us/ 

The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) is an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

The Forest Service manages public lands in national forests and grasslands. 

Alaska has two National Forests managed by the USFS; the Chugach, in 

Southcentral Alaska, and the Tongass, in Southeast Alaska. These forests total 

nearly 22 million acres, including over 7 million acres of wetlands. 

US Fish & Wildlife Service 

fws.gov/ 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service works to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, 

wildlife, plants, and their habitats. The USFWS is the only agency in the federal 

government whose primary responsibility is management of these important 

natural resources for the American public. USFWS is responsible for implementing 

and enforcing some important environmental laws, such as the Endangered 

Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, & Marine Mammal Protection. 

US Bureau of Land Management 

blm.gov/ 

In Alaska, the Bureau of Land Management administers approximately 75 million 

surface acres of federal public land - an area larger than the State of New Mexico. 

The Bureau has an active program of soil and watershed management on 86 

million acres in Alaska. BLM encourages practices such as revegetation, protective 

fencing, and water development that are designed to conserve and enhance 

public land, including soil and watershed resources. 

Western Regional Climate Center 

www.wrcc.dri.edu/ 

The Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC) consolidates delivery of climate 

services at national, regional and state levels, working with the National Climatic 

Data Center, National Weather Service, the American Association of State Climatologists, 

and NOAA Research Institutes. 

Alaska State Climate Center 

climate.uaa.alaska.edu/ 

The Alaska State Climate Center, an effort of the University of Alaska, provides 

climatological information and official weather data to the public. The climate 

center library contains a wide variety of publications of climatologically interest. 

178

Alaska Climate Research Center 

climate.gi.alaska.edu/ 

The Alaska Climate Research Center is a research and service organization at 

the Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks. The group conducts 

research focusing on Alaska and polar regions climatology and maintains an archive 

of climatological data for Alaska. 

Juneau Watershed Partnership 

www.juneauwatersheds.org/ 

The Juneau Watershed Partnership (JWP) promotes watershed integrity in the 

City and Borough of Juneau through education, research and communication 

while encouraging sustainable use and development. 

Kenai Watershed Forum 

www.kenaiwatershed.org/ 

The Kenai Watershed Forum (KWF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization 

dedicated to maintaining the health of the watersheds on the Kenai Peninsula. 

KWF is active in education, restoration, and research. 

Alaska Association of Conservation Districts 

www.alaskaconservationdistricts.org/ 

Alaska Association of Conservation Districts' (AACD) mission is to actively support 

12 statewide Soil and Water Conservation Districts, while providing other 

services such as education programs, information, meetings and conferences. 

The Alaska district works as a community-based organization, serves as a nonregulatory 

agency, maintains strong partnerships with other agencies and becomes 

involved only at the land users' request. 

179

180

Appendix A: 

Beach Wildrye Planting Guide 


Abandoned sand quarry on Adak Island, revegetated with Beach Wildrye 

Beach Wildrye is a native species that is highly adapted for revegetation 

and erosion control on sandy and/or gravelly coastal areas, river and lake 

banks, and unstable dune areas. 

This guide is intended to give the user ideas and techniques for using 

Beach Wildrye through a series of flow charts from which actual need and 

method of use can be determined. If Beach Wildrye has a place in your 

revegetation plan and you require additional information, please contact 

the Alaska Plant Materials Center at (907) 745-4469. Alternatively, visit the 

Plant Materials Center’s website, at plants.alaska.gov/. 

A.1

BEACH WILDRYE 

Planting Guide for Alaska 

By Stoney Wright 

Originally Published in 1994 

Reprinted in 2013 

ALASKA DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE 

PLANT MATERIALS CENTER 

PALMER, ALASKA 

UNITED STATES NAVY 

ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVITY NORTHWEST 

POULSBO, WASHINGTON 

A.2

Acknowledgements: 

This publication was prepared and published through a grant from the 

U.S. Navy Engineering Field Activity Northwest. The publication is the 

culmination of ten years of active research by the Alaska Plant Materials 

Center, Alaska Department of Natural Resources. Support for the research 

presented herein has been provided by the following groups: 

US. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 

ALASKA DISTRICT 

US. AIR FORCE 

ALASKAN COMMAND 

ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE, ALASKA 

US. NAVY, NAVAL FACILITIES 

ENGINEERING COMMAND WESTERN DIVISION 

SAN BRUNO, CALIFORNIA 

U.S. COAST GUARD 

17TH COAST GUARD DISTRICT 

JUNEAU, ALASKA 

A.3

WHAT'S IN A NAME 

Beach Wildrye is an easily identifiable grass species common throughout 

coastal and insular Alaska. This species (or subspecies) has been called 

by a number of common and scientific names. (Klebesadel 1985) listed no 

less than 12 common names including: dune grass, American dune grass, 

Iyme grass, beach ryegrass, sea Iymegrass, Siegle de mer, strand wheat, 

strand oats, wild wheat, sand-meal grass, dune wildrye, and beach wildrye. 

The scientific names applied to this species are nearly as confusing as 

the common names. Presently, Leymus mollis is being used as the scientific 

name of the species. It has also been called Elymus mollis, Leymus 

arenarius and Elymus arenarius. Leymus mollis is the third scientific name 

the Plant Materials Center has used since starting to work with Beach Wildrye. 

To further muddle the issue of nomenclature, species of Amomophilia 

are at times confused with Beach Wildrye because of that genus' common 

name “beach grass”. 


FIGURE a.1: Typical stand of Beach Wildrye on a gravel beach. 

A.4

WHERE DOES IT GROW 

Beach Wildrye is the North American species or variety of the Elymus arenarius 

complex. The range of Beach Wildrye is described as being along 

the coast of Alaska to Greenland, south to Long Island, New York and central 

California, along lakes Superior and Michigan, also eastern Siberia to 

Japan (Hitchcock 1950). Within this range, the species occupies a specific 

niche, most often on sandy beaches forming belts along the shore (Hulten 

1968). This includes sandy beaches along the north shore of Lake Superior 

(Dore 1980). The species habitat is further defined as being spits, sea 

beaches, tidal flats, sea cliffs and lakeshores (Welsh 1974). While usually 

associated with coastal dunes, the species can be found along large land 

lakes occupying the same relative shoreline areas as in the marine coastal 

areas (Klebesadel 1985). 

FIGURE a.2: 

Typical coastal band community 

of Beach Wildrye 


FIGURE a.3: Rock-based Beach Wildrye community in Prince William Sound 

A.5

THE FIRST DECISION: 

DO YOU NEED BEACH WILDRYE 

If you wish to revegetate or control erosion on a coastal site or foredune 

area where drifting sand is a concern, Beach Wildrye may be the preferred 

species. If a pre-existing stand of Beach Wildrye needs to be recreated, it 

is the only solution. 

FIGURE a.4: Do you need or want Beach Wildrye 

A.6

WHAT TO PLANT: THE SECOND DECISION 

Usually when planning a revegetation or erosion control project, seed 

comes to mind. Beach Wildrye may require a different approach. At the 

time of this publication’s printing, Beach Wildrye seed is not commercially 

available. However, in 1991, two cultivars of Beach Wildrye were released 

for commercial production. One was developed for vegetative reproduction 

or transplanting (sprigging) the other for seed production. 

To date, the most common method of using Beach Wildrye has been 

sprigging. As seed becomes commercially available, more projects will use 

standard seeding methods. 

SEED vs. SPRIGS 

ADVANTAGES 

ADVANTAGES 

Reduced cost 

Readily available 

Low manpower requirements 

Standard method can be used 

Can be used on erosive sites 

High degree of success 

Allows for layout design 

Can tolerate flooding by high tides or 

storm surges soon after planting 

DISADVANTAGES 

Slow growth 

Low vigor 

Short supply 

Not adapted for all sites 

DISADVANTAGES 

Higher manpower requirement 

Higher costs 

Table a.1: Seed/Sprig comparisons 

Once it has been determined that Beach Wildrye will be used for a revegetation 

project, Figure a.6 can guide the process for selecting a planting 

technique and address additional considerations important for planting the 

project. 

A.7

WHAT TO PLANT: THE SECOND DECISION 

FIGURE a.5: 

Procedure Selection Chart: 

Seed vs. Sprigs 

A.8

SPRIGGING: A.K.A. TRANSPLANTING 

What is a sprig 

Basically, a sprig of Beach Wildrye is the smallest division taken from a 

live Beach Wildrye plant that can be used to grow a new plant. 


FIGURE a.6: 

Clump of Beach Wildrye, prior to division 

Does the sprig need to have well developed roots attached 

No. A Beach Wildrye sprig will rapidly regenerate new roots. 

Does the sprig need to have green leaves 

No. The above ground portion of the sprig may be dormant when transplanted. 

Also, if the leaves are green when transplanted, they die back after 

transplanting. This is not reason for concern. New growth will start from the 

below ground portion. 

Is it necessary to trim either the leaves or the below ground 

portion of a sprig 

No. Simply transplant the entire sprig. 

How many times can a clump of Beach Wildrye be divided 

A clump can be divided to a point where only a portion of the below ground 

crown and above ground leaf mass exists. 

A.9

SPRIGGING: A.K.A. TRANSPLANTING 

Photo: Brennan Veith Low (AK PMC) 

FIGURE a.7: 

Sprigs of Beach Wildrye, one year after planting at the mouth of the Kenai River 

A.10

FIGURE a.8: Excavator used to harvest Beach Wildrye 


FIGURE a.9: Loader used to harvest sprigs 

A.11

HOW ARE SPRIGS HARVESTED 

Several tools can be used to harvest Beach Wildrye sprigs. Shovels are 

an appropriate tool for harvesting small quantities of sprigs or for harvest 

in sensitive areas. 

When possible, a backhoe, excavator, or front-end loader (Figures a.9 

- a.10) provides a very efficient harvesting tool. With this equipment, sod 

blocks are dug and moved to a site where workers can easily remove 

sprigs by hand. The vibration and force exerted by the equipment on the 

sod loosens the soils, usually sand, and allows large undamaged clumps 

to be removed easily by hand. These are then further divided into individual 

sprigs for planting. 

At the Alaska Plant Materials Center, Beach Wildrye is harvested with a 

potato digger (Figure a.11). This specialized tool is fragile and is more appropriate 

for use in the commercial production of Beach Wildrye than for 

wild harvested plants. 


FIGURE a.10: 

Loader preparing to lift a natural stand 

of Beach Wildrye for sprig harvest 

A.12 

FIGURE a.11: A potato digger used to harvest Beach Wildrye at the 

Alaska Plant Materials Center

SITE PREPARATION & PLANTING 

Planting can be accomplished with shovels or construction equipment. If a 

shovel or spade is used, simply drive the point four to six inches in the soil. 

Push the handle forward and slip the sprig into the slit behind the shovel. 

Note this is done without withdrawing the shovel or spade (Figure a.14). 

It is more efficient to use machinery to open trenches, as shown in figures 

a.12 and a.13. 

FIGURE a.12: 

Modified dozer blade 

with ‘tiger teeth’ 


FIGURE a.13: A site prepared with tiger teeth 

4 to 6” 

depth 

FIGURE a.14: Shovel method of planting 

A.13

PLANTING 

The actual planting technique is referred to as the "drop and stomp method". 

This technique is not described in any landscape or horticulture text, 

however, the technique has been proven at both Shemya AFB and Adak 

NAF. 

The use of mechanical tree planters (Figure a.17) can be used on production 

ground with good results. It is unlikely that a contractor will use this 

type of equipment. Instead, they will rely on standard construction equipment 

or manual methods. 


FIGURES a.15 AND a.16: 

Drop (above) & stomp (below) planting method 

FIGURE a.17: 

Mechanical tree planters can be 

used to plant Beach Wildrye 

A.14

PLANTING 

Do the sprigs need to be planted vertically 

No. Beach Wildrye sprigs can be placed in any position and will resume 

growth, thereby eliminating the need for careful upright planting (Wright 

1990a). Negative geotropic growth resumes quickly from inverted seed blocks 

(Amundsen 1986) indicating haphazard and rough treatment of the sprigs is 

acceptable. This was verified on Shemya. 

When can the sprigs be transplanted 

One major drawback usually pointed out for this species is that the window 

or time period for successful planting is very limited. Carlson (1991) states 

"American dunegrass (Beach Wildrye) must be planted when dormant". This 

point has been dismissed in Alaska. Table a.2 lists various planting times 

attempted by the Plant Materials Center. High success rates have been reported 

at all sites from mid May to mid September. This may be in part due 

to the relatively cool temperatures and cloudy conditions typical of all of the 

planting sites in Alaska. As a general rule in Alaska, try to complete all transplanting 

prior to September 1 south of the Arctic Circle, and prior to August 1 

north of the Arctic Circle. 

LOCATION PLANTING DATE SUCCESS RATE after 1 year 

Shemya 5/15 98% 1 

Red Dog 6/15 99% 2 

Adak 6/23 93% 3 

Shemya 7/12 98% 1 

Adak 7/18 99% 3 

Port Clarence 7/20 70% 2 

Kuparuk 8/16 96% 4 

Adak 8/17 98% 3 

Fish Creek 

(Anchorage) 8/23 60% 5 

Adak 9/15 99% 3 

1 

Based on 3 replications of 300 sprigs 

2 


3 


4 

Based on 25 sprigs, no replication 

5 

Based on 50 sprigs, no replication 

TABLE a.2: 

Percent survival of locally collected Beach Wildrye sprigs related to time of planting 

(Wright et al 1987, Wright 1980a, 1990b). 

A.15


FIGURE a.18: A site on Shemya sprigged in May 1987 

A.16 

FIGURE a.19: Same Shemya site in September 1989

PLANTING 

What spacing should be used for transplants 

In general, a 3-4 foot on center spacing is adequate. If the site is subject 

to severe erosion, 18 inches may be needed. 

FIGURE a.20: Typical planting layout 


FIGURE a.21: 

A planting site on Adak in 

June 1989 

FIGURE a.22: The Adak planting site in August 1991 

A.17

PLANTING 

How long will it take to plant an acre 

The time required depends on the spacing between sprigs and how many 

are planted per acre. 

Projects at Shemya, Port Clarence, Kasilof and Adak indicated that 400 

sprigs could be dug and prepared per man-hour relatively easily and that 

350 sprigs could be planted per man-hour using the drop and stomp method. 

What should I expect for survival 

A well planned project planted with reasonable care can be expected to 

have a sprig survival rate of 90%. Figures a.18 - a.19, and a.21 - a.24 show 

successful plantings at three sites in Alaska. 


FIGURE a.23: 

Adak dune restoration project 

in 1989, 3 months after 

sprigging 

A.18 

FIGURE a.24: Same Adak dune area in 1994, 5 years after sprigging

USING SEED TO ESTABLISH BEACH WILDRYE 

Beach Wildrye as a species is notorious for not producing seed. The Plant 

Materials Center has expended a great deal of effort in finding a collection 

of Beach Wildrye that would produce commercially viable amounts of seed. 

By 1991 these efforts resulted in the release of 'Reeve' Beach Wildrye, a 

collection from Norway. This release is classified as Leymus arenarius. The 

demand for seed should be strong if it becomes commercially available, 

and Leymus arenarius can be substituted for Leymus mollis. 

What is Beach Wildrye seed like 

Beach Wildrye seed is very large when compared to other grasses. There 

are 33,000 seeds per pound. For comparison, Kentucky bluegrass averages 

1,500,000 seeds per pound and Red fescue averages 365,000 seeds 

per pound. 

How is the germination & vigor 

Beach Wildrye is not known for being a species with either high seedling 

vigor or exceptional germination percentages for its seed. Fifty percent germination 

for the seed should be considered acceptable. 

How about a seeding rate 

Based on the seed size and evaluation of plantings throughout Alaska, 

a seeding rate of 60 pounds per acre should provide an adequate stand. 

Remember that this is a large-seeded species, so the rate per acre may 

appear excessive. It is not. 

When should I sow the seed 

In general, use the standard seeding recommendations as presented in 

Table a.3. 

REGION SOWING DATES 

Southwest Alaska May 1 - September 30 

Southeast Alaska May 1 - September 30 

Southcentral Alaska May 15 - September 1 

Western Alaska June 1 - August 15 

Arctic Alaska July 1 - August 1 

TABLE a.3: Standard seeding dates in Alaska 

A.19

ADDITIONAL FACTS ABOUT BEACH WILDRYE 

Beach Wildrye responds to high nitrogen fertilizers. When planting sprigs 

or seed, rates of 500 to 600 pounds of 20% nitrogen, 20% phosphorus, and 

10% potassium fertilizer give good results. 

No other soil amendments are necessary. 

This species will not tolerate excessive traffic (Wright 1990c). This includes 

foot traffic. Both natural and artificially established stands can be 

severely damaged by traffic that causes soil compaction. 

Beach Wildrye works best in sandy or gravelly soils. Performance in organic, 

silt and clay soils tends to be poor. 

Planting patterns must be planned. Irregular spacing can result in dunes. 

Uniform spacing tends to promote uniform sand deposition and therefore 

uniform build-up of sand. 

This species does not tolerate strong competition from other grasses. 

Avoid using strongly rhizomatous species with Beach Wildrye sprigs. Avoid 

any other grass when using Beach Wildrye seed. If a grass species is used 

with Beach Wildrye, use light rates of Hairgrass (Deschampsia sp.) (less 

than ten pounds per acre). Broadleaf material such as Tilesy sagebrush 

(Artemisia tilesii) can be used with either seed or sprigged Beach Wildrye. 

A one-acre natural stand can produce enough sprigs to establish a sevenacre 

site with sprigs on two - to three-foot centers. 

A.20 


FIGURE a.25: Beach Wildrye roots and rhizomes stabilize sandy soils

COMMERCIAL AVAILABILITY OF SPRIGS & SEED 

Two cultivars, 'Reeve' and 'Benson', have been released by the Alaska 

Plant Materials Center (Wright 1991a, 1991b). Reeve is a seed producing 

cultivar of L. arenarius, while Benson, L. mollis, is intended to be sold as 

sprigs. Presently, availability of both is limited. Contact the Plant Materials 

Center if you are interested in commercially producing either cultivar. If 

you are searching for seed for plants to use on projects, contact your local 

Cooperative Extension Service Office or the Alaska Plant Materials Center. 


Figure a.26: Beach Wildrye along the Kenai Peninsula 

A.21

CLOSING STATEMENT ABOUT USING BEACH WILDRYE 

& WHERE TO GET MORE INFORMATION 

Beach Wildrye is an extremely effective species for use in coastal revegetation, 

restoration and erosion control. Due to the dynamic nature of most 

shorelines, prior planning is needed if planting efforts using Beach Wildrye 

are to succeed. Before undertaking a Beach Wildrye planting program, a 

call to the Alaska Plant Materials Center may prevent unnecessary surprises, 

(907) 745-4469. 

Photo: Brennan Veith Low (AK PMC) 

Figure a.27: 

Beach Wildrye is very susceptible to damage by uncontrolled foot traffic. 

In this photograph, an eroded coastal dune has been used for a fire-pit. 

Protective fencing and access controls can help limit human causes of erosion. 

A.22

REFERENCES 

Amundsen, C.C. 1986. Central Aleutian Tundra. Ecological Manifestations of 

Maritime Tundra Landscapes in the Central Aleutian Islands (Amchitka. Adak), 

Alaska. DOE-AS05-76EV04180. University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN. 

Carlson, J, F. Reckendorf and W. Ternyik. 1991. Stabilizing Coastal Sand 

Dunes in the Pacific Northwest. Agriculture Handbook 687. United States Department 

of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 

Dore, W.G. and McNeill. 1980. Grasses of Ontario. Monograph 26, Agriculture 

Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 

Hitchcock, A.S. 1950. Manual of Grasses of the United States. United States 

Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C. 

Hulten, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University 

Press, Stanford, California 

Klebesadel, L.J. 1985. Beach Wildrye Characteristics and uses of a Native Alaskan 

Grass of Uniquely Coastal Distribution. Agroborealis. 17:31-38. 

Welch, S.L. 1974. Anderson’s Flora of Alaska and Adjacent Parts of Canada. 

Brigham Young University Press, Provo, Utah. 

Wright, S.J., L.H. Fanter, and J.M. Ikeda. 1987. Sand Stabilization Within the 

Lateral Clear Zone at Shemya Air Force Base. Alaska Using Beach Wildrye, Elymus 

arenarius. State of Alaska, Division of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center 

and U.S, Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District. 

Wright. S.J. 1990a. Final Report of Data and Observations Obtained From the 

Adak Naval Air Station Evaluation Plot Network. 1988-1990. State of Alaska, Division 

of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center. 

Wright, S.J. 1990b. Final Report of Data and Observations Obtained From the 

Red Dog Mine Evaluation and Demonstration Plots. State of Alaska, Division of 

Agriculture, Plant Materials Center. 

Wright, SJ. 1990c. An Overview of the Alaska Plant Materials Center’s Work with 

Beach Wildrye, Elymus arenarius (E. mollis). Proceedings of the Public Symposium. 

Restoration Following the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. March 26-27, 1990. 

Restoration Planning Work Group. Anchorage, Alaska. 

Wright, S.J. 1991 a. Release Notice - ‘Reeve’ Beach Wildrye. State of Alaska, 


Wright, S.J. 1991 b. Release Notice - ‘Benson’ Beach Wildrye. State of Alaska, 


A.23

A.24

Appendix B: 

State of Alaska Seed Regulations 

Alaska Administrative Code: 

Title 11, Chapter 34 

B.1

Title 11, Alaska Administrative Code, 

Chapter 34: Plant Health and Quarantine 

Article 1: 

10. Labeling 

20. Prohibited and restricted noxious weeds 

30. Weed seed as agricultural seed 

40. Sampling procedure for purity and germination tests 

45. Duties and authority of the director 

50. Germination and purity tests 

60. Laboratory fees and schedule 

70. Code of Federal Regulations 

75. Prohibited acts 

77. Weed seeds in shipment 

80. Penalties 

85. When penalties not applicable 

90. Records 

100. Expense of treatments 

B.2

Article 2: 

105. Quarantine officers 

110. Pest certificate fees 

115. Appeals from director’s decision 

120. Federal-state cooperation 

125. Inspection stations 

130. Quarantine regulations; inspections 

135. Form of certain regulations 

140. New pests 

145. Permits for pest shipment 

150. Notification of quarantined articles 

155. Release from inspection 

160. Right to inspect 

165. Labeling and certificates 

170. Destruction or treatment of pests 

180. Treatment of appliances 

Article 4: 

400. Definitions 

11 AAC 34.010. 

Labeling 

SEED REGULATIONS: 11 AAC 34.010 

(a) Each lot or package of agricultural seed sold or offered for sale within the state 

must bear on it or have attached to it in a conspicuous place, a legibly written or 

printed label or tag, in English, providing the following information: 

(1) the commonly accepted name of the kind and variety of the seed; 

(2) the country or state where the seed was grown; 

(3) the total percentage by weight of pure seed; 

(4) the total percentage by weight of all weed seed; 

B.3

(5) the total percentage by weight of inert matter; 

(6) the total percentage by weight of other crop seed; 

(7) the name and approximate number per pound of each kind of restricted 

noxious weed seed, as listed in 11 AAC 34.020; 

(8) the percentage of germination of the agricultural seed, together with the 

month and year the seed was tested; 

(9) the percentage of hard seed, if any is present; 

(10) the name and address of the person labeling the seed or selling, offering, 

or exposing the seed for sale within the state; and 

(11) the lot number or other lot identification. 

(b) Each lot of mixed agricultural seed sold or offered for sale within the state 

must bear on it or have attached to it in a conspicuous place, a legibly written or 

printed label or tag, in English, providing the following information: 

(1) that the seed is a mixture; 

(2) the name and variety and total percentage by weight of each kind of agricultural 

seed present in order of predominance; 

(3) the total percentage by weight of other crop seed less than five percent of 

the mixture; and 

(4) the information listed in (a)(4), (a)(5), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(10), and (a)(11) of 

this section. 

(c) Vegetable seed in a container of one-half pound or more sold or offered for 

sale within the state must bear on the container or have attached to the container 

in a conspicuous place, a legibly written or printed label or tag, in English, providing 

the following information: 

(1) the name of the kind and the variety and total percentage by weight; and 

(2) the information listed in (a)(4) - (a)(8), (a)(10), and (a)(11) of this section. 

(d) Vegetable seed in a container of less than one-half pound sold or offered for 

sale within the state and which meets the germination standards and tolerances 

in 7 U.S.C. 1551 - 1611 (Federal Seed Act) must bear on the container or have 

attached to the container in a conspicuous place, a legibly written or printed label 

or tag, in English, providing the following information: 

(1) the name of the kind and variety of the seed; 

(2) the name and address of the person or firm labeling the seed, or selling, 

offering, or exposing the seed for sale within the state; 

(3) the year the seed was packed; and 

(4) the lot number or other identification. 


(e) Vegetable seed in a container of less than one-half pound sold or offered for 

sale within the state and which does not meet the germination standards and tolerances 

in 7 U.S.C. 1551 - 1611 (Federal Seed Act) must be labeled, in English, 

B.4

to provide the information required by (d) of this section and the following: 

(1) percentage of germination; 

(2) percentage of hard seed, if applicable; and 

(3) the phrase “substandard germination” in not less than eight-point type. 

(f) Any agricultural or vegetable seed treated with toxic substances must be labeled 

to provide the information required by (a) - (e) of this section and the following: 

(1) a word or statement, in type no less than eight points, that the seed has 

been treated; 

(2) the commonly accepted coined or chemical name of the applied substances; 

and 

(3) a caution statement and appropriate poison symbol if the applied substance 

presents a hazard to human or animal health. 

(g) Seed packed in hermetically sealed containers must be labeled to provide the 

information required by (a) - (f) of this section and the following: 

(1) that the container is hermetically sealed; 

(2) that the seed has been preconditioned as to moisture content; 

(3) that the germination test is valid for a period of not more than 24 months 

from the date of germination test for seed offered for sale on a wholesale basis, 

and for a period of not more than 36 months for seed offered for sale at retail; 

and 

(4) that the germination of seeds at the time of packaging was equal to or 

above standards and tolerances prescribed in the 7 U.S.C. 1551 - 1611 (Federal 

Seed Act). 

(h) Agricultural seeds, mixed agricultural seeds, or bulk vegetable seeds, are 

exempt from the provisions of this section when 

(1) the seeds are grown in or sold within the state to be recleaned before being 

sold, exposed, or offered for sale for seeding purposes; 

(2) the seeds are held for purposes of recleaning; or 

(3) the seeds are held or sold for milling for food or for feeding purposes only. 

(i) Tetrazolium viability test results are not considered valid germination tests for 

the purposes of labeling as required by this section. 

(j) Hybrid seed, as defined in 7 C.F.R. 201.2(y), must be labeled in accordance 

with provisions of 7 C.F.R. 201.11(a). 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 


History: In effect before 7/28/59; 

am 3/2/78, Register 65; 

am 10/28/83, Register 88 

B.5

11 AAC 34.020. 

SEED REGULATIONS: 11 AAC 34.020 - 34.030 

Prohibited and restricted noxious weeds 

(a) The following are prohibited noxious weeds: 

(1) Bindweed, field (Convolvulus arvensis); 

(2) Fieldcress, Austrian (Rorippa austriaca); 

(3) Galensoga (Galensoga parviflora); 

(4) Hempnettle (Galeopsis tetrahit); 

(5) Horsenettle (Solanum carolinense); 

(6) Knapweed, Russian (Centaurea repens); 

(7) Lettuce, blue-flowering (Lactuca puichella); 

(8) Orange Hawkweed (Hieracium aurantiacum); 

(9) Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria); 

(10) Quackgrass (Agropyron repens); 

(11) Sowthistle, perennial (Sonchus arvensis); 

(12) Spurge, leafy (Euphorbia esula); 

(13) Thistle, Canada (Cirsium arvense); 

(14) Whitetops and its varieties (Cardaria drabe, C. pubescens, Lepidium 

latifolium). 

(b) The following are restricted noxious weeds, with their maximum allowable 

tolerances: 

(1) Annual bluegrass (Poa annua), 90 seeds per pound; 

(2) Blue burr (Lappula echinatat), 18 seeds per pound; 

(3) Mustard (Brassica kaber, juncea), 36 seeds per pound; 

(4) Oats wild (Avena fatua), seven seeds per pound; 

(5) Plantain, buckhorn (Plantago sp.), 90 seeds per pound; 

(6) Radish (Raphanus raphanistrum), 27 seeds per pound; 

(7) Toadflax, yellow (Linaria vulgaris), one seed per pound; 

(8) Vetch, tufted (Vicia cracca), two seeds per pound; 

(9) Wild Buckwheat (Polygonum convovulus), two seeds per pound. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 



am 10/28/83, Register 88; 

am 7/28/2007, Register 183 

11 AAC 34.030. 

Weed seed as agricultural seed 

B.6


The following seeds, when occurring incidentally in agricultural and vegetable 

seeds, are classed as weed seeds, except when sold alone or as a specific constituent 

of a definite seed mixture: 

• Black Medic (Medicago lupulina); 

• Cardoon (Cynara cardunculus); 

• Dandelion (Taraxacum species); 

• Lupine (Lupinus species); 

• Pigweed (Amaranthus species); 

• Radish (Raphanus sativus); 

• Rape (Brassica campestris and napus); 

• Sunflower (Helianthus annuus); 

• Yarrow (Achillea millefolium); and 

• Tufted Vetch (Vicia cracca). 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 




11 AAC 34.040. 

Sampling procedure for purity and germination tests 

(a) A sample of seed chosen by an authorized agent of the division of agriculture 

for the purpose of determining whether or not the seed meets the requirements 

of this chapter is known as an “official sample,” and must be drawn in a manner 

to represent as nearly as possible the entire lot from which it is taken. 

(b) Official samples of seed shall be taken according to procedures which 

conform as nearly as practicable to those used by the United States Department 

of Agriculture pursuant to 7 C.F.R. 201.39 - 201.44. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 



11 AAC 34.045. 

Duties and authority of the director 

(a) The duty of enforcing this chapter and of carrying out its provisions and requirements 

is vested in the director. The duties and authority of the director include 

the following: 

B.7


B.8 

(1) to sample, inspect, make analyses of, and test any agricultural or vegetable 

seed held, transported, sold, offered, or exposed for sale within the state for 

planting purposes, at the time, place, and to the extent the director finds necessary 

to determine whether the seed is in compliance with this chapter; 

(2) to sample, inspect, make analyses of any tree, shrub, or flower seed held, 

transported, sold, offered, or exposed for sale within the state for planting purposes, 

at the time, place, and the extent as the director may find necessary to 

determine whether the seed is in compliance with this chapter; 

(3) to issue and enforce a written stop sale order or to issue a violation notice, 

whichever the director determines applicable, to the possessor or owner of any 

lot of agricultural, vegetable, tree, shrub, or flower seed which is found to be in 

violation of this chapter; and 

(4) to prohibit the further sale, processing, or movement of seed, except on 

approval of the director, until evidence is obtained that shows that the requirements 

of this chapter have been complied with and a release from the stop sale 

order has been issued for the seed. 

(b) When seed is denied further sale, processing, or movement under (a)(3) and 

(a)(4) of this section, the owner or processor of the seed has the right to appeal 

to a court of competent jurisdiction in the locality in which the seeds were found 

in violation, asking for a judgment as to the justification of the order and for the 

discharge of the seed from the order prohibiting the sale, processing, or movement, 

in accordance with the findings of the court. 

(c) The provisions of (a)(3) and (a)(4) of this section do not limit the right of the 

director to proceed as authorized by other sections of this chapter. 

(d) For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this chapter, the director or 

his authorized agents, may 

(1) enter upon any public or private premises during regular business hours in 

order to access seeds and associated records maintained under this chapter, 

and any truck or other conveyer by land, water, or air at any time when the 

conveyer is accessible, for the same purposes; and 

(2) either alone or in the presence of a representative or employee of the person 

whose premises are entered, examine and inspect any agricultural, vegetable, 

tree, shrub, or flower seed in possession, offered, or exposed for sale 

for planting purposes in this state, for compliance with this chapter. 

(e) A sample taken under this section, and the report showing the results of the 

official test made on a sample, is prima facie evidence of the true condition of the 

entire lot from which the sample was taken. 

(f) A copy of the results of any seed test from a sample taken under this section 

may be mailed to any person or his authorized representative, known to own, 

possess, or hold the seed from which the sample was taken. 

History: Eff. 10/28/83, Register 88 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 03.05.040 , AS 03.05.050 , AS 44.37.030

11 AAC 34.050. 

Germination and purity tests 


Germination and purity tests of seeds must be conducted according to procedures 

which conform as nearly as practicable to those used by the United States 

Department of Agriculture pursuant to 7 C.F.R. 201.59 - 201.66. 

Authority: AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 

11 AAC 34.060. 

Laboratory fees and schedule 

(a) Germination and purity tests are performed at the Alaska Seed Testing Laboratory. 

(b) State residents may submit seed samples for routine testing free of charge 

if the samples are limited to three per year per person and are submitted before 

April 15 of the year. 

(c) Samples submitted by residents in excess of three per year or after April 15, 

or submitted by nonresidents will be charged a service fee as determined by the 

director. 

(d) Samples submitted by residents and nonresidents for germination tests requiring 

tetrazolium procedures will be charged a service fee to be determined by 

the director according to a fee schedule based upon the difficulty of the species 

being tested. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.070. 

Code of Federal Regulations 

Except where in conflict with specific provisions of this chapter, the rules, regulations 

and recommendations pertaining to sampling procedures and germination 

and purity testing procedures and standards contained in 7 C.F.R. 201.39 

- 201.44 and 201.59 - 201.66 are adopted by reference and made part of this 

chapter. Copies of these provisions may be obtained from the U.S. Government 

Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20250. Any reference in these provisions to 

U.S. Government officials and agencies shall be construed to refer to the corresponding 

officials and agencies of the State of Alaska. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 


B.9

SEED REGULATIONS: 11 AAC 34.070 - 34. 075 

Editor’s note: These regulations are adopted by reference. The official Rules 

and Regulations under the Federal Seed Act are published by the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture and are available from the Superintendent of Documents, 

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20250 

11 AAC 34.075. 

Prohibited acts 

(a) No person may sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, or transport for use in 

planting in the state any agricultural or vegetable seed that 

(1) unless exempt under 11 AAC 34.010(h) , has not been labeled as required 

by 11 AAC 34.010; 

(2) bears a false or misleading label; 

(3) contains any prohibited noxious weed seed, except as allowed in (g) of this 

section; 

(4) contains any restricted noxious weed seed in excess of the permissible 

tolerance per pound established under 11 AAC 34.020(b) , except as allowed 

in (g) of this section; or 

(5) has not been tested within the 18 months preceding the sale, offering, or 

exposure for sale, or transportation, not including the calendar month in which 

the test was completed, except for hermetically sealed containers under 11 

AAC 34.010(g) (3), and except that 

(A) the director will, in his discretion, allow a shorter period for kinds of seed 

which he finds, under ordinary conditions of handling, will not maintain a germination 

within the established limits of tolerance during the prescribed time 

period, or a longer period for kinds of seed which are packaged in a container 

and under conditions the director determines will, during the longer period, 

maintain the viability of the seed under ordinary conditions of handling; 

(B) a person in possession of seed shall keep on file, available for department 

inspection, the original or duplicate copy of the latest test made of the 

seed which must show, in addition to the information required by this chapter, 

the date and name of the person making the test. 

(b) No person may substitute uncertified seed for certified seed. 

(c) No person may use tags or seals indicating certification other than as prescribed 

by the authorized certification agency unless the tuber, horticultural, 

vegetable, tree, shrub, flower, or cereal grain seed has been produced, tested, 

examined, and labeled in accordance with this chapter or the official certification 

agency of another state, territory, or country. No person may 

(1) sell, offer for sale, expose for sale, advertise, or transport any tuber, plant, 

or seed, falsely representing it to be certified; or 

(2) use in connection with a tuber, plant, or seed any tags or seals similar to 

B.10

those used in official certification as established by this chapter. 

(d) No person may hinder or obstruct in any way, any authorized person in the 

performance of his duties under this chapter. 

(e) No person may sell, offer, or expose for sale, plant, transport or process any 

seed that is under a stop sale order issued under 11 AAC 34.045(a) (3) or that is 

in violation of this chapter, without express approval of the director. 

(f) No person may plant in this state any agricultural, vegetable, tree, shrub, or 

flower seed containing any prohibited noxious weeds listed in 11 AAC 34.020(a) 

or any restricted noxious weeds in excess of the maximum allowable tolerances 

listed in 11 AAC 34.020(b) , except as provided in 11 AAC 34.030, without express 

written approval of the director, or as provided in (g) of this section. 

(g) No person may use, sell, offer, expose for sale, give away, or transport for 

feeding, seeding, or mulching purposes any seed or grain screenings containing 

any prohibited noxious weed seed listed in 11 AAC 34.020(a) or any restricted 

noxious weeds in excess of the maximum allowable tolerances listed in 11 AAC 

34.020(b), except as provided in 11 AAC 34.030, and except that the director may 

allow sale or transport of screenings for 

(1) complete destruction; 


(2) removal outside of the boundaries of the state; 

(3) recleaning to the point of being in compliance with 11 AAC 34.020(a) and 

(b); or 

(4) processing to make the weed seed nonviable. 

(h) No person may sell, offer, or expose for sale for seeding purposes, seed containing 

more than one and one-half percent by weight of all weed seed. 

(i) No person may sell, offer, expose for sale or transportation, or transport a 

container or package of seed within this state unless the container or package 

of seed is labeled with a net contents statement, expressed by either weight, 

volume, or numerical count, except for seed being transported from an owner’s 

field to a warehouse for storage, cleaning, or processing. 

(j) No person may sell, offer for sale, or represent potatoes as seed potatoes unless 

the potatoes have been certified by the official seed certifying agency of the 

state or country of origin. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 

History: Eff. 10/28/83, Register 88; 

am 10/28/87, Register 104 

11 AAC 34.077. 

Weed seeds in shipment 

Whenever anything brought into a part of the state from another part of the state 

B.11

or from any other state or foreign country is found to be infested with the seed 

of any prohibited noxious weed, the director will notify the owner or bailee of the 

shipment to return it to the point of shipment within 48 hours, and the owner or 

bailee of the shipment shall return it. If the director determines that the seeds 

can be destroyed by treatment, the shipment may, at the option and expense of 

the owner or bailee, be treated under the supervision of the director, and may be 

released after treatment. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 

11 AAC 34.080. 

Penalties 



Penalties for violation of this chapter are as provided in AS 03.05.090. 


11 AAC 34.085. 

When penalties not applicable 

No person may be subjected to the penalties of AS 03.05.090 for selling, offering, 

exposing for sale, or transporting in this state any agricultural or vegetable seed 

that; 

(1) is incorrectly labeled or represented as to kind and variety or origin, and which 

cannot be identified except by a field test, when that person 

(A) obtains an invoice or grower’s declaration stating the kind, or kind and variety, 

and origin, if required; 

(B) takes the invoice or grower’s declaration in good faith; and 

(C) takes other precautions as are reasonable to insure the identity of the seeds 

to be as stated; 

(2) does not conform to the label on the container, but is within the tolerances 

authorized by the director under this chapter; or 

(3) is in violation of this chapter, but is allowed sale or movement under specific 

written permission of the director. 


Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 

B.12

11 AAC 34.090. 

Records 


Each person whose name appears on the label as handling agricultural or vegetable 

seed subject to this chapter shall keep for two years a complete record of 

each lot of agricultural or vegetable seed handled, and shall keep for two years 

a file sample of each lot of seed after final disposition of the lot. All records and 

samples pertaining to the shipment or shipments involved must be accessible for 

inspections by the director or his designated agent during customary business 

hours. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.100. 

Expense of treatments 

Any treatment which may be required under the provisions of this chapter shall be 

at the risk and at the expense of the owner or persons in charge or in possession 

thereof at the time of treatment unless otherwise provided. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 

History: In effect before 7/28/59 

11 AAC 34.105. 

ARTICLE 2 

Quarantine officers 

(a) The director is an enforcing officer of all laws, rules and regulations relative to 

the prevention of the introduction into, or the spread within the state of pests. 

(b) The director and such inspectors as he may appoint, holding valid certificates 

of eligibility for the office to which they have been appointed, are hereby 

designated State Plant Quarantine officers for the purpose of certifying to the 

pest condition or pest treatment of shipments, when certification as a condition 

of movement is officially required, and for the purpose of enforcing of laws, rules 

and regulations, relative to plant quarantine. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 


B.13

11 AAC 34.110. 


Pest certificate fees 

The director may establish a schedule of fees for any or all classes of certificates 

to be paid by shippers requesting such certificates. Upon receipt of such scheduled 

fee, or in the event no schedule has been established, then upon request of the 

shipper it is the duty of the director to make such inspection as may be necessary 

to determine the facts required by the state or country of intended destination 

and to issue a certificate stating the facts determined; provided, that no fee shall 

be charged for certification required by any law, regulation, or requirement of the 

United States or of this state. The schedule of fees established for such certificates 

shall be based upon the approximate cost of the inspection made therefor. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.115. 

Appeals from director’s decision 

(a) In cases relative to the prevention of the introduction into, or the dissemination 

within the state of pests, any interested person aggrieved by any action or order of 

the director may appeal in writing to the office of the director within five days after 

notice of action or order where there is no time limit upon such action or order, and 

in cases where a time limit is fixed, within such time limit. In cases where the director 

is empowered to, and does take summary action, no appeal may be taken. 

(b) Appeals will be heard by the director within 10 days after receipt thereof upon 

notice to all interested parties and his decision shall be final. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.120. 

Federal-state cooperation 

B.14 

Whenever quarantine regulations are established under this chapter, if there are 

any authorities or officers of the United States having authority to act in such matter, 

or any part thereof, the director shall notify such authorities or officers and seek their 

cooperation as far as possible. When any article is found to have been transported 

into this state from any other state, or district of the United States, in violation of the 

provisions of a quarantine established by the Secretary of Agriculture of the United 

States, such article shall be subject to seizure, destruction or other disposition to 

the same extent and in the same manner as if such article had originated in this 

state and was in violation of a provision of this chapter.


Authority: 

AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.125. 

Inspection stations 

To prevent the introduction into, or the spread within this state, of pests, the director 

may maintain at such places within this state as he deems necessary quarantine 

inspection stations for the purpose of inspecting all conveyances which might 

carry plants or other things which are or are liable to be infested or infected with 

pests. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.130. 

Quarantine regulations; inspections 

(a) The director may establish, maintain and enforce such quarantine regulations 

as he deems necessary to protect the agricultural industry of this state from pests, 

by establishing quarantine at the boundaries of this state or elsewhere within the 

state. He may make and enforce such rules and regulations as are necessary 

to prevent any plant or thing which is or is liable to be infested or infected by or 

which might act as a carrier of any pest, from passing over any quarantine line 

established and proclaimed pursuant to this chapter. The person conducting the 

inspection shall not permit any such plant or thing to pass over the quarantine 

line during quarantine, except upon a certificate of inspection and release signed 

by him. 

(b) No person shall conceal from plant quarantine officers any plant or fail to 

present the same or any quarantined article for inspection at the request of such 

officer. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.135. 

Form of certain regulations 

All quarantine regulations involving another state, district, or foreign country will 

be adopted by the commissioner and will be approved and proclaimed by the 

B.15


governor. A proclamation will be signed in duplicate. The original proclamation 

will be filed in the office of the lieutenant governor and a copy in the office of the 

director before it takes effect. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 



11 AAC 34.140. 

New pests 

Upon information received by the director of the existence of any pest not generally 

distributed within this state he shall thoroughly investigate the existence and 

probability of the spread thereof. He may also establish, maintain and enforce 

quarantine and such other regulations as are in his opinion necessary to circumscribe 

and exterminate or prevent the spread of such pest. The director may 

disinfect, or take such other action with reference to, any plants or things infested 

or infected with, or which in his opinion may have been exposed to infection or 

infestation by, any such pest, as in his discretion shall seem necessary. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.145. 

Permits for pest shipment 

No pest, live insect or disease may be imported into or shipped or transported 

within the state except for the purpose of identification, unless such shipment or 

transportation is authorized under written permit and the regulations of the director 

or the United States Department of Agriculture. Any unauthorized shipment 

shall be returned to the point or origin, shipped out of the state, or destroyed 

within 48 hours at the expense of the owner or bailee. 

Authority: 

AS 03.05.010 , AS 03.05.030 , AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.150. 

Notification of quarantined articles 

Any person who transports, receives or imports into the state any things, or any 

B.16


plants against which quarantine has been established and who fails immediately 

after the arrival thereof to notify the director of their arrival, and to hold them for 

immediate inspection by the director, without unnecessarily moving them, or placing 

them where they may be harmful, is in violation of this section. 

Authority: AS 03.05.010, AS 03.05.030, AS 44.37.030 


11 AAC 34.155. 

Release from inspection 

The director may designate certain plants arriving from certain areas not for planting, 

propagation or ornamental purposes within this State which may be released 

without inspection, if he finds upon investigation that such plants from such areas 

are not liable to cause the introduction of pests into the state. 



11 AAC 34.160. 

Right to inspect 

The officer making the inspection may enter at any time into any conveyance or 

place within the state where the said plants or things are located, to ascertain 

whether they are or are liable to be infested or infected with any pest. 



11 AAC 34.165. 

Labeling and certificates 

Each shipment of plants, brought into this state, shall have legibly marked thereon 

in a conspicuous manner and place the name and address of the shipper or 

owner, the name of the person to whom the same is forwarded or shipped, or his 

agents, the name of the country or state where the contents were grown, and a 

statement of the contents therein. Also each shipment of plants, grown in a country 

or state which maintains inspection of plants, shall be accompanied by a copy 

of a current inspection certificate from such country or state. 



B.17

11 AAC 34.170. 


Destruction or treatment of pests 

When any shipment of plants brought into this state is found infested or infected 

or there is reasonable cause to presume that it may be so infested or infected 

with any pest, the shipment shall be immediately destroyed by, or under the such 

pest may be exterminated by treatment or processing prescribed by the director, 

and it is determined by the inspecting officer that the nature of the pest is such 

that no damage can be caused to agriculture in this state through such treatment 

or processing, or procedure incidental thereto. In such case, the shipment may 

be so treated or processed at the expense of the owner or bailee in the manner, 

and within the time specified by the inspecting officer, under his supervision, and 

if so treated or processed, upon determination by the enforcing officer that the 

pest has been exterminated, the shipment may be released. 



11 AAC 34.180. 

Treatment of appliances 

(a) To prevent the dissemination of pests through the agency of appliances, the 

director will, in his discretion, publish a list of pests that can be carried that way 

and designating the appropriate treatment for appliances. 

(b) No person may ship or move any used appliances unless he furnishes to 

the director proof satisfactory to the director that the appliances have not been 

exposed to infestation or infection by any pests, or that the appliances have been 

treated immediately before shipment or movement in the manner designated by 

the director. 




11 AAC 34.400. 

Definitions 

Definitions 

B.18 

The terms used in this chapter are construed to conform insofar as possible with 

the terms used in the Federal Seed Act (7 U.S.C. 1551 et seq.) and the regulations 

issued under that Act. Unless the context indicates otherwise, in this chapter 

(1) “advertisement” means representation other than on labels, disseminated in


any manner or by any means relating to seed within the scope of these regulations; 

(2) “agricultural seeds” means the seeds of all domesticated grasses and cereals, 

and of all legumes and other plants grown as turf, cover crops, forage crops, fiber 

crops or field crops and mixtures of the seeds; 

(3) “appliance” means box, tray, container, ladder, tent, vehicle, implement, or 

any other article which is or may be used in connection with the planting, growing, 

harvesting, handling, or transportation of an agricultural commodity; 

(4) “bailee” means a person who, by warehouse receipt, bill of lading, or other 

document of title, acknowledges possession of goods and contracts to deliver 

them; 

(5) “certified,” as applied to bulblets, tuber, or horticultural plants or to agricultural, 

vegetable, tree, shrub, flower, or cereal grain seed, means inspected and labeled 

by and in accordance with the standards and rules and regulations of the official 

certification agency or in accordance with similar standards established by a similar 

authority in another state, country, or territory; 

(6) “certified seed potatoes” means potatoes used for planting a crop, that have 

been officially certified as “foundation seed” or “certified seed” by an authorized 

inspector, in a manner approved by the director, or, in the case of seed imported 

into the state, meets the certification standards of the Association of Official Seed 

Certifying Agencies; 

(7) “commercial production” means products not grown exclusively for use or 

consumption by the producer; 

(8) “director” means the director of the division of agriculture, Department of Natural 

Resources, or the director’s authorized agent; 

(9) “flower seed” includes seed of herbaceous plants grown for their blooms, 

ornamental foliage, or other ornamental parts which is commonly sold under the 

name of flower seed in the state; 

(10) “labeling” means all labels and other written, printed, or graphic representations 

in any form whatsoever, whether attached to, or accompanying and pertaining 

to any seed, whether in bulk or in containers and includes invoices; 

(11) “lot” means a definite quantity of seed identified by a lot number or other 

mark, every portion of which is uniform within the recognized tolerances for the 

factors which appear in the labeling; 

(12) “mixed agricultural seeds” means any lot of seeds that contains five percent 

or more by weight of each of two or more kinds of agricultural seeds; 

(13) “noxious weed” means any species of plants, either annual, biennial, or perennial, 

reproduced by seed, root, underground stem, or bulblet, which when established 

is or may become destructive and difficult to control by ordinary means 

of cultivation or other farm practices; or seed of such weeds that is considered 

commercially inseparable from agricultural or vegetable seed; 

(14) “nursery stock” means any plant for planting, propagation or ornamental 

use; 

B.19

(15) “other crop seed” means that part of a lot or sample of seed that consists of 

the seed of cereal grain and agricultural and vegetable seeds other than those 

named on the label; 

(16) “packer” means the person or firm putting the seed into its final container in 

preparation for sale as seed; 

(17) “person” means a individual, partnership, corporation, company, society, association, 

or cooperative; 

(18) “pest” means a form of animal life, plant life, or infectious, transmissible, or 

contagious disease of plants, that is or is liable to be dangerous or detrimental to 

the agricultural industry of the state; 

(19) “plant” means a whole or part of a plant, tree, shrub, vine, fruit, vegetable, 

seed, bulb, stolon, tuber, corm, pip, cutting, scion, bud, graft, or fruit pip, and 

includes an article made from a plant; 

(20) “pure seed,” “germination,” and other seed labeling and testing terms in common 

use are defined as the terms are defined in the Rules for Seed Testing (Volume 

6, #2, 1981) published by the Association of Official Seed Analysts, Stone 

Printing Company, Lansing, Michigan, and in the Federal Seed Act (7 U.S.C. 

1551 et seq.) and the regulations promulgated under it (7 C.F.R. 201 et seq.); 

(21) “restricted noxious weed seed” means the seed of weeds which are very objectionable 

in fields, lawns, and gardens of this state, but which can be controlled 

by good cultural practices; 

(22) “shipment” means an article or thing, which may be, is being, or has been 

transported from one place to another place; 

(23) “tree and shrub seed” means seed of woody plants commonly known and 

sold as tree and shrub seeds in this state; 

(24) “vegetable seeds” means the seeds of all crops which are being grown or 

which may be grown in gardens, privately or commercially, and which are generally 

known and sold under the name of vegetable seeds; and 

(25) “weed seed” means a restricted noxious weed seed and any seed not included 

in the definition of agricultural seed when it occurs incidentally in agricultural 

or vegetable seeds. 

History: 

In effect before 7/28/59; 





B.20

Appendix C: 

Other Publications of Interest 

Gathering information from a variety of reference materials can be helpful when 

approaching a revegetation or erosion control project. The publications listed in 

this section are particularly relevant to the topics covered in the Alaska Coastal 

Revegetation and Erosion Control Guide. 

A Field Guide to Alaska Grasses 

Quentin A. Skinner, Stoney J. Wright, Robert J. Henszey, JoAnn L. Henszey 

& Sandra K. Wyman 

A Field Guide to Alaska Grasses has the most complete inventory of 

Alaskan grass species to date. It covers 167 grass species, providing 

detailed taxonomic descriptions, distribution maps, a comprehensive 

glossary and hundreds of a full-color photographic plates. 

The book’s lead author is Dr. Quentin Skinner, Professor Emeritus of the 

University of Wyoming. Stoney Wright, manager of the Plant Materials 

Center, is a co-author, along with Sandra Wyman of the U.S. Bureau of 

Land Management, Robert Henszey of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 

and JoAnn Henszey of the University of Alaska Fairbanks. 

A Field Guide to Alaska Grasses was funded through a partnership with 

the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, the Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Bureau of Land 

Management and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. A Field Guide to 

Alaska Grasses is available from the Alaska Plant Materials Center, and 

is linked at plants.alaska.gov. 

Size: 6 x 9 inches, 380 pages. 

ISBN: 978-0-615-64886-6; 

Published by: Education Resources Publishing. 

Interior Alaska Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide 

Phil K. Czapla and Stoney J. Wright 

The Interior Alaska Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide complements 

the Alaska Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide, focusing 

on the unique aspects of construction or cleanup activities in 

Interior Alaska. The guide includes information on planting techniques, 

the protection of wetlands and permafrost, and the mitigation of negative 

human and natural impacts to the environment. 

This publication contains species suggestions and a step-by-step 

guide to planning a revegetation project. Several case-studies examine 

past reclamation and restoration projects in the region, serving as 

a useful reference for future revegetation activities. 

C.1

The Interior Alaska Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide was funded in part 

by a grant from the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, and was published 

by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. The guide was awarded 

a 2012 Extension Education Award Materials Award from the American Society 

of Agronomy, and is available from the Alaska Plant Materials Center. The book is 

available online, at plants.alaska.gov. 

Size: 8.5 x 11 inches, 138 pages. 

Published by: Alaska DNR, Division of Agriculture, Plant Materials Center 

Wildflowers and other Plant Life of the Kodiak Archipelago 

A Field Guide for the Flora of Kodiak and Southcentral Alaska 

by Stacy Studebaker 

The first comprehensive field guide to cover the flora of this unique 

region of Alaska. This book contains illustrations and descriptions of 

365 species of vascular plants, with over 650 full color photographs. 

The plants are organized by flower color in an easy-to-use format 

and is full of information on habitats, uses, folklore, and other natural 

history information. In addition to wildflowers, the book also includes 

ferns, horsetails, clubmosses, shrubs, trees, grasses, sedges, rushes 

and aquatic plants that are found throughout Southcentral AK. 

The book contains information about geology, glacial history, soils, the 

Kodiak glacial refugium, the recovery of plant life after the ice age, and 

notable Alaskan botanists. The author has researched, documented, 

and photographed the flora of coastal Alaska since 1973 and lived in 

Kodiak since 1980. 

Size: 6 x 9 inches, 224 pages. $25.00 

Published by: Sense of Place Press, Kodiak AK. kodiakwildflowers.com 

Familiar Plants of Coastal Alaska 

A Guide to Identification 

by Stephen MacLean 

This full color plant guide features the most common and familiar 

plants of Alaska’s coastal environments as well as the ferns, mosses, 

lichens and trees. The book explains how the temperate rainforest 

“works” with detailed descriptions of the climate and major habitats 

such as the forest, forest edge, coastal meadows, and muskeg bog. 

Designed for both the beginner and advanced learner, this book features 

large oversize photos to aid identification and handy tables that 

let you quickly find your plant by looking at habitat, color, counting the 

number of petals and other shortcuts. Author Stephen MacLean is a 

retired professor from the University of Alaska and works as a naturalist 

on board cruise ships in the Inside Passage during the summer. 


ISBN 978-0-9821896-7-2 $19.95 

Published by: Greatland Graphics, Anchorage, AK. alaskacalendars.com 

C.2

Field Guide to Seaweeds of Alaska 

Mandy R. Lindeberg and Sandra C. Lindstrom 

This book is the first and only field guide to more than 100 common 

seaweeds, seagrasses, and marine lichens of Alaska. Filled with color 

photos and clearly written descriptions, and printed on water-resistant 

paper, it is a must-have addition to the reference collections of any scientist, 

coastal monitor, naturalist, educator, student, or beachcomber 

interested in Alaska’s coastal ecosystems. 

Author Mandy Lindeberg is a biologist with the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration in Juneau, Alaska. In 2006 she discovered 

a new genus of kelp, golden V (depicted on the cover), in the Aleutian 

Islands. Coauthor Sandra Lindstrom is a professor at the University of 

British Columbia and has published many journal articles and books 

on algae. 


ISBN: 978-1-56612-156-9; $30.00 

Published by: Alaska Sea Grant Program. seaweedsofalaska.com 

Invasive Plants of Alaska 

Edited by Matt Carlson, Jeff Heys, Michael Shepard and Jamie Snyder 

In recent years, biologists, ecologists, and land managers have become 

acutely aware of the global threats posed by invasive species. 

Invasive species can include plants, animals, fungi, insects, and other 

organisms that have overcome previously limiting geographical barriers 

through deliberate or inadvertent human activity. 

This guide is intended for use by anyone interested in learning more 

about the invasive non-native plants moving into Alaska. Some of the 

plants described have been here for many years; some are common, 

others are rare and just now spreading, and still others have not yet 

shown up here but are likely to arrive soon. Some species in this guide 

are known to be serious problems in Alaska and elsewhere, while others 

are quite ubiquitous except in remote places. 

Size: 5.5 x 8.5 inches, 294 pages. 

Produced by: U.S. Department of the Interior, the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, The Alaska Soil and Water Conservation District, the University 

of Alaska Fairbanks Cooperative Extension Service, and the Alaska Natural 

Heritage Program. 

www.fs.usda.gov/main/r10/forest-grasslandhealth/ 

C.3

The Alaska Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide was 

released by the Alaska Plant Materials Center, a part of the 

Department of Natural Resources, Division of Agriculture. 

This publication is intended for use by the general public and 

environmental professionals in the protection of coastal Alaska. 

It was produced at a cost of $20.93 per copy, and printed in 

Anchorage, Alaska. This publication is also available online, at 

plants.alaska.gov. 


Beach Wildrye covers a sandy beach in Southeast Alaska 

Back Cover: Honckenya peploides and Leymus mollis community on a beach in Safety Sound 

Photo: Stoney Wright (AK PMC)

Alaska Coastal Revegetation & Erosion Control Guide - Alaska Plant ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?