[APWG] Massive California, Texas droughts, maybe we should take advantage?

[Wayne Tyson]

Dear Craig and Forum:

Dremann and I are together on the ultimate objective. We differ, perhaps 
dramatically (although I don't want to over-dramatize it, but will persist 
in mentioning it), in that it appears that, perhaps to oversimplify a bit, 
that the "Dremann approach" puts a lot of emphasis on weed control before 
the introduction of indigenous species while the "Tyson approach" emphasizes 
the introduction of indigenous species into weedy sites (often along with 
site modification to set up favorable conditions for the development of 
healthy ecosystems) with relatively less emphasis on physical or chemical 
weed control. This does not mean that I do not favor some level such control 
in some cases. Such decision should be based on the facts of each case.

Context is everything, of course, and each set of circumstances should drive 
the design and execution of any restoration program. I might agree that 
emphasis be placed on initial weed control is one case (sometimes even due 
to variations in circumstances on one project), but in a different set of 
circumstances recommend no initial weed control at all.

Another possible/probable difference might concern project management 
weed-control activities. My projects almost always had zero maintenance. The 
primary reason for that is that site disturbance incident to control 
activities tend to interfere with the development of indigenous species and 
even encourage additional growth of weeds. I am not as concerned about the 
presence of minor fractions of non-indigenous species as Dremann, much as I 
agree that such would be desirable.

Naturally, I tend to favor my own concepts, but I should confess that I once 
would have taken a similar approach to Dremann's. I once emphasized lots of 
initial control and continued management to control weeds. It took me many 
years to change my mind. I worked for a number of years to get costs down 
rather than up, so that restoration would become more widely used and 
accepted, but I did not find that lowering costs meant lowering quality. On 
the contrary, I found that performance and quality increased as certain 
costs were reduced.

This does not mean that I think Dremann is "all wrong" and that I am "all 
right." I do think both methods should be investigated by independent 
parties, and that all concerned should continue to maintain open minds to 
ensure that progress continues to be made in the field.

WT

Please note that rwg at lists.plantconservation.org does not accept my posts, 
so if anyone wishes, they can copy that list on their responses.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Dremann - Redwood City Seed Company" <Craig at astreet.com>
To: "Wayne Tyson" <landrest at cox.net>
Cc: <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>; <rwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 3:55 PM
Subject: Massive California, Texas droughts, maybe we should take advantage?


> Dear Wayne and All,
>
> The drought in California is so severe, causing the weeds to be so
> weakened that they just need a little tap, to get them to fall over dead.
>
> Meanwhile, the local perennial native grasses have taken advantage, and
> are appearing in places where they have been suppressed by the exotic
> annual plant allelochemicals for decades, and the native seeds are only
> now getting a chance to germinate.
>
> My suggestions for these forums, is that what looks like really bad
> weather for us, like a severe drought here in California, the Mid-west,
> Florida, and Texas right now, can be the best time for us to either take
> care of exotics when they are at their weakest, or get the local natives
> re-established.
>
> And in some cases, like for the California Endangered listed grassland
> species, like the Kangaroo rats in Riverside County, $42 million dollars
> has been expended so far, to give them a permanent home, paid for in part
> by the tax payers.  We need to manage the weeds and restore their habitat
> quickly, so that the species can survive, because they cannot survive in a
> weed-choked habitat.
>
> I took a look at part of the 42,000 acres of weed-choked K-rat habitat in
> Riverside County last month, and do not see any serious action yet.  What
> you see in the picture is wild lettuce and annual grass weeds, no natives
> seen.
>
> We need to realize, that good, solid non-riparian restoration costs lots
> of money, and even if you are going to buy habitat to preserve for a
> species, that at least an equal amount of money may be necessary to manage
> the exotics and restore the habitat to a self-sustaining condition.
>
> A good rule of thumb is the percentage of native plant cover you have in
> your understory.  Less than 95% needs help, Less than 50% you are in
> trouble, and less than 25% expect to spend at least as much as the land is
> worth.
>
> We currently have a massive drought, where in central California we are
> 1/3 of the way through the six month rainy season that lasts from October
> to April, and so far, only have 1.6 inches of rain--probably the worst in
> 200 years.
>
> If we can in California, Texas and Florida, we should get whatever funds
> we can, to try and take advantage of the situation, to tip these exotics
> over  and get some natives growing in their place.
>
> Sincerely,  Craig Dremann (650) 325-7333
>
>
>
>
>
>


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


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1416 / Virus Database: 2109/4148 - Release Date: 01/17/12