[APWG] Ecosystem management and restoration planning

Fri Jan 16 16:54:47 CST 2009

Hello, I do not have a background in ecology, but this topic has interested
me for quite awhile, since weed control overlaps with more agriculturally
focused land management. Looking for causes can add to the 'feeling' of
futility. I understand that it is vitally important for improving methods.
But, is it only part of the picture. Can a review of the history of the site
and use of cultural controls be more practical for putting things in
perspective for those of us without formal training? A lot of people
understand some of the basics and professional services are expensive and
scarce.
Thanks, Kim Yousey

-----Original Message-----
From: apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
[mailto:apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of
apwg-request at lists.plantconservation.org
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 2:00 PM
To: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: APWG Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14

Send APWG mailing list submissions to
	apwg at lists.plantconservation.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconserva
tion.org

or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	apwg-request at lists.plantconservation.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	apwg-owner at lists.plantconservation.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of APWG digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Ecosystem management and
      restorationplanningPlantsAlienspecies component Re:
      NEWS:Removingspeciesfromsub-Antarctic island 'causeddisaster'
      (Wayne Tyson)
   2. NEWS: Invasive plants challenge scientists in face of
      environmental change (Olivia Kwong)
   3. Bad management can be worse, in California
      (Craig Dremann - Redwood City Seed Company)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:43:07 -0800
From: "Wayne Tyson" <landrest at cox.net>
Subject: Re: [APWG] Ecosystem management and
	restorationplanningPlantsAlienspecies component Re:
	NEWS:Removingspeciesfromsub-Antarctic island 'causeddisaster'
To: <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Message-ID: <07ee01c977a5$b0da5e60$6501a8c0 at wayneb2f97d881>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original

No doubt that is true in some cases, but either way it is speculation until 
there is a disciplined survey with appropriate controls and notation of 
differences. On the other hand, there have been cases where damage has been 
done.

WT

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ialm at erols.com>
To: <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: [APWG] Ecosystem management and 
restorationplanningPlantsAlienspecies component Re: 
NEWS:Removingspeciesfromsub-Antarctic island 'causeddisaster'

Just a reminder. Mistakes in non-native invasive species control have
caused much, much, less damage than the mistake of doing nothing. Cheers.
Marc

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Karen Adair kadair at TNC.ORG
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:22:43 -0500
To: landrest at cox.net, apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: Re: [APWG] Ecosystem management and restoration
planningPlantsAlienspecies component Re: NEWS:
Removingspeciesfromsub-Antarctic island 'causeddisaster'

Your response reminds me of the knee jerk reaction I often have when I
think someone is not doing something the "right" way or in a way "I
know" they "should." This is just my flawed thinking and when I
recognize I'm thinking this way, I remind myself of Einstein's quote:
"No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single
experiment can prove me wrong."

I've discovered the hard way that nobody wants to hear what they
"should" be doing or that they're doing it "wrong." I instead have
learned and try to focus on only what is in my power. You don't have the
power to change the way people think, but it is in your power to provide
useful information to support your belief. If someone listens and adopts
it, great. If not, that's just how it is.

Your last paragraph illustrated my point about our flawed thinking. It's
not that those people didn't know about what light availability does to
plants. It's that somewhere along the way, their thinking was flawed and
they didn't accurately predict what would happen. Understanding why they
didn't predict it or where that flaw occurred hits the core of
understanding how to be effective.

I've also learned that if I live my life trying to find reassurance in
what other's are doing, I'm going to be upset. Nobody will "do
conservation" perfectly or the way "I think" it should be done. Millions
of mistakes have been made and that's part of what has gotten us to
where we are today, for better and worse. If I devote the time I spend
thinking about what others are doing or not doing instead to what I can
do, I'll be that much more effective in contributing to our common goal.

-----Original Message-----
From: apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
[mailto:apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of Wayne
Tyson
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 10:32 PM
To: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: Re: [APWG] Ecosystem management and restoration planning
PlantsAlienspecies component Re: NEWS: Removing speciesfromsub-Antarctic
island 'causeddisaster'

KA and PC:

Of course I agree; however, I have seen many cases where individuals'
and organizations' actions in alien-bashing have left me with the
impression that their knowledge and skills were more limited than would
be necessary for the error avoidance procedures you mention, and were
not only not followed, they were strenuous objections. On one occasion,
for example, when it was suggested in a statewide alien plant
orginazation's seminar that optimal allocations of scarce resources be a
consideration according to a priority list based upon the procedures
mentioned, including feasibility and infeasibility as well as net
effectiveness (I'm trying to make a long story short here), there was
outraged objection based on the "logic" that "we know they are
invasives, and that's all we need to know, etc., so forget all that bs
and just get on with the work. The seminar leaders apparently agreed and
emphasized technique "effectiveness" such as which herbicides to use,
how to use mechanical methods, etc. Suggestion that improving ecosystem
"health" or any kind of integrated analysis and proof of restoration of
ecosystem equilibrium was consider an obstacle to action rather than a
necessary or even useful part of a comprehensive and integrated program
that would result in true long-term effectiveness. The emphasis seemed
to be on gaining satisfaction only by the removal or killing of aliens
in the short-term.
"Nature" was supposed to "take care of everything else." The general
impression given was that if one was not a true-believer in the
organization's precepts that vilification or worse would be in store for
the offenders.

I don't know the case to which you allude, but it would seem that the
California case might be indicative of something along the lines just
mentioned. Someone with even the most casual knowledge of ecological
processes should know--for starters-- that weeds "like" light. The
effects of the eradication efforts on such simple concepts and soil
water, nutrients, and nutrient sequestration might have been in the
realm of "needless" complexity.

Nonetheless, I am reassured that somewhere all who are working on
invasives do "understand that they are working in ecosystems and what
that means."

WT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Karen Adair" <kadair at TNC.ORG>
To: "Wayne Tyson" <landrest at cox.net>; "Olivia Kwong"
<plant at plantconservation.org>; <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 6:15 PM
Subject: RE: [APWG] Ecosystem management and restoration planning Plants
Alienspecies component Re: NEWS: Removing species fromsub-Antarctic
island 'causeddisaster'

I say a more correct title would have been "Flawed thinking 'caused
disaster' on sub-Antarctic island"

I don't remember the specifics, but I know of at least one scenario
where this has happened with plants. I think an invasive tree species
was successfully eradicated somewhere in California only to promote the
massive and swift invasion of some herbaceous understory plant that was
just waiting for such an event. And these were highly intelligent people
working on this.

I don't know anyone working on invasives who doesn't understand that
they are working in ecosystems and what that means. This gets me to the
opinion I've formed from constant analysis of my own mistakes
(fortunately never described as "disasters") and successes which is that
the "root of the root"
in all mistakes comes from our lack of understanding and acceptance that
there will always be flaws in how people think and decide. The human
thought process is imperfect and intellectual limitations are constant.
We can't change those facts, but knowing and thinking of it whenever we
have to make a decision should remind us to push away our assumptions
and instead rely on and stick to sound, strategic planning principles
and the questions and information that come as a result. That is the
only way to mitigate the effects of our emotions, perceptions, and
ignorance in our thought processes. I can directly link every mistake
I've ever made to at least one of those three. I can link every success
to the fact that I kept my goal front and center at all times.

"The lessons for conservation agencies globally is that interventions
should be comprehensive, and include risk assessments to explicitly
consider and plan for indirect effects, or face substantial subsequent
costs."

This quote is very logical and you would think that everyone working to
protect the environment would know this and do it automatically
especially with a project of this importance, scale, and nature. To me,
why they did not do it is the key component in this story and what would
be most helpful to know and learn from.

Thanks. Karen

________________________________

From: apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
[mailto:apwg-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of Wayne
Tyson
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 7:46 PM
To: Olivia Kwong; apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: [APWG] Ecosystem management and restoration planning Plants
Alienspecies component Re: NEWS: Removing species fromsub-Antarctic
island 'causeddisaster'

APWG:

While we don't usually think of predator-prey relationships with plants,
there can be situations where alien plant removal procedures are
detrimental to ecosystem health. And the lesson here of understanding
interspecies connections and making predictions that are testable as
theory, then test plots, then useful procedures, beats the "find 'em,
whack 'em, and forget 'em" approach that is far too widely used
(sometimes with good results,* but too often with negative or neutral
results). While consideration of the whole ecosystem context may take
more time, it can minimize error, expense, and wasted or
counterproductive effort.

WT

*Ecosystems are resilient--that is, "forgiving." But correlations are
not always reflective of causation, and a shift in context can mean
success in one case, failure in another.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Olivia Kwong" <plant at plantconservation.org
<mailto:plant at plantconservation.org> >
To: <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
<mailto:apwg at lists.plantconservation.org> >
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 7:33 AM
Subject: [APWG] NEWS: Removing species from sub-Antarctic island
'causeddisaster'

> About animal species, but it did affect plants on the island.
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090112/sc_afp/environmentbiodiversityinv
> asiveaustralia_newsmlmmd
> <http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090112/sc_afp/environmentbiodiversityin
> vasiveaustralia_newsmlmmd>
>
> Removing species from sub-Antarctic island 'caused disaster'
> Mon Jan 12, 12:34 pm ET
>
> PARIS (AFP) -- Efforts to remove an invasive species from a
> sub-Antarctic island that has been named a World Heritage site
> accidentally triggered an environmental catastrophe, a study to be
published on Tuesday says.
>
> The eradication programme on Macquarie Island, lying halfway between
> Australia and Antarctica, is a cautionary tale about the complex web
> of ecosystems, its authors say.
>
> See the link above for the full article text.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list
> APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
> <mailto:APWG at lists.plantconservation.org>
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantco
> nservation.org
> <http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantc
> onservation.org>
>
> Disclaimer
> Any requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the
> opinion of the individual posting the message.

________________________________

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.6/1888 - Release Date:
1/12/2009
7:04 AM

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1893 - Release Date:
1/14/2009
6:59 AM

_______________________________________________
PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list
APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantcons
ervation.org

Disclaimer
Any requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the
opinion of the individual posting the message.

_______________________________________________
PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list
APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconserva
tion.org

Disclaimer
Any requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the
opinion of the individual posting the message.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web LIVE - Free email based on Microsoft? Exchange technology -
http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE

_______________________________________________
PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list
APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconserva
tion.org

Disclaimer
Any requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the 
opinion of the individual posting the message.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1895 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 
7:46 AM

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:00:46 -0600 (CST)
From: Olivia Kwong <plant at plantconservation.org>
Subject: [APWG] NEWS: Invasive plants challenge scientists in face of
	environmental change
To: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Message-ID:
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0901160859480.7397 at cpanel1-bb.epconline.net>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-01/uoca-ipc011309.php

University of Colorado at Boulder
Invasive plants challenge scientists in face of environmental change
Warmer growing seasons, increases in CO2 and nitrogen amplify weedy 
species success, says CU-Boulder researcher

Managing invasive plant species on the Great Plains has become more 
challenging in recent years in the face of human-caused environmental 
change, including the positive responses of invaders to altered 
atmospheric chemistry and longer growing seasons, says a University of 
Colorado at Boulder professor.

See the link above for the full text of the press release.

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:13:34 -0000 (UTC)
From: "Craig Dremann - Redwood City Seed Company" <Craig at astreet.com>
Subject: [APWG] Bad management can be worse, in California
To: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Message-ID: <1287.199.232.90.53.1232126014.squirrel at fast2.astreet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1

Dear All,

I want to disagree very strongly with Marc's statement.  I have been
watching the management of our last best example of native California
grasslands, for a 200 mile radius of San Francisco.

The area is called Russian Ridge, a part of a local public lands district,
and the Board 10 years ago, spent $100,000 with a consultant, to study
what would be the best methods to manage the weeds that were invading the
area.

You can read about Russian Ridge and see photos at
http://www.ecoseeds.com/invent.html.  Instead of doing what the consultant
suggested, the Board has gone for what they thought would be the cheap
solution, burning the area three times.

What the three fires have done, is killed more wildflowers, and spread the
weeds even faster, because the weeds can take advantage of the area
cleared by the fire, than the natives can recolonize the areas.

Misguided management, cheap solutions, and no before-management and after-
management vegetation transects, can leave your ecosystems in much, much
worse shape out here in the arid West.

Sincerely,  Craig Dremann (650) 325-7333

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
APWG mailing list
APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconserva
tion.org

End of APWG Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14
************************************