[APWG] Try and get reveg costs down, plus quicker, better quality

[Wayne Tyson]

APWG (RWG does not accept my postings):

I'm not convinced that 98% or even 100% extirpation of weeds is possible, 
necessary, or even desirable. It might be desirable to consultants and seed, 
plant, and other related merchants in that the cost of projects and the 
profit to be netted from them is greater, but not that the ultimate result 
is better, or even as good.

Again, what counts is results, trends--say five and ten years out, and 
whether or not, and to what degree, projects are self-sufficient and 
continue to improve rather than decline. Those requiring continued tinkering 
are bound to cost more, but higher cost, percentage claims, and other 
generalizations are not, in of themselves, performance.

WT


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Dremann - Redwood City Seed Company" <Craig at astreet.com>
To: <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>; <rwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 11:23 AM
Subject: [APWG] Try and get reveg costs down, plus quicker, better quality


> Dear Wayne and All,
>
> Thanks for your email.  I am going to give two different links to the same
> web pages that I have referenced in my email below.
>
> Unfortunately over the last forty years, I have been a witness to the
> failure of many non-riparian native projects planted in California, mostly
> because of our massive weed issues that we still do not have a secure
> handle on.
>
> What I am proposing, is to start inventing the methods to bring down the
> costs of native non-riparian projects, from the billions of dollar that it
> currently costs, down to the millions of dollars, and hopefully down to
> the hundreds of thousands of dollars eventually.
>
> It is like the original computers in the 1950s, when each computer cost
> millions of dollars and filled a whole room, made out of old radio tubes,
> like you can see at http://www.ecoseeds.com/talk.html or
> http://userwebs.batnet.com/rwc-seed/talk.html, plus you only could get 5K
> of RAM and 64K of memory out of those huge monsters.  Now, we carry around
> cell phones that have 10,000 times the memory, tucked in our pockets.
>
> That is my goal with both weed management and for ecological restoration
> of non-riparian areas, especially the billion acres of the most arid lands
> on our planet.  Make the restoration process faster, cheaper and higher
> quality.
>
> And also for mitigation projects in the lower 48 States, like pipeline
> rights of ways, powerline corridors, Endangered species habitats, public
> parklands, mine tailings, gas and oil pads, etc.  Basically, any
> non-riparian site where you need to restore the local natives, and do it
> as cheaply and quickly as possible, and to the very highest standards of
> weed-freeness.
>
> At least in California in Santa Cruz County, at least two properties have
> been able to achieve high quality restoration standards, 95% overall cover
> at the Shaw 74 acre property, and 99.5% native cover at the Mark Vande Pol
> 14 acre property.
>
> So the next step, is for each State and the Federal agencies to establish
> these high quality standards for all non-riparian projects across the
> country.
>
> Then, the second step is to start the conversion of large areas, like the
> State of Iowa has been doing for the last decade along its roadsides, by
> planting genetically local native grasses instead of the exotics, whenever
> there is a planting project is to be done.  Or like using local natives
> for pipeline rights of way,  like you can see at
> http://www.ecoseeds.com/greatbasin.html or
> http://userwebs.batnet.com/rwc-seed/greatbasin.html
>
> When all of our non-riparian projects are held to very high performance
> standards, like a minimum of 98% local native plant cover within six
> months or less, then, just like the computer industry, we can start to
> invent methods to make the restoration costs cheaper, quicker and much
> more efficient.
>
> Sincerely,  Craig Dremann (650) 325-7333
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.