inlet and accumulating around a small (1 hectare or less) spoil island 

 deposited during the course of opening the original channel. An island 

 in this vicinity was seeded in early May 1972, and the resulting seedlings 

 destroyed in the storm of 24 to 27 May of that year. 



By early April 1973, an estimated 6 to 7 hectares of South Island 

 lay within the upper half of the tide range, the elevation zone in which 

 we have found seeding of S. alterniflova to be feasible. This situation 

 presented a unique opportunity to: (1) undertake field-scale seeding 

 using our portable equipment under the type of conditions for which it 

 was designed, and (2) test the feasibility of seeding a very exposed area 

 where little opportunity for natural invasion by marsh species seemed 

 likely in the immediate future. - The low elevation and closeness to the 

 inlet subjects the area to frequent flooding and strong turbulence. The 

 probability of seeds drifting onto this site at the appropriate time for 

 germination and subsequent seedling establishment seems rather remote. 



Seeding was delayed until the week of 16 April to reduce storm hazards. 

 \bout 4 hectares were seeded on 17 and 18 April using the two-wheel 

 tractor with cultivator. The area to be seeded was cultivated before 

 seeding and again immediately after seeding. Seed were broadcast by hand 

 as previously described. On 2 May, a second area of about 1 hectare was 

 seeded in the same manner. Germination and emergence were excellent over 

 most of the area; by late May, an adequate stand of seedlings had survived 

 over an area of 3 to 4 hectares. However, the island continued to grow 

 and many seedlings were smothered by sand that moved over the island 

 during the summer. By the end of the growing season a 2-hectare block 

 lying roughly across the westerly one-fourth of the island still retained 

 an adequate stand with scattered plants remaining over another 1 o.r 2 

 hectares. 



Rainfall was below normal for much of the summer in this region which 

 when coupled with the low, flat nature of the island, made the seeded area 

 vulnerable to salt injury (see discussion in Section 3c on Salt Damage) . 

 Salt damage was believed to be the cause of both the stand thinning and 

 the slow rate of top growth of this planting. An area near the center of 

 the 2-hectare block (Fig. 34), devoted to a fertilizer test, was sampled 

 8 November 1973 and the data are presented and discussed later in Section 

 VI and Table 43. Top growth was quite restricted, much less than that of 

 the seeding of 21 June 1972 at Beaufort (Tab. 16). However, root and 

 rhizome production was equal to or better than the Beaufort planting. 

 These results suggest that the periodic salt-induced dieback observed 

 aboveground is not necessarily matched by losses in underground growth. 

 This does not seem too surprising since the large mass of succulent roots 

 and rhizomes underneath established stands probably plays a significant 

 role in their tolerance to salt buildup. 



This planting was in good condition on 8 March 1974. The island 

 is still growing to the south and east with some erosion along the north- 

 west side. Additional sand has been deposited over most of the seedlings, 



69 



