[APWG] Why not succeed the first time, with Performance Standards?

[Fuhrmann, Paul]

Alison's comments re:  native purity, ecotypes in the context of real
time infrastructure projects and associated landscape disturbance is
where the rubber meets the road (no pun intended).  

Earlier exchanges noted that list members of all levels of experience
(professional and regional) are attentive to this issue whether they
weigh in or not.  I look forward to all exchanges to learn, fine tune
restoration thinking, share with colleagues or all of the above.  This
is invaluable, real time dialogue for many whether it's universally
pertinent or not.   

Restoration design within complex linear projects involves numerous
temporal and contractual constraints.  Performance monitoring and
lessons learned from restoration design for infrastructure and resource
mitigation projects has pushed project sponsors towards new design and
techniques.  The common objectives for regulators, engineers and
restoration biologists is immediate, functional stability combined with
defined biological uplift.  That can't happen if restoration biologists
work in a vacuum or are excluded from conceptual planning to final
design process.

Each project site offers different (native species) restoration
opportunities and challenges.  Water resource, stream/river,
transportation, utility corridor project scale restoration have much in
common.  Adding climate driven weather events, flood flows, etc.
emphasizes need for immediate structural/physical stabilization of
disturbed landscape, planting design and plan to provide emergency soil
stabilization, plant/seed dominant native species with appropriate
erosion control assemblage for "sustainable" cover type, monitor and
apply "adaptive management" until establishment, design objectives and
performance goals are achieved.  

Not sure my comments are in synch with other posts but this is what came
out after thinking about previous exchanges.  Recent TNC presentation at
the ODUM Invasive Species Conference has reinforced approach to invasive
plant control/management.  The concept of mutualism or restoration
design that allows cohabitation but not dominance by invasive
terrestrial species could be a realistic approach to some not all site
design.  This is most applicable to riparian habitat restoration where
invasive density, recruitment and seedbank is overwhelming and will be
for our lifetime.    

Paul Fuhrmann
ecology and environment, inc.
368 Pleasantview Drive
Lancaster, New York 14086
Tel    716 684 8060 ext 2876
Fax   716 684 0844
www.ene.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
[mailto:apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of Krohn,
Alison
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 11:54 AM
To: Craig Dremann - Redwood City Seed Company;
apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: Re: [APWG] Why not succeed the first time, with Performance
Standards?

How does this group define a weed?  Are naturalized plants like lambs
quarters viewed the same as native ragweed?  I'm very confused by the
insistence on 100% native purity. I don't think it's possible in the
Midwest. I work for a state transportation agency and we seed 98% native
species, not local ecotype.  But when our seeding adjoins a brome
pasture, brome will invade and we cannot spend public resources to
prevent that.  Is this discussion confined to the great basin and
California?

Is everyone aware of the clean water act and the requirements of the
NPDES construction permit?  Anywhere more than 1 acre is disturbed
(unless you're a farmer) a construction stormwater permit is required
and remains open until 70% of the pre-construction/native, perennial
vegetation is restored.  Most of the roadsides we are regrading and
seeding were brome.  Native prairie vegetation, especially mixed grass
areas will provide less vegetative cover than the brome and therefore
will potentially discharge more sediment into our waterways (if you
believe the RUSLE2 model).  I'm not advocating brome, just want to point
out the mixed messages out there and conflicting expectations.  We must
stabilize erodible soils within 14 days under the clean water act to
protect our waterways.  This state uses a mix of cool and warm season
grasses to meet this requirement along with some forbs. It is not a
restoration mix. 

I also grow local ecotype seed and obviously support its  use but there
is not enough of this seed in our area to restore roadsides and there
doesn't appear to be the public support for this endeavor in terms of
dollars from FHWA, the state government or wealthy donors. I applaud all
of the research that Craig and others are doing but am frustrated by the
assumption that roadsides are restorations.  We just don't have the
resources to pull it off.