MEMO  ON  UNIVERSITY  BAY  TO  Messrs:      A.D. Hasler

                                                                                    Grant Cottam

FROM:  James H. Zimmerman                                      Orie Loucks

               U.W. Arboretum Naturalist                            Wm. Reeder

                                                                                     Robt. Ellarson

DATE:  March 17, 1970                                               Van R. Potter

                                                                                     C.A. Engman

TOPIC: University Bay Natural Areas                           James Edsall

              management – specifically the                          Michael Oberdorfer

              former cornfield                                              [Dick] McCabe

Definition:  University Bay includes 5 wetland areas of interest and value to the University and Madison Community.

1.   The bay from Willows Beach across to Picnic Point.  Deepened by raising lake level years ago; made shallower recently by siltation from west Madison storm runoff and University Farm campus and over-fertilized by both via Marsh Creek.  Proposals for dredging [bay,] abatement of upland silting and fertilizing, and restriction of boating during waterfowl migration in spring and fall need consideration.

2.   The tiny cattail marsh on north side of Picnic Point.  Excellent habitat for wood ducks and amphibians; no change needed.

3.   The crescent-shaped cattail marsh on the north side of Willows drive from lot 60 to the base of Picnic Point, bordering the bay.  Valuable habitat for a variety of life, but small; no change needed.

4.   Marsh Creek, west of the Natatorium.  Formerly cattail marsh with considerable bird life; sides filled in too steeply, vegetation and wildlife now absent, mud banks crumbling and adding silt to lake.  Could be restored by grading banks back and stabilizing them with marsh plants and shrubs.  The two present foot-bridges over the creek would make good wildlife observation points.

5.   The former cornfield from lot 60 west to University Bay Drive, between Marsh lane on the south and Willows Drive on the north.  Probably once a giant sedge meadow, next flooded by raising  of lake [level,] then drained by pumping for reclaimed wetland agriculture demonstration for many years until tiling surfaced because of peat oxidation.  Now heavily used by migrant waterfowl and shorebirds as wetland and duck food plants moved in.  Marsh wildlife, including breeding waterfowl, who moved in, indicating scarcity of such habitat on Lake Mendota.  This is understandable because the three major wetlands on north side of Lake Mendota (Yahara-Cherokee, Six Mile Creek and Pheasant Branch) have all been made too shallow by siltation, polluted by over fertilization and invaded by less desirable plants, so that they support very little waterfowl despite their vast acreages.

Management considerations for Area 5, the former cornfield, are the subject of this memo.  It should be noted that the bay area in general, including the open space provided by the cornfield and former lot 60 area, has long been used by bird watchers and university classes as the only accessible place in Madison convenient to visit repeatedly for study and enjoyment of lowland and open country wildlife.

Value of Wildlife Habitat:
Aside from the definite possibility of waterfowl extenction [sic], now that wetlands are becoming both scarce and degraded everywhere, there is the point that accessible wildlife is all that most people will ever see in their busy structured world.  Restoring and maintaining wildlife habitat in the old cornfield is the only way to bring waterfowl – and wetland ecology – into the [lives] of 8 substantial bodies of people who care or would care about environmental quality.

1. Graduate students in University Houses who commute to the hill, often by bicycle.

2. Residents of Shorewood who commute to the hill, often by bicycle.

3. Students in biology classes, most of whose laboratory work is confined to 2 or 3 hour periods barely   sufficient to permit field trips to adjacent campus areas like University Bay.

4. Other students who hike or bike about the campus and especially use the lake shore from Park Street to the tent colony

5. University people who use Lot 60.

6. Athletics students using playing fields and the bay nearby.

7. Madisonians interested in (a) nature, (b) the environment, (c) boating, fishing, swimming, and hence visit the area.

8. Researchers, technicians, planners, and administrators who visit the University and Madison because of concern for the environment.

Opportunity for Wildlife demonstration area:
 

The cornfield’s location makes it ideal for the development as a wildlife restoration and study area as well as for exploring the means of coexistence of wildlife and man that can mean quality environment as well as indicating health of the lands and waters.

(A)  The pump-house, continuing to keep the water level a little lower than the lake, is ideal for use in water level control to prevent [mosquito] problems and to draw waters down when needed to encourage duck foods or attract shorebirds.  A sign on the pump-house could explain the operation as it did the agricultural use of lowland in the past.

(B)  The separation of this wetland from the lake by the Willows Drive berm is unfortunate, and might someday be re-arranged so as to allow travel of wildlife underneath the road, while still maintaining level control.  But the exclusion of carp is an asset, to be capitalized upon.  (Carp uproot wild rice and other duck foods.)

(C)  The presence of the lake and bay makes it possible that a small wetland would still see heavy waterfowl use, especially if food and cover for wildlife were encouraged, and tree growth discouraged (waterfowl need open space for landings and take-offs – either open water or open fields – which Lot 60 and the athletic practice supply).  Birds frightened away by too many people or too much traffic would stay around and simply retreat to the lake, especially if boating were restricted in University Bay in spring and fall when migrating ducks use the bay in great numbers for feeding and resting.

(D)  The piling of excess fill into a hill or two on one side of the cornfield marsh would provide an observation site for looking down into the marsh to see the waterfowl better.

RECOMMENDATION:

To capitalize on this [asset], the lowland should be structured for maximum value as indicated in the accompanying sketch, and as suggested in the McCabe report. ([essentially] this plan had been proposed [earlier] with the advice of the Wildlife Ecology Dept.)

a.  Shoreline should be very gradual – the less steep the better, and at least [sic, most] at a slope

     of 1” in 1 foot.

b.  The center should be deep enough (6-8 feet) not to freeze so it will support maximum variety of fish, amphibians, and small plants and animals including predators that control the mosquitoes, as well as food [animals] for ducks and herons and shorebirds.

c.  Vegetation should be kept natural but low on most edges – marsh plants, a few native shrubs, few if any trees.  For maximum waterfowl use, no trees should be planted anywhere in the entire [former] cornfield area.

d.  Water levels should not fluctuate too much during nesting season, yet [gradually] should go down somewhat occasionally to allow the start of [new] aquatic plants on mud and to attract shorebirds – this is often the natural condition in May and August – September.  The pump will make this possible.

e.  The size (length or area) of the wet marsh should be as great as possible in order that it satisfy both conditions (a) and (b).  If a single deepest point was 8 feet, no maximum shoreline could be less than 100 feet from it, and the wetland would be at least 200 feet across at its narrowest [diameter].  Actually, a few acres of deep water (6-8 feet deep) would be desirable, but it would not have to be more than a few.

f.   Present fill would therefore have to be adjusted as indicated in the accompanying sketch.  Excess fill could be piled to form a low observation hill on one side. [(south best for observation)]

g.  Management of the area should be effected jointly by the Wildlife Ecology and Zoology Departments, perhaps with the help of the Botany Department and U.W. Arboretum.  (Arboretum research on its own wetland restoration projects will be helpful.)

OBJECTIONS TO this plan come from two sources:

a.  Need for space on the crowded campus.  Buildings have robbed athletics of much of its practice fields.  Population growth has forced transportation and parking likewise to seek new space.  The cornfield, too low and wet for much building, was the logical place to put both.  The cornfield has room for all 3:  the small remaining marsh (even when somewhat enlarged and re-graded as recommended above), the present Lot 60, and the currently expanded practice fields and tennis stadium.  But enlargement or moving of parking facilities westward will eliminate first the marsh and, later, athletics.  It seems a shame to exterminate environment for parking when eventually another solution will have to be found for transportation anyway.

b.  Purported nuisances of wild land (a) Mosquitoes – but those will not be a problem if the marsh has deep water.  (b) Weeds – but these will be confined to non-pest wetland duck foods (such as smartweeds, rice, arrowhead), which need not include ragweed.  (c) Odors – again unnecessary if water is deep and unpolluted.  (d) Untidiness – often confused with ignorance of the interesting wild plants, and even more often the result of experience with our too-numerous disturbed lowlands which often are nuisance areas.  Surface scums can be temporary [healthy] duckweeds and non-nuisance algae that are important to wildlife or the can be bluegreen algae that tell us of over-fertilization and a dearth of wildlife

The Nielsen alumni gift could very appropriately be used for marsh restoration here and will achieve more good that way – by educating others on how to restore and enrich the environment – than it possibly could by being used to construct a sterile lagoon (we already have several of the lat[t]er in our city parks.) 

The most important thing in this world is life.  I believe we should encourage it everywhere.  I shall be glad to escort anyone – alumni, regents, residents, engineers or others who object to a marsh here and explain the subtleties of good and poor wildlife habitats and lay to rest the misunderstandings noted above.

Note:  Bracketed annotations added to typed original, usually in blanks.