Cedar Creek Natural History Area

Conducting Research at Cedar Creek

Research and Land Use Policy

Areas zoned for observational research are to be used so as to preserve, intact, their organisms and ecosystem processes. Small scale destructive sampling/manipulation is allowed, but it should not be of a scale or frequency to impact population dynamics or ecosystem functioning. Areas zoned observational include the wetlands around Cedar Bog Lake and Beckman Lake Bog and the lakes themselves, the 22 fields that form the LTER Old Field Chronosequence, and Crone's Knoll. Portions of the 22 fields in which there are permanent transects to study succession are protected to assure that other research activities do not impact studies of successional dynamics. In these 22 old fields the area of the old field chronosequence transects themselves (approximately 40 m x 75 m) and a 50 meter buffer around the outside of all of these transects is zoned for observational research. Permission is needed to enter these zones and for any observational or small-scale experimental work within them. Intensive experimentation

Intensive experiments, if properly planned and executed, can be a highly valuable resource for current and future researchers at Cedar Creek, which is a major justification for dedicating land to them. Intensive experiments are ones that cause significant changes to population densities of one or more species or that significantly impact ecosystem processes. They leave an ecosystem in a state that may be markedly different from either its original state or the state that would be obtained after a period of natural succession. Intensive experimentation includes large-scale tilling or other manipulations of soil, large-scale removal of vegetation, large-scale planting of other species, nitrogen addition, watering, application of pesticides, introduction of novel species, fire, and any other such manipulations. The areas currently zoned for intensive experimentation are Fields A, B, C D, and E, the area where the duck pens and garden plots are (but not the rest of Field 44), and the biodiversity experiment area. Note that all of these areas except Field D were highly human-impacted before experimentation was initiated, and that experimentation is more restricted in Field D, which is a savanna habitat. It is generally expected that all future intensive experimentation will be performed in these areas. Any exceptions to this policy would require extensive and lengthy review.

Moderate experimental manipulations are those of sufficiently low intensity or small spatial extent that they are unlikely to impact areas other than the immediate sites where treatments are applied, that are of short duration, and for which treated sites seem likely to become indistinguishable from non-manipulated areas a few years after cessation of the experiment. All areas of Cedar Creek not mentioned above are zoned for moderate experimental manipulation. Thus, it applies to most wetland habitats, abandoned fields, forests and all other sites. Within this categorization, no more than one fifth of any given field or stand may be used for experiments which modify the nature of that ecosystem, and no more than one-fifth of the stands representing any given type of ecosystem, in total, may be so used or impacted, in total, by any type of research. This thus restricts use of a given ecosystem type, for example 25-30 year old successional fields or savanna undergoing a particular burning frequency, such that no more than a fifth of any given field would be impacted and such that no more than a fifth of all such fields would be impacted, in total, by moderate experimental manipulation. Because oak savanna is a rare ecosystem type in Minnesota and at Cedar Creek, experimental work is more restricted in savanna and undergoes closer scrutiny.

All of these guidelines for research and land use at Cedar Creek are just that, guidelines. All may need to be re-evaluated by the Director and Associate Director of Cedar Creek and the Land Use Committee in response to specific requests for research. When deciding whether or not requests for deviations from these guidelines should be granted, those making the decision will weigh the potential significance of scientific knowledge that would be gained by the research against the potential cost to future research because of such land use. The ultimate goal is the sustainable use of Cedar Creek Natural History Area as a place for experimental and observational ecological research. The final decision on any deviations from these guidelines, in all cases, rests with the Director and the Associate Director, who will seek advice and guidance from the Land Use Committee and the Research Review Board.

David Tilman, Director, and Clarence Lehman, Associate Director 19 November 2002

Modified and Approved by the Land Use Committee*, December 5, 2001. Modified, in minor ways, to be consistent with the Research Review Board process on August 13, 2002.

* Members: Cynthia Brown, Mark Davis, Ian Dickie, Joe Fargione, John Haarstad, Sarah Hobbie, Linda Kinkel, Dale Kreuger, Clarence Lehman, Peter Reich, Autumn Sabo, Don Siniff, David Tilman