RFP For Invasives Removal And Treatment In The St. Louis River And Hartley Designated Natural Areas

CITY OF DULUTH REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS INVASIVES REMOVAL AND TREATMENT IN THE ST. LOUIS RIVER AND HARTLEY DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS, DULUTH, MN RFP NO. 24-99328 ISSUED MARCH 15, 2024 PROPOSALS DUE APRIL 15, 2024 BY 4:00 PM SUBMIT TO: CITY OF DULUTH ATTN: PURCHASING DIVISION CITY HALL, ROOM 120 411 WEST 1ST STREET DULUTH, MN 55802 PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION I-1. Project Overview. The City is soliciting proposals from qualified ecological restoration professionals to perform terrestrial invasive species removal and treatment in two management units in Hartley Natural Area, and four management units in the St. Louis River Natural Area. See Appendix A for maps of the management units. Hartley Management Units:  NW unit  SE Unit St. Louis River Management Units:  Chambers Grove Unit  North Bay Unit  Munger Landing  Kingsbury Bay The following species are to be removed and/or treated under this RFP: Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera spp.), glossy buckthorn (frangula alnus), common

buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), Wild Parsnip (Pastinaca sativa), Garlic Mustard (Alliaria 2etiolate), and Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia Japonica var. japonica). Two documents are attached for the Proposers’ reference (See Appendix F): 1.) Hartley Natural Area Native Plant Community Management Plan; Applied Ecological Services, inc.; 2020 2.) Native Plant Community and Special Species Verification and Mapping, St. Louis River Natural Area Project; SHE; 2018 These documents provide limited information about species that have been documented in the management units in the past. ISM Trac (https://www.ismtrack.org/) may also provide some information about documented species and locations in the management units. These data sources only document known species and locations at a certain period in time. The selected proposer is expected traverse each unit and remove and treat invasives as they are found. Funding is provided by a Great Lakes Restoration Initiative grant through the EPA. There are special conditions relating to the funding, which can be found in Appendix C. I-2. Calendar of Events. The City will make every effort to adhere to the following schedule. Activity Date Deadline to submit Questions via email to kkubiak@duluthmn.gov. March 27, 2024 Answers to questions will be posted to the City website no later than this date. April 3, 2024 Proposals must be received in the Purchasing Office by 4:00 PM on this date. April 15, 2024 I-3. Rejection of Proposals. The City reserves the right, in its sole and complete discretion, to reject any and all proposals or cancel the request for proposals, at any time prior to the time a contract is fully executed, when it is in its best interests. The City is not liable for any costs the Proposer incurs in preparation and submission of its proposal, in participating in the RFP process or in anticipation of award of the contract. I-4. Questions & Answers. Any questions regarding this RFP must be submitted by email to Kate Kubiak at kkubiak@duluthmn.gov no later than the date indicated on the Calendar of Events. Answers to the questions will be posted as an Addendum to the RFP. I-5. Addenda to the RFP. If the City deems it necessary to revise any part of this RFP before the proposal response date, the City will post an addendum to its website http://www.duluthmn.gov/purchasing/bids-request-for-proposals/ . Although an e-mail notification will be sent, it is the Proposer’s responsibility to periodically check the website for any new information I-6. Proposals. To be considered, hard copies of proposals must arrive at the City on or before the time and date specified in the RFP Calendar of Events. The City will not accept proposals via email or facsimile transmission. The City reserves the right to reject or to deduct evaluation points for late proposals. Proposals must be signed by an authorized official. If the official signs the Proposal Cover Sheet attached as Appendix A, this requirement will be met. Proposals must remain valid for 60 days or until a contract is fully executed. Please submit one (1) paper copy of the Technical Submittal and one (1) paper copy of the Cost Submittal. The Cost Submittal shall be in a separate sealed envelope. In addition, Proposers shall submit one copy of the entire proposal (Technical and Cost submittals, along with all requested documents) on flash drive in Microsoft Office compatible or pdf format. All materials submitted in response to this RFP will become property of the City and will become public record after the evaluation process is completed and an award decision made. I-7. Small Diverse Business Information. The City encourages participation by minority, women, disadvantaged, and veteran-owned businesses as prime contractors, and encourages all prime contractors to make a significant commitment to use minority, women, veteran-owned and other disadvantaged business entities as subcontractors and suppliers. A list of certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprises is maintained by the Minnesota Unified Certification Program at http://mnucp.metc.state.mn.us/ . I-8. Form & Term of the Agreement. The awarded proposer will execute a standard city services agreement, an example of which is attached as Appendix D. This RFP as well as additional conditions and supplementary provisions are deemed to be part of the executed agreement. The term of the agreement will begin once the agreement is fully executed (anticipated by April 1, 2024) and end by December 31, 2024. The selected Proposer shall not start the performance of any work nor shall the City be liable to pay the selected Proposer for any service or work performed or expenses incurred before the agreement is executed and Notice to Proceed is provided. I-9. Mandatory Disclosures. By submitting a proposal, each Proposer understands, represents, and acknowledges that: A. Their proposal has been developed by the Proposer independently and has been submitted without collusion with and without agreement, understanding, or planned common course of action with any other vendor or suppliers of materials, supplies, equipment, or services described in the Request for Proposals, designed to limit independent bidding or competition, and that the contents of the proposal have not been communicated by the Proposer or its employees or agents to any person not an employee or agent of the Proposer. B. There is no conflict of interest. A conflict of interest exists if a Proposer has any interest that would actually conflict, or has the appearance of conflicting, in any manner or degree with the performance of work on the project. If there are potential conflicts, identify the municipalities, developers, and other public or private entities with whom your company is currently, or have been, employed and which may be affected. C. It is not currently under suspension or debarment by the State of Minnesota, any other state or the federal government. D. The company is either organized under Minnesota law or has a Certificate of Authority from the Minnesota Secretary of State to do business in Minnesota, in accordance with the requirements in M.S. 303.03. I-10. Notification of Selection. Proposers whose proposals are not selected will be notified in writing. PART II – PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Proposers must submit a complete package in order to be considered. The submission package must include each of the sections below, in the following order: II-1 Technical Proposal. 1. Cover letter – A letter of up to two pages highlighting the proposed project team. The letter should indicate a single point of contact/overall project manager. The cover letter should also include: the firm’s name, e-mail address, business address, telephone and fax number, federal I.D. number, and Minnesota tax I.D. number (if applicable). The cover letter must state that the firm (with teamed partners identified) has personnel with the qualifications necessary to complete work of the project. The letter should also explain the benefits of using your company’s/team’s services. 2. Relevant projects – Include a maximum of three projects that highlight the team and/or team members’ experience. The strongest package will demonstrate direct experience collaborating with and/or working with municipalities and within the project areas. There is no prescribed format for this section, however it will be limited to three pages in length. 3. A proposed Work Plan with a timeline. Do not include any costs in the Work Plan or Technical Proposal. II-2 Cost Proposal. The Cost Proposal must be sealed separately from the Technical Proposal and shall include a proposed lump sum fee to perform the Work along with a Personnel and Materials Fee Schedule. PART III – CRITERIA FOR SELECTION The proposals will be reviewed by an evaluation team consisting of city staff, grant consultants and other stakeholders. The intent of the selection process is to review proposals and make an award based upon qualifications as described therein. A 100point scale will be used to create the final evaluation recommendations. The factors and weighting on which proposals will be judged are: Prior experience with similar work Qualifications of the Proposer Schedule Costs 60% 10% 20% 10% PART IV – PROJECT DETAIL IV-1 Background Duluth’s Natural Resource Management Program was created to protect, restore, nurture and assess the City’s forests, watersheds and designated Natural Areas. Hartley Park and the St. Louis River are two of three designated Natural Areas in the City. The invasive species listed above are a concern for the ecological integrity of these areas. With funding from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the City, through this RFP, is continuing its efforts to restore and enhance the ecological values of these Natural Areas by removing invasive species. IV-2 Tasks & Deliverables. In completion of this work, time is of the essence. The work must be completed by December 31, 2024 and must be performed under the following conditions: 1. Woody invasives must be cut using chainsaws or similar technique. Large forestry mowing equipment may not be used. 2. Stump (chemical) treatment must use glyphosate and/or tryclopir or similar chemicals and must be applied directly to the stump, not over-sprayed. 3. Slash may be left on site. 4. Contractor must participate in three sites visits with City staff to confirm progress and adequate performance. These visits will occur 1.) before the work begins; 2.) mid-way through the work; 3.) once the work is completed. 5. In order for the City to document the work, the contractor must use survey flags, or propose some other form of marking invasive plants that are removed and/or treated. 6. Management unit boundaries are approximate. IV-4 Appendices Appendix A – Treatment Area / Management Unit Maps Appendix B – Proposal Cover Sheet Appendix C – Supplementary Provisions Appendix D – Example Services Agreement Appendix E – Byrd Anti-Lobbying Certificate (The completed certificate must be completed with your proposal). Appendix F – Reference Documents Page 1 of 6 Rev 05/23 APPENDIX A TREATMENT AREA / MANAGEMENT UNIT MAPS INVASIVES REMOVAL AND TREATMENT IN THE ST. LOUIS RIVER AND HARTLEY DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS, DULUTH, MN HARTLEY NATURAL AREA: NW UNIT AND SE UNIT SHAPEFILES PROVIDED UPON REQUEST Page 2 of 6 Rev 05/23 ST. LOUIS RIVER NATURAL AREA: SHAPEFILES PROVIDED UPON REQUEST ST. LOUIS RIVER NATURAL AREA PARCELS MAP – FOR CONTEXT Page 3 of 6 Rev 05/23 Chamber’s Grove – (entire area is city-owned) Page 4 of 6 Rev 05/23 North Bay - (blue and orange parcels are City – owned) Page 5 of 6 Rev 05/23 Munger Landing - (blue and orange parcels are City – owned) Page 6 of 6 Rev 05/23 Kingsbury Bay - (entire area is city-owned) Page 7 of 6 Rev 05/23 APPENDIX B PROPOSAL COVER SHEET CITY OF DULUTH INVASIVES REMOVAL AND TREATMENT IN THE ST. LOUIS RIVER AND HARTLEY DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS, DULUTH, MN RFP 24-99328 Proposer Information: Proposer Name Mailing Address Contact Person Contact Person’s Phone Number Contact Person’s E-Mail Address Federal ID Number Authorized Signature Title Revised 11.30.2018 1 APPENDIX C CITY OF DULUTH SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS – STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING INVASIVES REMOVAL AND TREATMENT IN THE ST. LOUIS RIVER AND HARTLEY DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS, DULUTH, MN 24-99328 1. Disbursements a. No money under this Contract shall be disbursed by the City to any Contractor unless the Contractor is in compliance with the Federal Agency requirements with regard to accounting and fiscal matters to the extent they are applicable. b. Unearned payments under this Contract may be suspended or terminated upon the Contractor’s refusal to accept any additional conditions that may be imposed by the Federal Agency at any time; or if the grant, if applicable, to the City under which this Contract is made is suspended or terminated. 2. Subcontracting Requirements a. The Contractor shall include in any subcontract the clauses set forth in these City of Duluth Supplementary Provisions in their entirety and shall also include a clause requiring the subcontractors to include these clauses in any lower tier subcontracts which they may enter into, together with a clause requiring this insertion in any further subcontracts that may in turn be made. b. The Contractor shall not subcontract any part of the work covered by this Contract or permit subcontracted work to be further subcontracted without the City’s prior written approval of the subcontractors. The City will not approve any subcontractor for work covered by this Contract who is at the time ineligible under the provisions of any applicable regulations issued by a Federal Agency or the Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, to receive an award of such subcontract. 3. Breach of Contract. The City may, subject to the Force Majeure provisions below and in addition to its other rights under the Contract, declare the Contractor in breach of the Contract by written notice thereof to the Contractor, and terminate the Contract in whole or in part, in accordance with Section 2, Termination, for reasons including but not limited to any of the following: a. Failure to begin the Work within the time specified in the Contract; b. Failure to perform the Work with sufficient labor, equipment, or material to insure the completion of the specified Work in accordance with the Contract terms; c. Unsatisfactory performance of the Work; d. Failure or refusal to remove material, or remove and replace any Work rejected as defective or unsatisfactory; e. Discontinuance of the Work without approval; f. Failure to resume the Work, which has been discontinued, within a reasonable time after notice to do so; g. Insolvency or bankruptcy; h. Failure to protect, to repair, or to make good any damage or injury to property; i. Breach of any provision of the Contract; j. Misrepresentations made in the Contractor’s bid/proposal; or k. Failure to comply with applicable industry standards, customs, and practice. 4. Termination. If the Contractor is in breach of the Contract, the City, by written notice to the Contractor, may terminate the Contractor’s right to proceed with the Work. Upon such termination, the City may take over the Work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or otherwise, and the Contractor and its sureties shall be liable to the City for any additional cost incurred by the City in its completion of the Work and they shall also be liable to the City for liquidated damages for any delay in the completion of the Work as provided below. If the Contractor's right to proceed is Revised 11.30.2018 2 terminated, the City may take possession of and utilize in completing the Work such materials, tools, equipment, and plant as may be on the site of the Work and necessary therefore. City shall have the right to terminate this contract immediately without other cause in the event that all or a portion of the funds that the City intends to use to fund its obligations under the contract have their source with the State or Federal government or any agency thereof and said source reduces or eliminates their obligation to provide some or all of the funds previously committed by it to fund City’s payment obligations under the Contract. The City agrees that termination hereunder will not relieve the City of its obligation to pay Contractor for Work satisfactorily performed and reasonable costs incurred prior to the effective date. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the City may terminate this Contract at any time upon written notice given by the City (for any reason, including the convenience of the City) to the Contractor at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of the termination of this Contract. The City agrees that termination hereunder will not relieve the City of its obligation to pay Contractor for Work satisfactorily performed and reasonable costs incurred prior to the effective date of the termination provided that Contactor has not committed a breach of this Contract. Nothing contained in this section shall prevent either party from pursuing or collecting any damages to which it may be entitled by law. 5. Force Majeure. The right of the Contractor to proceed shall not be terminated nor shall the Contractor be charged with liquidated damages for any delays in the completion of the Work due to any acts of the Government, including controls or restrictions upon or requisitioning of materials, equipment, tools, or labor by reason of war, National Defense, or any other national emergency; any acts of the City; causes not reasonably foreseeable by the parties to this Contract at the time of the execution of the Contract which are beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor, including, but not restricted to, acts of God or of the public enemy, acts of another Contractor in their performance of some other contract with the City, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, freight embargoes, and weather of unusual severity such as hurricanes, tornadoes, cyclones, and other extreme weather conditions; nor to any delay of any Subcontractor occasioned by any of the causes specified above. The Contractor shall promptly notify the City in writing within ten (10) days of the delay. Upon receipt of such notification, the City shall ascertain the facts and the cause of the delay. If, upon the basis of facts and the terms of the Contract, the delay is properly excusable, the City shall extend the time for completing the Work for a period of time commensurate with the period of excusable delay. 6. Equal Employment Opportunity. During the performance of this contract, the contractor agrees as follows: a. The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: Employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. b. The contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive considerations for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. c. The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided advising the said labor union or workers' representatives of the contractor's commitments under this section, and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. d. The contractor will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. e. The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit Revised 11.30.2018 3 access to his books, records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and orders. f. In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or federally assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions as may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. g. The contractor will include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph (1) and the provisions of paragraphs (a) through (g) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the administering agency may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, That in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the administering agency the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. 7. Contracting with Small and Minority Businesses, Women’s Business Enterprises, and Labor Surplus Area Firms. Per 2 CFR 200.321, prime contractor must take all necessary affirmative steps to assure that minority businesses, women’s business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms (collectively referred to as socioeconomic firms) are used when possible. The affirmative steps must include: a. Placing qualified socioeconomic firms on solicitation lists; b. Assuring that socioeconomic firms are solicited whenever they are potential sources; c. Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities to permit maximum participation by socioeconomic firms; d. Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirements permit, which encourage participation by socioeconomic firms; and e. Using the services and assistance, as appropriate, of such organizations as the Small Business Administration and the Minority Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce. 8. Rights to Inventions Made Under a Contract or Agreement. For any contracts involving the “substitution of parties, assignment or performance of experimental, developmental, or research work”, Contractor shall comply with the requirements of 37 CFR Part 401, ‘‘Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts and Cooperative Agreements,’’ and any implementing regulations issued by the awarding agency. 9. Clean Air Act and Federal Water Pollution Control Act Contractor shall comply with all applicable standards, orders or regulations issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251–1387). Violations must be reported to the Federal awarding agency and the Regional Office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Contractor agrees to include this provision in any subcontract exceeding $150,000 that is financed in whole or in part with Federal funds. 10. Energy Standards. Contractor shall comply with all mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6201). 11. Suspension and Debarment. This contract is a covered transaction for purposes of 49 CFR Part 29. As such, the contractor is required to verify that none of the contractor, its principals, as defined at 49 CFR 29.995, or affiliates, as defined at 49 CFR 29.905, are Revised 11.30.2018 4 excluded or disqualified as defined at 49 CFR 29.940 and 29.945. The contractor is required to comply with 49 CFR 29, Subpart C and must include the requirement to comply with 49 CFR 29, Subpart C in any lower tier covered transaction it enters into. 12. Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment, 31 U.S.C. § 1352 (as amended) Contractors must certify that that it will not and has not used Federal appropriated funds to pay any person or organization for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member of Congress, officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with obtaining any Federal contract, grant, or any other award covered by 31 U.S.C. § 1352. 13. Procurement of Recovered Materials. In the performance of this contract, the Contractor shall comply with section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. This shall include making maximum use of products containing recovered materials as designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unless (i) the materials cannot be acquired competitively and within the timeframe required by the contract performance schedule; (ii) the materials designated by the EPA do not meet contract performance requirements; or (iii) the materials cannot be acquired for a reasonable price. Information about this requirement, along with the list of EPA- designated items, is available at the EPA’s Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines web site, https://www.epa.gov/smm/comprehensive- procurement-guideline-cpg-program . CITY OF DULUTH ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS PER GRANT AGREEMENT INVASIVES REMOVAL AND TREATMENT IN THE ST. LOUIS RIVER AND HARTLEY DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS, DULUTH, MN 24-99328 1. CYBERSECURITY If awarded contractor’s network or information system is connected to EPA (“Agency”) networks to transfer data to the Agency using systems other than the Environmental Information Exchange Network or EPA’s Central Data Exchange, contractor must comply with the following requirement: EPA must ensure that any connections between the recipient’s network or information system and EPA networks used by the recipient to transfer data under this agreement are secure. For purposes of this section, a connection is defined as a dedicated persistent interface between an Agency IT system and an external IT system for the purpose of transferring information. Transitory, user‐controlled connections such as website browsing are excluded from this definition. If the contractor’s connections as defined above do not go through the Environmental Information Exchange Network or EPA’s Central Data Exchange, the contractor agrees to contact the EPA Project Officer no later than 90 days after date of award and work with the designated Regional/Headquarters Information Security Officer to ensure that the connections meet EPA security requirements, including entering into Interconnection Service Agreements as appropriate. This condition does not apply to manual entry of data by the recipient into systems operated and used by EPA’s regulatory programs for the submission of reporting and/or compliance data. 2. TRAFFICKING Contractor, its employees, its subcontractors and their employees, may not – a. Engage in severe forms of trafficking in persons during the period of time that the award is in effect; b. Procure a commercial sex act during the period of time that the award is in effect; or c. Use forced labor in the performance of the awarded project. The Federal awarding agency may unilaterally terminate the award, without penalty, if the contractor – a. Is determined to have violated a prohibition of paragraph 2; or b. Has an employee who is determined by the agency official authorized to terminate the award to have violated a prohibition in paragraph 2 through conduct that is either – (1) Associated with performance under this award; or (2) Imputed to the City or contractor using the standards and due process for imputing the conduct of an individual to an organization that are provided in 2 CFR part 180, “OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (nonprocurement)” as implemented by the Agency at 2 CFR 1532. Page 1 of 6 Rev 05/23 APPENDIX D SERVICES AGREEMENT (Purchase Order # ) This agreement (“Agreement”) between the City of Duluth, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) and NAME OF SERVICE PROVIDER – Debarment Check?. (“NAME” or “Service Provider”), with offices located at ADDRESS. WHEREAS, City desires to enter into an agreement with a service provider to provide DESCRIBE THE SERVICES; WHEREAS, City issued a Request for Bid (the “RFB”) for DESCRIBE THE SERVICES (the “Services”); WHEREAS, NAME is in the business of providing DESCRIBE THE SERVICES to its customers; WHEREAS, NAME submitted a Response to the RFB (the “Response”) and has represented itself as fully capable of providing the Services to its customers and that it is qualified and willing to perform the services set forth in the RFB; WHEREAS, based on the Response the City has selected NAME as the lowest responsible bidder and wishes to engage NAME to provide the Services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: City and Service Provider hereby agree to the following terms and conditions: 1. Services. Service Provider shall provide the following Services: DESCRIBE THE SERVICES, described in more detail on the Response attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference. 2. Rates/Price and Payment for Services. The rates (the “Rates”) for the Services are outlined in Exhibit A. The total amount payable under this agreement shall not exceed dollar amount spelled out ($) unless the contract is modified by formal amendment. Payments shall be made from fund XXX‐ XXXXXX. Service Provider shall be paid for the Services within thirty (30) days of the City’s receipt of an invoice. (Include any special terms for price adjustments, prepayment or partial prepayment, etc) 3. Term; Termination. The term of this Agreement shall commence on (either date of attestation or future date) and shall continue, unless earlier terminated as provided for herein, for a period enter term (the “Term”). The Term will renew for XX additional XX (X) year terms (each year a “Renewal Term”) unless either Service Provider or City provides the other party with written notice of termination of this Agreement at least sixty (60) days prior to the end of the Term or any Renewal Term. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time prior to the end of the Term or any Renewal Term due to the other party’s material breach of any of its obligations hereunder, which breach has not been cured to the non‐breaching party’s reasonable satisfaction within a reasonable time, not to exceed ten (10) business days, after receipt of written notice specifying such breach. In addition, during the Renewal Term of this Agreement, either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other party. Page 2 of 6 Rev 05/23 4. Representations and Warranties. Service Provider represents and warrants that: i.Service Provider shall perform its respective duties in a professional and diligent manner in the best interests of City and in compliance with all applicable laws. ii.Service Provider and all personnel to be provided by it hereunder have sufficient training and experience to perform the duties set forth herein and are in good standing with all applicable licensing requirements. 5. Insurance. A. Service Provider shall provide and maintain in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement the following minimum amounts of insurance: (1) Workers compensation insurance in accordance with applicable law. (2) Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance with limits not less than $1,500,000 Single Limit shall be in a company approved by the City of Duluth and shall provide for the following: Liability for Premises, Operations, Completed Operations, Independent Contractors, and Contractual Liability. Umbrella coverage with a “form following” provision may make up the difference between the commercial general and auto liability coverage amounts and the required minimum amount stated above. The City of Duluth does not represent or guarantee that these types or limits of coverage are adequate to protect the Service Provider’s interests and liabilities. (3) City of Duluth shall always be named as an Additional Insured under the Commercial General and Automobile Liability Policies, and Service Provider will provide Certificate of Insurance evidencing such coverage with 30‐days’ notice of cancellation provision included. B. Certificates showing that Service Provider is carrying the above described insurance in the specified amounts shall be furnished to the City prior to the execution of this Agreement and a certificate showing continued maintenance of such insurance shall be on file with the City during the term of this Agreement. 6. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Service Provider shall defend, indemnify, and hold City and its employees, officers and agents harmless from and against any and all costs or expenses, claims or liabilities, including but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses, whether asserted by itself or any third party, including claims arising from the acts, omissions, negligence, or misconduct of Service Provider or that of its agents, employees, or contractors. The obligations shall include, but not be limited to, the obligations to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City in all matters where claims of liability against the City are alleged to be or could be found to arise out of acts or omissions of Service Provider or are passive, derivative, or vicarious of the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of Service Provider arise out of or relate to the services in this Agreement or Service Provider’s negligent, intentional, or wrongful acts or omissions, including breach of any duty in this agreement, of Service Provider. The obligations to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be triggered upon the assertion of a claim for damages against City. This Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement for any reason. Service Provider shall not have the obligation to indemnify the City for its intentional, willful or wanton acts. The Service Provider understands this provision may affect its rights and may shift liability. Page 3 of 6 Rev 05/23 7. Data, Records and Inspection. a. The City agrees that it will make available all pertinent information, data and records under its control for Service Provider to use in the performance of this Agreement, or to assist Service Provider wherever possible to obtain such records, data and information. b. All customer addresses and other data or customer information provided to Service Provider by the City pursuant to this Agreement will be confidential and will not be released by Service Provider without prior authorization from the City. c. Records shall be maintained by Service Provider in accordance with requirements prescribed by the City and with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. Such records shall be maintained for a period of six (6) years after receipt of final payment under this Agreement. d. Service Provider will ensure that all costs shall be supported by properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, contracts, vouchers, or other official documentation evidencing in proper detail the nature and propriety of the charges. All checks, payrolls, invoices, contracts, vouchers, orders, or other accounting documents pertaining in whole or in part to this Agreement shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. e. Service Provider shall be responsible for furnishing to the City records, data and information as the City may require pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. f. Service Provider shall ensure that at any time during normal business hours and as often as the City may deem necessary, there shall be made available to the City for examination, all of its records with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement Service Provider will also permit the City to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts from such records, and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls, records of personnel, conditions of employment, and other data relating to all matters covered by this Agreement. 8. Independent Contractors. The parties agree that they are independent contractors, and no agency, partnership, employment or joint venture arrangement shall be deemed to exist by virtue of this Agreement, performance hereunder or otherwise. No employee or independent contractor of Service Provider shall be deemed to have any employment or independent contractor relationship with City by virtue of this Agreement or performance hereunder, and such individuals shall have no claim against City for any employee benefits offered to employees of City. 9. Assignment. Service Provider may not assign this agreement. City may assign this Agreement without the prior written consent of Service Provider. 10. Amendment; Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the entire understanding of the parties and there are no other agreements or understandings, written or oral, in effect between parties relating to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by an instrument signed by the parties. 11. Applicable Law. This Agreement, together with all of its paragraphs, terms and provisions is made in the state of Minnesota and shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 12. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original as against any party whose signature appears thereon, but all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Signatures to this Agreement transmitted by facsimile, by electronic mail in “portable document format” (“.pdf”), or by any other electronic means which preserves the original graphic and pictorial appearance of the Agreement, shall have the same effect as physical delivery of the paper document bearing the original signature. Page 4 of 6 Rev 05/23 13. Captions. The captions contained in this Agreement are solely for convenience of reference and are not part of the Agreement and shall not be used in construing this Agreement or in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank. Signature page to follow.] Page 5 of 6 Rev 05/23 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth below. CITY OF DULUTH SERVICE PROVIDER NAME By: By: ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Mayor Representative City Clerk Attest: ____________________________________ Date Attested: _____________________ Countersigned: ____________________________________ City Auditor Date Approved as to form: ____________________________________ City Attorney Date Its: ____________________________________ Title of Representative Date: APPENDIX E BYRD ANTI‐LOBBYING AMENDMENT CERTIFICATION (To be submitted with each bid or offer exceeding $100,000) The undersigned, [Company] ______________________________ certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge, that: 1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of an agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. 2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form - LLL, “Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,” in accordance with its instructions. 3. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by 31, U.S.C. § 1352 (as amended by the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995). Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. The Contractor, [Company] ______________________, certifies or affirms the truthfulness and accuracy of each statement of its certification and disclosure, if any. In addition, the Contractor understands and agrees that the provisions of 31 U.S.C. § 3801 et seq., apply to this certification and disclosure, if any. _____________________________________ Signature of Contractor’s Authorized Official _________________________________________ Name and Title of Contractor’s Authorized Official __________________ Date APPENDIX F REFERENCE DOCUMENTS INVASIVES REMOVAL AND TREATMENT IN THE ST. LOUIS RIVER AND HARTLEY DESIGNATED NATURAL AREAS, DULUTH, MN 24-99328 SEE ATTACHED HARTLEY NATURAL AREA NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED FOR CITY OF DULUTH PREPARED BY APPLIED ECOLOGICAL SERVICES, INC. DECEMBER 9, 2020 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan i HARTLEY NATURAL AREA NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................ iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 1 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Road Map to This Plan ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Site Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Related Planning Work & Information ............................................................................................... 5 1.4 Native Plant Community Management Goals .................................................................................... 5 2. ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Landscape Context ............................................................................................................................. 7 2.1.1 Ecological Subsection .................................................................................................................. 7 2.1.2 Adjacent Land Uses ..................................................................................................................... 9 2.2 Site Conditions ................................................................................................................................... 9 2.2.1 Plant Communities ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.2.2 Water Resources ....................................................................................................................... 15 2.2.3 Invasive Plants ........................................................................................................................... 15 2.2.4 Invasive Wildlife, Pests & Diseases ........................................................................................... 17 2.2.5 Rare Natural Features ............................................................................................................... 18 2.2.6 Climate ...................................................................................................................................... 23 2.3 Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................................ 25 3 IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................................................. 27 3.1 Restoration & Management Approach ............................................................................................ 27 3.1.1 Restoration & Establishment Phase .......................................................................................... 27 3.1.2 Long-term Management Phase ................................................................................................. 28 3.1.3 Adaptive Management ............................................................................................................. 29 3.2 Restoration & Management Approach and Tasks ........................................................................... 29 3.2.1 Hydrological Restoration ........................................................................................................... 32 3.2.2 Prescribed Burning .................................................................................................................... 32 3.2.3 Biocontrol .................................................................................................................................. 34 Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan ii 3.2.4 Invasive Tree & Shrub Removal ................................................................................................ 36 3.2.5 Invasive Herbaceous Vegetation Control .................................................................................. 38 3.2.6 Herbaceous Vegetation Installation .......................................................................................... 38 3.2.7 Tree & Shrub Installation .......................................................................................................... 39 3.2.8 Conifer Plantation Thinning and Restoration ........................................................................... 39 3.2.9 Turf to Native Vegetation Conversion ...................................................................................... 37 3.2.10 Ecological Monitoring & Reporting ......................................................................................... 38 3.3 Native Vegetation Restoration & Management Program................................................................ 39 3.3.1 Generalized Land Cover and Management Units ..................................................................... 39 3.3.2 Recent or Ongoing Projects by Others ...................................................................................... 40 3.3.3 Project Prioritization ................................................................................................................. 41 3.3.4 Opinions of Probable Cost ........................................................................................................ 47 3.3.5 Long-term Management ........................................................................................................... 48 3.3.6 Implementation Schedule ......................................................................................................... 49 3.3.7 Funding Sources ........................................................................................................................ 52 3.4 Monitoring & Reporting ................................................................................................................... 54 3.4.1 Monitoring ................................................................................................................................ 54 3.4.2 Reporting ................................................................................................................................... 55 3.5 Volunteer Engagement .................................................................................................................... 56 3.5.1 Existing Volunteer Program ...................................................................................................... 57 3.5.2 Volunteer Program Considerations/Recommendations ........................................................... 58 3.6 Partnerships ..................................................................................................................................... 58 3.7 Ecological Contractors ...................................................................................................................... 59 4 Next Steps ........................................................................................................................................... 60 REFERENCES & RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................ 62 List of Figures Figure 1. Location of Hartley Natural Area .................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2. Native Plant Communities of Hartley Natural Area .................................................................... 10 Figure 3. Condition Ranks of Native Plant Communities in the Hartley Natural Area ............................... 13 Figure 4. Generalized Cost of Restoration and Management Over Time .................................................. 28 Figure 5. Pine Stands within City Thinning Plan in Hartley Natural Area (Source: City of Duluth) ............ 37 Figure 6. Generalized Land Cover and Management Units of Hartley Natural Area ................................. 40 Figure 7. Tiered Approach to Priority Vegetation Projects at Hartley Natural Area .................................. 42 Figure 8. Priority Projects at Hartley Natural Area .................................................................................... 44 Figure 9. Hypothetical Project Acres Managed & Per-Acre Cost ............................................................... 50 Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan iii List of Tables Table 1. Native Plant Communities in the Hartley Natural Area ............................................................... 11 Table 2. Invasive Plant Species Found in Hartley Natural Area (Reschke et al, 2019) ............................... 16 Table 3. Potential Biocontrol Options for the Hartley Natural Area .......................................................... 35 Table 4. Priority Vegetation Management Projects at Hartley Natural Area ............................................ 45 Table 5. Generalized Professional Contractor Unit Costs for Ecological Services ..................................... 47 Table 6. Opinions of Probable Cost1 for Initial Restoration & Management at the HNA Priority Projects .................................................................................................................................................................... 48 Table 7. Ten-year Implementation Schedule for Priority Projects at Hartley Natural Area ...................... 51 Table 8. Using City/HNC Staff, Volunteers & Private Contractors for Ecological Tasks ............................. 57 List of Appendices Appendix A. Practices to Avoid Introducing & Moving Invasive Species (MN Dept. Nat. Resources) ....... 66 Appendix B. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Report for Hartley Natural Area (USFWS) .................................................................................................................................................................... 68 Appendix C. MNDNR Native Plant Community Species Lists ..................................................................... 69 Appendix D. Hartley Park Northwest Hills Restoration Plan (The Nature Conservancy) ........................... 70 Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The consultant team gratefully acknowledges the following people, who contributed to the Hartley Natural Area - Restoration & Management Plan: Diane Desotelle City of Duluth – Natural Resources Coordinator Jim Shoberg City of Duluth - Senior Parks Planner Clark Christenson City of Duluth - Forester Matthew Andrews City of Duluth - Trails Coordinator Tom O'Rourke Hartley Nature Center - Executive Director Matt Willey Hartley Nature Center - Operations Director Pat Collins Hartley Nature Center - Board Chair Brandon Van Tassel Community Action Duluth The City of Duluth acknowledges the Natural Resource Commission for their advisory council and adoption of this Plan on December 2, 2020: Mike Pennington, President Mike Schrage, Vice President Brandon Van Tassel, Secretary Judy Gibbs, Commissioner Brian Fredrickson, Commissioner Brandon Krumwiede, Commissioner John Lindgren, Commissioner Nancy Schuldt, Commissioner Tiffany Sprague, Commissioner Prepared for: City of Duluth 411 W 1st Street Duluth, MN 55802 (218)730-5000 Prepared by: Applied Ecological Services, Inc. Kim Alan Chapman, PhD Doug Mensing, MS Eoghan O’Neill, MS Matthew Lasch, BA Citation: Applied Ecological Services. 2020. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan. Report prepared for City of Duluth Parks. Prior Lake, Minnesota. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Hartley Natural Area (including most of Hartley Park) and Hartley Nature Center represent approximately 684 acres of forests and woodland, a pine grove, conifer plantations, various types of wetlands, and vernal pools. Tischer Creek flows through the site from the northwest to the east, and an impoundment creates Hartley Pond. Hartley Nature Center is one of the City of Duluth’s most cherished parks in which the facilities, educational offerings, and various recreational uses are enjoyed by many residents, students, and visitors year round. Prior to creation of the Hartley Natural Area, Hartley Park had already been formally dedicated by City Council to ecological restoration and environmental education in a manner and to an extent that is unique; this is clearly defined in the Hartley Park Master Plan (SRF Consulting Group, Inc. et al, 2014) and the City of Duluth’s agreement with Hartley Nature Center. With this in mind, and through discussions with the City of Duluth and other stakeholders, the following goals have been established for the site’s native plant communities: • Protect and enhance the ecological function of native forests, woodlands, meadows, and wetlands through active restoration and management; • Provide opportunities for public access to enjoy and engage in natural resource protection, restoration, and management; • Per the Hartley Park Master Plan (2014), the project purpose is to help establish a framework for implementing improvements and managing resources within Hartley Park with natural resource goals that: o preserve and enhance the distinctive character of Hartley Park as a unique place both locally within Duluth and the greater region, and o restore natural ecological processes within the Park’s diverse landscapes • Per the Hartley Nature Center Park Stewardship Plan (2011), ensure future development projects do not: o increase the presence of invasive species, o decrease the diversity of native flora or fauna, o degrade the quality of established native plant communities, and o negatively affect the quality of nearby waterways. This Hartley Native Plant Community Management Plan is a guide for vegetation management over the coming decade. The Plan describes the site’s natural resources and existing ecological conditions, and lays out a framework, tasks, priority projects, estimated costs, and schedule for elevating the Park’s native plant communities to a higher level of ecological health and resilience. Increased funding, monitoring, reporting, and long-term management will be critical to this Plan’s success. Well-trained City and HNC staff—assisted by volunteers, partners, and professional contractors—will work together to carry out elements of the Plan over the coming years. Results will be reported and evaluated at least every three years or as deemed necessary; the Plan will be updated in accordance Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 2 with the reports and evaluations at least every five years. In this way, Hartley Natural Area will become a more healthy and resilient complex of native ecosystems. The fruits of these efforts will be passed on to future generations for the enjoyment of all and the benefit of nature. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 3 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Road Map to This Plan The City of Duluth has committed to the ecological restoration and environmental education in Hartley Park well before the Hartley Natural Area was established under the Duluth Natural Areas Program. This is clearly defined in the Hartley Park Master Plan (SRF Consulting Group, Inc. et al, 2014) and the City of Duluth’s agreement with Hartley Nature Center. The effective programmatic utilization of Hartley Park to educate people about ecological restoration is on a greater scale than anywhere else in the City because the City is achieving a double benefit often referred to by the Izaak Walton League as, “Connect and Protect”. This means the City and its’ funders are able to show a greater return on financial investment in restoring and managing Hartley for its’ natural resources. This Hartley Native Plant Community Management Plan (Plan) is a guide for vegetation management over the coming decade in Hartley Natural Area located in Duluth, Minnesota. The Introduction provides a brief overview of the site, the general setting, related plans, and management goals for the site’s native plant communities. The Assessment describes the ecological setting of the area and summarizes some of the natural resources inventory findings from the recent Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area (Minnesota Land Trust, 2019) which provided a foundation for the development of this Plan. Considering the Hartley Natural Area project goals and assessment work to date, this Plan lays out a vision for what the site’s native plant communities could become if properly restored and managed. The Implementation section presents restoration and management terminology, a general approach, and specific tasks to be conducted (e.g., removal of invasive species, planting of native vegetation). Management units are presented to help refine work areas, along with recent or ongoing management projects at the site. Priority projects are then described along with opinions of probable cost to implement the prioritized restoration and on-going management tasks. A phasing plan is included as a suggestion for implementation over a ten-year timeframe. To assist with implementation, a prioritized list of recommended funding sources appropriate for restoration and management of the site’s vegetation is provided along with monitoring and reporting recommendations to document change over time, gauge the success of management, and guide adaptations. Information is also provided on how the City and Hartley Nature Center have utilized volunteers to advance native vegetation goals, and how partnerships and ecological contractors can further assist in achieving those goals. The Plan should be reviewed and updated as often as necessary to provide direction and strategies into the future. 1.2 Site Overview The Project Area is located in the north-central portion of the City of Duluth, St. Louis County, Minnesota (Figure 1). As one of City’s premier natural areas, 620 acres have been recognized as the “Hartley Natural Area” (HNA) under the Duluth Natural Areas Program (DNAP). A portion of Woodland Recreation Area (on the northeast side of Woodland Avenue) is included within the HNA. The Project Area addressed by this Plan contains all of the HNA as well as adjacent parkland (including Hartley Nature Center). In this Plan, the Project Area is sometimes referred to simply as the HNA, but it includes Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 4 some areas outside the HNA where work has been completed in the past and for the protection of the HNA. Figure 1. Location of Hartley Natural Area The Project Area is characterized by: • Over 620 acres, including forests and woodland, a pine grove, conifer plantations, various types of wetlands, and vernal pools • Tischer Creek • Hartley Pond (an impoundment in Tischer Creek) • Hartley Nature Center • Ten miles of multi-purpose trails Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 5 1.3 Related Planning Work & Information The following plans and studies related to the HNA were compiled and reviewed for this project: • City of Duluth Pine Thinning Project (City of Duluth, 2020) • Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area (Minnesota Land Trust, 2019) • Plant Communities of Hartley Park (Reschke et al, 2019) • Buckthorn and Restoration Management Plan for Hartley Park (Prairie Restorations, Inc., 2017) • Duluth Traverse Mini Master Plan (City of Duluth, 2017) • Duluth Cross Country Ski Trail Master Plan (Gary Larson Sports LLC, 2015) • Evaluating Vital, Small Forested Wetlands (UMD-NRRI, 2015) • Hartley Park Master Plan (SRF Consulting Group, Inc. et al, 2014) • Tracking Buckthorn in Hartley Park (City of Duluth, 2014) • Hartley Nature Center Park Stewardship Plan (Hartley Nature Center Park Stewardship Committee, 2011). Several of these plans were developed using an inclusive public engagement process that provided valuable information about HNA stakeholders including how they use the park and feedback on potential changes related to restoration and park use. This Native Plant Community Management Plan is a technical, internal guidance document specific to City and HNC use to help manage vegetation with their partners; it is driven by the outcome of Hartley as a Duluth Natural Area. Therefore, public outreach was limited to an informational flyer about the project (posted on the City’s and HNC’s website and announced at several Natural Resource Commission meetings). On October 21, 2020, a stakeholder meeting was held via Zoom because of the Covid-19 pandemic. This public engagement, along with the Natural Resource Commission meetings, informed the public and stakeholders about this project and confirmed alignment with the Plan’s direction. 1.4 Native Plant Community Management Goals The HNA is a long-treasured area, valued by the community, and yet, greatly changed by anthropogenic forces over the last 150 years. Establishing native plant community goals for the site helps guide restoration and management planning. Through discussions with the City of Duluth and other stakeholders, the following goals have been established for the site’s native plant communities: • Protect and enhance the ecological function of native forests, woodlands, meadows, and wetlands through active restoration and management; • Provide opportunities for public access to enjoy and engage in natural resource protection, restoration, and management; and • Per the Hartley Park Master Plan (SRF Consulting Group, Inc. et al, 2014), the project purpose is to help establish a framework for implementing improvements and managing resources within Hartley Park with natural resource goals that: o preserve and enhance the distinctive character of Hartley Park as a unique place both locally within Duluth and the greater region, and o restore natural ecological processes within the Park’s diverse landscapes Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 6 • Per the Hartley Nature Center Park Stewardship Plan (2011), ensure future development projects do not: o increase the presence of invasive species, o decrease the diversity of native flora or fauna, o degrade the quality of established native plant communities, and o negatively affect the quality of nearby waterways. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 7 2. ASSESSMENT 2.1 Landscape Context A site’s location provides insights into its natural resources—what they were, what they are today, and what they have the potential to become. Adjacent and nearby lands and waters can affect a site’s vegetation, water, and wildlife, and may present opportunities to enlarge or better connect habitats. 2.1.1 Ecological Subsection According to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ (MNDNR’s) Ecological Classification System (MNDNR 2020a), Hartley Natural Area is located in the North Shore Highlands Ecological Subsection; this Subsection is within the Northern Superior Uplands Section, which lies within the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province. A description of the North Shore Highlands Ecological Subsection follows (adapted from MNDNR 2020a): Overview The boundary of this subsection follows the Highland Moraine along Lake Superior. In general, the boundary parallels the shore about 20 to 25 miles inland. This subsection occupies the area adjacent to Lake Superior. It is gently rolling to steep. Bedrock outcroppings are common and soils are commonly shallow. Soils are formed in red and brown glacial till and are very rocky. Lake Superior dominates this region. It moderates the climate throughout the year, acting as an air conditioner in summer and a heat source in winter. Presettlement vegetation was forest, consisting of white pine, red pine, jack pine, balsam fir, white spruce, and aspen-birch. Present land uses include recreation, tourism and forestry. Landform Ground moraine and end moraine of the Superior lobe cover much of the subsection (Hobbs and Goebel, 1982). Clay lake plain forms a broad band along the Lake Superior shoreline in the southern half of the subsection. The clay plain is flat to rolling, with steep, narrow ravines along many streams. There are also outwash deposits along the western edge of the subsection. Bedrock geology Glacial drift is thin over the entire subsection and bedrock is exposed or near the surface in large areas. The underlying bedrock consists of Upper Precambrian (Middle Proterozoic) basalt, rhyolite, gabbro, diabase, anorthosite, granite, sandstone, and shale (Morey 1976). Soils The soils are developed from rocky, red tills of the Superior Iobe. Textures range from sand to clay (Hobbs and Goebel 1982). Loams and sandy loams are the most common soil textures on the moraines, which occupy most of the subsection. The Highland Flutes, along the eastern edge of the subsection, have a predominance of thin soils over bedrock and clayey soils (Dept. of Soil Science, Univ. of Minnesota 1981b). The Nemadji-Duluth Lacustrine Plain has about 95% clayey soils. The Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 8 most common soils in the subsection are classified as Orthents, Ochrepts, and Boralfs (Anderson and Grigal 1984). Climate Total annual precipitation ranges from 28 to 30 inches, about 40% of which occurs during the growing season. The growing season ranges from approximately 121 to 135 days, with the longest growing season along the shore of Lake Superior. The growing season on Lake Superior is about 10 days longer than at the equivalent latitude 6 miles inland (Dept. of Soil Science, Univ. of Minnesota 1981b). Lake effect increases the amount of snowfall by about 10 inches within 5 miles of the Lake Superior shoreline, but a similar trend is not apparent in the annual precipitation data (Albert 1995). Hydrology Lakes make up about only two to three percent of the subsection. Numerous short streams, 10-15 miles long, lead directly from the highland to the shores of Lake Superior. Most of them have water falls near the shoreline (Wright 1972). Presettlement vegetation Marschner (1974) recorded aspen-birch forest, white pine-red pine forest, mixed hardwood-pine forest, and conifer bogs and swamps. White pine-red pine forest was most common on the clay lake plain and on thin soil over bedrock in the southern half of the subsection. Mixed hardwood-pine forest, with sugar maple, was concentrated on the ridges of the dissected clay lake plain and the Highland Flutes. In the northern half of the subsection, aspen-birch was dominant, with very little white pine-red pine forest or mixed hardwood-pine forest. Mixed hardwood-pine forest persisted on ridgetops in areas within 6-10 miles of the shoreline. Present vegetation and land use Almost the entire subsection remains forested, with forest management and recreation as the major land uses. Following logging, the extensive white pine-red pine forests have been replaced by forests of quaking aspen-paper birch. Tourism and mining are the other important land uses. There are no mines within the subsection, but ports were set up to get ore from the iron range to steel mills in Indiana and Ohio. The city of Duluth has a large port area and ships significant amounts of agricultural commodities, as well as iron ore. Natural disturbance Fire was an important disturbance. This is readily apparent in the northern half of the subsection, where there was a dominance of aspen-birch stands, which are pioneer species. Spruce budworm defoliation was and continues to be a significant disturbance to stands of balsam fir and spruce. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 9 2.1.2 Adjacent Land Uses Adjacent land uses have significant effects on natural areas. The majority of the land surrounding the HNA consists of suburban development, including a golf course (Ridgeview Country Club), which lies just north of the northwest portion of the HNA. These land uses can adversely affect natural areas by: • Isolating a natural area from other nearby natural areas; this results in regional habitat fragmentation; • Introducing invasive species and pests from the surrounding landscape; • Acting as a source of predators, such as domestic cats, that kill native wildlife, especially birds and small mammals; and • Contributing suburban stormwater runoff into Tischer Creek and other site drainageways, conveying pollution, sediment, and nutrients into site wetlands, Hartley Pond, and downstream water resources. Woodland Avenue, a well-travelled road, separates Hartley Park (on the southwest) from adjacent Woodland Recreation Area (to the northeast). This roadway presents a threat to crossing wildlife and its noise can affect the nesting density of territorial songbirds. These influences from outside the HNA are known to reduce the variety of species—biodiversity—in natural areas and reduce the overall level of ecosystem services generated at a site. Fortunately, low density residential development exists along most of the site’s west edge, and a natural corridor extends northwest of the HNA. These low-intensity adjacent land uses have fewer negative “edge effects” that harm natural areas and they provide some degree of connectivity to other nearby natural lands. 2.2 Site Conditions 2.2.1 Plant Communities Plant communities are an expression of many factors: climate, soils, hydrology, land use history, disturbance regimes, etc. Marschner’s pre-European settlement mapping of Minnesota (1974) identified the HNA as “Mixed Hardwood and Pine (Maple, White Pine, Basswood, etc.)”. Silt loam soils provided the substrate for these upland forests to thrive, while lower elevations and depressions (containing muck soils) likely harbored shrub swamps and wet meadows. Plant communities are often divided into “native” plant communities (natural communities characterized by native plants and representative of historical vegetation assemblages) and “cultural” or “non-native” communities (typically dominated by non-native species and/or representative of a human-altered or -maintained landscape). The term “cultural” does not refer to areas of historical/cultural significance. The site’s native plant communities are the focus of this management plan. The following text and table were taken from the Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area (Minnesota Land Trust, 2019): In the summer of 2019, researchers from University of Minnesota - Natural Resources Research Institute (UMD-NRRI) completed plant surveys for the entire natural area, using drone imagery and field surveys (Reschke et al 2019). This work built on the plant surveys conducted by Perry (2004). Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 10 A total of 23 native plant communities (NPCs) were identified in Hartley Natural Area according to Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ (MNDNR’s) 2005 Field Guide to Native Plant Communities of Minnesota in 124 distinct polygons (Figure 2; Table 1). Figure 2. Native Plant Communities of Hartley Natural Area (from Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area, Minnesota Land Trust, 2019) Note: Native Plant Communities that extend outside the HNA are subject to change due to development. This Plan is intended to address areas only within the HNA for preservation and protection. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 11 Table 1. Native Plant Communities in the Hartley Natural Area (from Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area, Minnesota Land Trust 2019) System Subtype Description Subtype S-Rank Condition Area Code Rank (Acres) (range) Fire-Dependent Forest/Woodland Aspen - Birch Woodland FDn33b S5 B-CD 1.9 White Pine - Red Pine Forest FDn43a S2 C-CD 7.6 Aspen – Birch Forest FDn43b S5 C 6.0 Aspen - Birch Forest, Balsam Fir Subtype FDn43b1 S5 C 10.3 Mesic Hardwood Forest Aspen - Birch - Basswood Forest MHn35a S4 BC-D 60.2 Red Oak - Sugar Maple - Basswood - (Bluebead Lily) Forest MHn35b S4 BC-CD 128.7 Aspen - Birch - Red Maple Forest MHn44a S4 D 4.4 Aspen - Ash Forest MHn46a S4 D 34.8 Black Ash - Basswood Forest MHn46b S4 C 1.1 Sugar Maple - Basswood - (Bluebead Lily) Forest MHn47a S3 BC-CD 73.8 Rock Outcrop Crystalline Bedrock Outcrop (Northern) ROn12b S4 C 1.5 Bedrock Shrubland (Inland) ROn23a S3 D 0.3 Forested Rich Peatland Alder Swamp FPn73a S5 C-D 8.6 Wet Forest Black Ash - Aspen - Balsam Poplar Swamp (Northeastern) WFn55a S4 C-D 65.7 Black Ash - Yellow Birch - Red Maple - Basswood Swamp (Eastcentral) WFn55b S3 CD 4.1 Black Ash - Mountain Maple Swamp WFn55c S4 BC-D 21.8 Black Ash - Conifer Swamp WFn64a S4 C 1.3 Black Ash - Alder Swamp (Northern) WFn64c S4 C 1.4 Marsh Cattail - Sedge Marsh (Northern) MRn83a S2 C-D 4.5 Wet Meadow/Carr Willow Dogwood Shrub Swamp WMn82a S5 B-C 30.9 Sedge Meadow WMn82b S4 or S5 D 0.6 Sedge Meadow, Bluejoint Subtype WMn82b1 S5 B-D 51.8 Lakeshore System Inland Lake Clay/Mud Shore Lki54 S4 C 8.6 Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 12 Excerpt from Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area (Minnesota Land Trust 2019) continued: Condition ranks were assigned to each polygon according to the ranking specific to each community. In general, the condition ranks can be characterized as follows: A = Outstanding B = Very high quality; only slight disturbance BC = High quality; significant signs of human disturbance C = Altered, but with appropriate management, recovery within 50-100 years is expected CD = Between C and D D = Severely degraded; recovery will require active restoration Condition ranks for the NPCs are shown in Figure [3], with the range of conditions seen across the natural area for each NPC provided in Table 1. In most instances, NPCs identified as severely degraded (condition rank D) had an abundance of non-native species present (Reschke et al, 2019). NPC types and subtypes have been assigned conservation status ranks (S-ranks) that reflect the risk of elimination of the community from Minnesota (MNDNR, 2009). The five ranks are: S1 = critically imperiled S2 = imperiled S3 = vulnerable to extirpation S4 = apparently secure; uncommon but not rare S5 = secure, common, widespread, and abundant The S-ranks for the 23 NPCs found in Hartley Natural Area are given in Table 1. The majority of NPCs in the natural area rank as apparently secure (S4) or secure (S5). Two communities, White Pine – Red Pine Forest (FDn43a) and Cattail – Sedge Marsh (Northern) (MRn83a), rank as imperiled, while three communities rank as vulnerable to extirpation (Sugar Maple – Basswood (Bluebead Lily) Forest, MHn47a; Bedrock Shrubland (Inland), ROn23a; and Black Ash – Yellow Birch – Red Maple – Basswood Swamp (Eastcentral), WFn55b). Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 13 Figure 3. Condition Ranks of Native Plant Communities in the Hartley Natural Area (from Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area, Minnesota Land Trust 2019) Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 14 Cultural or Non-Native Plant Community Types The following text was adapted from the Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area (Minnesota Land Trust, 2019): The 2019 survey defined five cultural or non-native plant community types: conifer plantation (red pine or jack pine), non-native forest/woodland (European mountain ash), non-native shrubland (wet, wet mesic, and upland), non-native grassland, and non-native other (ball park, buildings, pavement, dam, and gravel). These community types cover 167.9 acres of the surveyed area [see white and gray areas in Figure 2]. Descriptions of the vegetated non-native plant community types are as follows (Reschke, 2019): Conifer Plantation - 51.5 acres In Hartley the conifer plantations are forests dominated by either red pine or jack pine, with the pines planted in rows, often close together. Common shrubs in the understory include glossy buckthorn, European mountain ash, beaked hazelnut, dwarf raspberry, and red raspberry. European Mountain-ash Forest - 1.3 acres This one polygon is a forest dominated by European Mountain-ash, with a few yellow birch. Understory shrubs include glossy buckthorn, red raspberry, choke cherry, and beaked hazelnut. Non-native Grassland - 10.4 acres These polygons are grassy meadows or old fields often dominated by reed canary grass, with tansy, Canada thistle, valerian, glossy buckthorn, and buckthorn mixed in. Upland Non-native Shrubland - 53.2 acres These polygons are upland shrublands dominated by glossy buckthorn and buckthorn. This type has been split into two subtypes based on soil moisture: Mesic Non-native Shrubland (C4a) and Wet- mesic Non-native Shrubland (C4b). Wetland Non-native Shrubland - 33.1 acres These polygons are wetlands dominated by glossy buckthorn and buckthorn, with some speckled alder and sapling black ash present. Reed canary grass is often present. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 15 2.2.2 Water Resources Surface waters provide habitat for many species of fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, clams, and aquatic insects. They include rivers, lakes, streams, ponds, and wetlands. Natural water features within the HNA include Tischer Creek and its tributaries, lowland forests and swamps, wet meadows and shrub carrs, and numerous vernal pools. Water resources are not the focus of this Native Plant Community Management Plan, but lowland and wetland plant communities are addressed. Additional information regarding the site’s water resources can be found in the Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area (Minnesota Land Trust 2019). 2.2.3 Invasive Plants Invasive plants often establish and thrive in disturbed habitat, usually crowding out native plants and altering the habitat in damaging ways. Removing these aggressive species is a major management activity of natural resources programs. Primary plants of concern at the HNA include invasive Glossy buckthorn (Frangula alnus), Common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), invasive Honeysuckles (Lonicera spp), Tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), Wild Parsnip (Pastinaca sativa), Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata), Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia Japonica var. japonica), and Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria). Reschke et al (2019) identified a total of 44 invasive species present in the HNA (Table 2). Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 16 Table 2. Invasive Plant Species Found in Hartley Natural Area (Reschke et al, 2019) Scientific name Common name # polygons Frangula alnus glossy buckthorn 80 Valeriana officinalis valerian 72 Rhamnus cathartica common buckthorn 69 Taraxacum officinale common dandelion 66 Tanacetum vulgare tansy 58 Plantago major common plantain 54 Hieracium aurantiacum orange hawkweed 47 Cirsium arvense Canada thistle 41 Phalaris arundinacea reed canary grass 41 Lonicera sp., alien Eurasian honeysuckle 25 Leucanthemum vulgare ox-eye daisy 23 Lotus corniculatus bird's-foot trefoil 13 Arctium sp. burdock 12 Cirsium vulgare bull thistle 12 Syringa x prestoniae Preston's lilac 12 Stellaria sp. stichwort or chickweed 11 Convallaria majalis lily-of-the-valley 8 Hesperis matronalis dame's rocket 8 Hieracium sp. (yellow) hawkweed 8 Lonicera caerulea ssp. edulis honeyberry 8 Lupinus polyphyllus large-leaved lupine 8 Campanula cervicaria bristly bluebells 6 Fallopia japonica var. japonica (= Polygonum cuspidatum) Japanese knotweed 5 Acer ginnala Amur maple 4 Campanula rapunculoides European bellflower 4 Glechoma hederacea creeping charlie 4 Aegopodium podograria goutweed 3 Bromus inermis smooth brome 3 Galeopsis tetrahit hemp nettle 3 Medicago sativa alfalfa 3 Sorbus aucuparia European mountain ash 3 Syringa cf. vulgaris common lilac 3 Typha sp. (alien?) cattail 3 Berberis thunbergii Japanese barberry 2 Lythrum salicaria purple loosestrife 2 Matricaria discoidea pineapple weed 2 Medicago lupulina black medick 2 Sonchus sp. sow thistle 2 Typha sp. - alien narrowleaf cattail 2 Verbascum thapsis common mullein 2 Acer platanoides Norway maple 1 Hemerocallis fulva orange daylily 1 Sorbaria sorbifolia false spiraea 1 Syringa reticulata Amur lilac 1 Ecological restoration and management activities may accidentally introduce or spread invasive species. To avoid this, see guidelines developed by the MNDNR (Appendix A). Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 17 2.2.4 Invasive Wildlife, Pests & Diseases Invasive wildlife, pests, and diseases can also harm natural areas by eliminating native wildlife and degrading habitat. Emerald ash borer (EAB, a non-native, invasive beetle), is eliminating street trees and natural ash stands throughout the eastern United States. This is just the most recent of many devastating pests inadvertently or purposefully introduced to North America. As long as global commerce exists, new invasive wildlife species and pests will have to be dealt with. Emerald Ash Borer EAB has already killed some of the site’s green ash and black ash trees, and it is likely they will continue to die over the coming decade. Chemical treatment of individual trees can provide effective protection against EAB, but it is often not feasible to treat and protect ash trees throughout a large area such as the HNA. Oak Wilt Oak wilt (a deadly, invasive fungus) occurs in the region and likely has affected oaks on the site. Seasonal guidelines for cutting, pruning, and care of wounds of oak trees should be followed strictly to prevent the spread of this destructive disease. If present and not managed, oak wilt has the potential to kill trees in the red oak group in the near term, and trees in the white oak group in the long term. Butternut Canker The state-endangered Butternut (Juglans cinerea) exists on the site; however, Duluth is outside the natural range of this species, so these individuals are likely offspring of landscape specimens from nearby yards. This native tree species was listed by MNDNR as Special Concern in 1996 due to a lethal fungal disease called Butternut canker (Sirococcus clavigignenti-juglandacearum). With the canker decimating this species across the state, Butternut was listed as state-endangered in 2013. Healthy (presumably resistant) trees have been found growing adjacent to diseased trees in Minnesota. These trees, if they are truly resistant, could be extremely valuable in efforts to preserve the species, and they must not be cut down. Cuttings and seeds taken from disease resistant trees and propagated in tree plantations could potentially provide stock for landscaping purposes and possibly for reestablishing wild populations. It is also advisable to consider augmenting existing populations by direct planting of seeds taken from healthy trees. The MNDNR refers to USDA recommendations for protecting and retaining butternut trees (USDA 1996): Vigor of individual trees in managed woodlots, urban, or other high-value landscape settings may be increased by proper pruning and tree care. If management objectives include conserving potentially resistant trees, the following guidelines will be helpful in retaining trees for seed and nut production and in selecting trees for breeding: 1. Retain trees with more than 70 percent live crown and with less than 20 percent of the combined circumference of the stem and root flares affected by cankers. Hartley Natural Area – Native Plant Community Management Plan 18 2. Harvest dead or declining trees to salvage the quality and value of the wood or maintain the trees in the forest for their wildlife value. 3. Retain trees free of cankers with at least 50 percent live crown and growing among diseased trees. These trees may be resistant and have value for propagation by grafting or for future breeding. Efforts are underway to locate potentially resistant trees in native forest stands. Contact the USDA Forest Service North Central Forest Experiment Station in St. Paul, MN, for further information if you find a healthy butternut. White Pine Blister Rust Blister rust is a fungal disease that creates cankers by killing areas of bark and outer wood. The HNA has a stand of Eastern white pine (Pinus strobus) trees that have a genetic history of natural resistance to white pine blister rust. According to the Management Plan for the Hartley Natural Area (Minnesota Land Trust 2019), cuttings collected by the University of Minnesota Cloquet Forestry Center and the USDA Forest Service from several trees in this stand were grafted for research to enhance propagation of blister rust resistance into Minnesota forests. This stand of trees is a unique historic resource, as it provides the opportunity to re-establish this ecologically important species; therefore, the HNA’s blister rust-resistant Eastern white pines should continue to be protected. 2.2.5 Rare Natural Features Federally-Tracked Natural Features The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website is used to identify federally-tracked species in a project area. A query of IPaC (USFWS 2020a, Appendix B) indicated that five federally-listed species may potentially be affected by activities at or near the HNA. • Piping plover (Charadrius melodus), Federally-endangered • Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), Federally-threatened • Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), Federally-threatened • Gray wolf (Canis lupus), Federally-threatened1 • Red knot (Calidris canutus rufa), Federally-threatened A brief description of each species follows, including potential conservation measures that can be taken at the HNA. Piping plover. This Federally-endangered bird is a small, sand-colored, shoreline bird that uses wide, flat, open, sand beach with sparse vegetation. Their nesting territories can include small creeks or wetlands; however, these habitats need to be adjacent to shorelines and beaches of large waterbodies. Because the HNA is over 1.5 miles inland from Lake Superior, it is very unlikely this species uses the site. Northern long-eared bat. This Federally-threatened mammal is a medium-sized bat with long ears that uses forested areas for summer roosting. Its range includes the entire Upper Midwest, including 1 As of the preparation of this plan, the USFWS had delisted the Gray wolf from the Endangered Species Act. This is proposed to be effective on January 4, 2021. For more information see: https://www.fws.gov/home/wolfrecovery/ (Accessed December 2020) https://www.fws.gov/home/wolfrecovery/