The Cherokee National Forest is hoping to remove vegetation that is competing with Ruth’s Golden Aster, which is on the Endangered Species List. The global distribution of Ruth's golden aster (Pityopsis ruthii) is confined to a few miles along the Hiwassee and Ocoee Rivers in Polk County. The populations of the rare flower have been intensively monitored since 1986.  Approximately 600 individuals are known to occur on the Ocoee River and approximately 10,000 on the Hiwassee.

Botanists have noted a substantial increase in competing vegetation within the Hiwassee River monitoring plots each year.  It is believed that this competition is negatively impacting individual plants through direct displacement and shading. Ruth’s Golden Aster is shade-intolerant.  Historically, such competing vegetation was probably removed by the scouring action of periodic floods; however, the free-flowing hydrology of the Hiwassee River has been altered by the construction of dams for power generation and flood control.  Flood events occur much less frequently, which is allowing the establishment of competing vegetation. Loss of habitat poses a threat to the continued existence of this endangered species.

The Cherokee National Forest in cooperation with the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), and USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, is proposing an experimental study designed to enhance habitat for the federally endangered Ruth’s golden aster by removing competing vegetation.  Four plots paired at two sites along the Hiwassee River have been selected for this pilot study. There would be no action at two plots, while the other would receive treatment.

Pending final approval, competing vegetation would be removed from the two treatment plots utilizing mechanical and chemical methods. Annual inspections and possible follow-up spring treatments would be conducted for a period of 10 years. The project was first proposed several years ago but dropped because of funding issues. At the time, the key issue raised during the public comment period was concern about the use of herbicides.

Because of the potential impacts of herbicides on the natural environment, mechanical removal was initially considered to be an alternative but it became apparent that mechanical treatments may do more harm than good.  Many of the target species have documented responses of increased growth in response to mechanical disturbance (poison ivy, Japanese honeysuckle, sericea lespedeza) and perhaps more importantly, since many of these plants are rooted in the same cracks as Ruth’s golden aster, hand pulling could result in accidental removal of Ruth’s golden aster plants.  Mechanical treatments may be effective on small, isolated plants within a plot, but cannot be effective as a broad scale treatment.  Since a proposal of this nature would serve to make the existing problem worse than the current condition or No Action Alternative, it was determined that strictly mechanical treatment could not meet the purpose.

All herbicide application techniques in the proposal have been designed specifically to avoid non-target impacts.  Specialized equipment including flexible wands with “no-drip tip” adjustable nozzles would be used on sprayers, and individual Ruth’s golden aster plants would be protected using a variety of shields. The total amount of herbicide that would be necessary to treat an individual plot is estimated to be between one to five ounces, thus non-target impacts (indirect effects) would be expected to be minimal to none.

Removal of competing vegetation is intended to simulate the long-term results of sustained, frequent flooding which were part of the natural habitat. If the results of the proposed actions are deemed successful, it would be reasonable to expect that these actions would replicated at a larger scale in the future. 

The increased populations of Ruth’s golden aster, a wildflower that blooms in late summer, would be considered a positive effect to the scenery and recreation resources.

The Forest Service is currently taking comments on the proposal. A description of the proposed actions is also available on the Cherokee National Forest Web site at http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/cherokee/planning/2008/ea08.shtml.