[APWG] Alien Uses Re: NYT opinion--exotics are good, and are we immigrant bashers?

[Wayne Tyson]

Honorable APWG Forum:

Egocentrism is very hard to shake off; I have been trying for years, and, while the process is far from complete, I think I have made reasonable progress. So I can understand when people defend "positions" with great vigor. For example, I battled alien plants and animals until I was probably at least 30 years of age, when I found out, almost by accident, that there were alternatives to whacking and poisoning (and taking money from my clients under questionable pretenses). In the fifty-some years since then, I have still whacked and poisoned them, but with far less frequency and on smaller and smaller scales. That does not mean that I welcome every alien that crosses every border, but it does not mean that the only good alien in every situation is a dead alien either. (Ironically, my friend Jesus, once an illegal alien, but now a "naturalized" citizen whose ancestors, like some of mine, were, unlike some of my other ancestors, the "indigenes," where I, and other mixed-ancestry aliens now infest their lands, largely because the European and other alien populations came here and "won" a "war," forcing the ancestors of my friend Jesus across a line in the sand they drew and continue to dare them to cross "illegally," just whacked a bunch of plant aliens for me this week. I confess--I am an alien basher. But I've given up on the idea that the only good alien is a dead alien. 

But that is just so much rhetoric. Since I consider it my responsibility, in addition to the rhetoric, to confront the particulars, I will respond to the article below by [[inserting comments into the text submitted for discussion thus.]] 

WT


"I've only been wrong once, and that was one time when I thought I was wrong." --Author forgotten


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Dremann - Redwood City Seed Company" <Craig at astreet.com>
To: <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 9:27 AM
Subject: [APWG] NYT opinion--exotics are good, and are we immigrant bashers?


Dear All,

I am forwarding this from another alien-list server, with my comments above.
As predicted, here is another one of these "Exotics are good for you and
good for the environment too" stories.

Maybe this was a day-late April Fool's joke?  When I see these stories, it
is like they are saying,--Just go to sleep and don't worry about the
exotics, or if you continue to be concerned, we are going to label you as
"Anti-immigrant".

Hopefully this results in some informative letters to the editor?

 Sincerely,  Craig Dremann


   http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/opinion/03Raffles.html

   Mother Nature's Melting Pot

 By HUGH RAFFLES

 Published: April 2, 2011

   The anti-immigrant sentiment sweeping the country, from draconian laws
in Arizona to armed militias along the Mexican border, has taken many
Americans by surprise. It shouldn't -- nativism runs deep in the United
States. Just ask our non-native animals and plants: they too are
commonly labeled as aliens, even though they also provide significant
benefits to their new home.

   While the vanguard of the anti-immigrant crusade is found among the
likes of the Minutemen and the Tea Party, the native species movement
is led by environmentalists, conservationists and gardeners [[Gardeners, which usually includes some "environmentalists" and "conservationists," are second only to agronomists as vectors for alien invaders. WT]]. Despite
cultural and political differences, both are motivated -- in Margaret
Thatcher's infamous phrase -- by the fear of being swamped by aliens.

   But just as America is a nation built by waves of immigrants, our
natural landscape is a shifting mosaic of plant and animal life. Like
humans, plants and animals travel, often in ways beyond our knowledge
and control. They arrive unannounced, encounter unfamiliar conditions
and proceed to remake each other and their surroundings.

   Designating some as native and others as alien denies this ecological
and genetic dynamism. It draws an arbitrary historical line based as
much on aesthetics, morality and politics as on science, a line that
creates a mythic time of purity before places were polluted by
interlopers. [[Regardless of how aliens are defined, human cultures of all kinds are the most destructive of all; nay, were it not for their invasions, all invasions of other species would be entirely based upon the mobility of their offspring/propagules, the winds of chance, and the suitability of habitat--in other words, biological diversity, evolution, ecology in action. WT]]

   What's more, many of the species we now think of as natives may not be
especially well suited to being here. They might be, in an ecological
sense, temporary residents, no matter how permanent they seem to us. [[This is amply demonstrated in many cases (with, apparently, notable exceptions) by the propensity of aliens to stick together, as when we wander from roads and roadsides at our peril, as wiping out the existing ecosystem is often the only way both we and the weeds are able to survive, much less achieve The American Dream. Like it or not, Nature can lick us with one hand tied behind her back (The trouble is, we tend to chop off her arms, legs, and even head when she gets in our way.). Why we persist in refusing Nature's help, or at least help her to do thing her way instead of ours is a mystery to me. WT]]

   These 'native' species can have serious effects on their environment.
Take the mountain pine beetle: thanks to climate change, its population
is exploding in the West, devastating hundreds of thousands of square
miles of forest.

   It's true that some non-native species have brought with them expensive
and well-publicized problems; zebra mussels, nutria and kudzu are prime
examples. But even these notorious villains have ecological or economic
benefits. Zebra mussels, for example, significantly improve water
quality, which increases populations of small fish, invertebrates and
seaweeds -- and that, in turn, has helped expand the number of larger
fish and birds. [[The guilty vectors in all these cases wuz, as Pogo would say, US. We asked for it. WT]]

   Indeed, non-native plants and animals have transformed the American
landscape in unmistakably positive ways. Honeybees were introduced from
Europe in the 1600s, and new stocks from elsewhere in the world have
landed at least eight times since. They succeeded in making themselves
indispensable, economically and symbolically. In the process, they made
us grateful that they arrived, stayed and found their place. [[While I'd personally rather have native bees and other indigenous pollinators, the only way we can ever really get rid of the alien bees and other culturally-vectored valuable varmints is to prohibit The American Dream (and commands like "Go forth and secure dominion over the earth). WT

   But the honeybee is a lucky exception. Today, a species's immigration
status often makes it a target for eradication, no matter its effect on
the environment. Eucalyptus trees, charged with everything from
suffocating birds with their resin to elevating fire risk with their
peeling bark, are the targets of large-scale felling. [[Like feral hogs, these plant-varmints should perhaps be used for the purpose for which they were brought in--firewood and other uses. WT]]

   Yet eucalyptuses are not only majestic trees popular with picnickers,
they are one of the few sources of nectar available to northern
Californian bees in winter and a vital destination for migrating
monarch butterflies. [[You won't catch me picnicking under eucalypts; they are infamous for widow-makers. WT]]

   Or take ice plant, a much-vilified Old World succulent that spreads its
thick, candy-colored carpet along the California coast. Concerned that
it is crowding out native wildflowers, legions of environmental
volunteers rip it from the sandy soil and pile it in slowly moldering
heaps along the cliffs.

   Yet ice plant, introduced to the West Coast at the beginning of the
20th century to stabilize railroad tracks, is an attractive plant that
can also deter erosion of the sandstone bluffs on which it grows. [[It is among the worst possible choices for erosion "deterrence." About all it can do is intercept raindrops; it lacks a complex root system and insufficient structure to act as storage surface for precipitation and metering of stemflow, and while it can facilitate infiltration the shallow root zone created by it saturates quickly, resulting in surficial failures in areas where it is most successful. WT]]

   There are plenty of less controversial examples. Non-native shad,
crayfish and mud snails provide food for salmon and other fish.
Non-native oysters on the Pacific Coast build reefs that create habitat
for crab, mussels and small fish, appearing to increase these animals'
populations. 

   And in any case, efforts to restore ecosystems to an imagined pristine
state almost always fail: once a species begins to thrive in a new
environment, there's little we can do to stop it. Indeed, these efforts
are often expensive and can increase rather than relieve environmental
harm. [[Too true--in general, but the statement begs the question. While "imagined" (even data-driven) restoration is not immediately or even quickly feasible on highly disturbed sites, a self-sustaining ecosystem consisting of indigenous plants suited to the altered or constructed site conditions is feasible, and can be cheaper than the so-called alternatives. If it is done properly, ecosystem restoration worthy of the name is nearly always economical--granted, however, fantasies are often expensive failures. But that does not mean that restoration has to be expensive. 

   An alternative is to embrace the impurity of our cosmopolitan natural
world and, as some biologists are now arguing, to consider the many
ways that non-native plants and animals -- not just the natives --
benefit their environments and our lives. [[Ok, but let's not get carried away and let sentimental generalities determine specific cases--let's not attempt to reason from the general to the specific. WT]]

   Last month, along with 161 other immigrants from more than 50
countries, I attended an oath-swearing ceremony in Lower Manhattan and
became a citizen of the United States. In a brief speech welcoming us
into a world of new rights and responsibilities, the presiding judge
emphasized our diversity. It is, he said, the ever-shifting diversity
that immigrants like us bring to this country that keeps it dynamic and
strong. [[Ok, welcome. But let's not depend upon reasoning by analogy either. While the practice can provide useful insights, let's be careful about fostering philosophies based on presumption and sentiment alone. Nature bats last, and "she" tends to solve extremes with busted bubbles. WT]]

   These familiar words apply just as meaningfully to our nation's
non-native plants and animals. Like the humans with whose lives they
are so entangled, they too are in need of a thoughtful and inclusive
response. [[See previous note. Thoughtful is a great idea. But to be included, a species' needs have to fit what the habitat has to offer. The trouble with Homo sap. is that "he" goes beyond needs into too many demands, too much cultural hierarchy, too much competition and too little cooperation--with all the world's species, to our ultimate mutual detriment. Let's find a way to better reconcile our needs and works with those of the earth and its life. WT]]

   Hugh Raffles, an anthropologist at the New School, is the author of
'Insectopedia.'



_______________________________________________
PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list
APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconservation.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 message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3511 - Release Date: 03/16/11
Internal Virus Database is out of date.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20110409/6fe71778/attachment.html>