[APWG] Invasion and cropping Re: rate of change

Thu Mar 1 21:42:04 CST 2012

We are finding that typically about half of the invasives are about 20% as
bad in natural, undisturbed habitats. Given time we find that they do take
over natural areas but at a slower rate. A good example is Japanese
Stiltgrass which takes advantage of natural erosion disturbance when a tree
comes down naturally but is much worse with artifical erosion disturbances. 

 Marc Imlay, PhD, 

Conservation biologist, Park Ranger Office

(301) 442-5657 cell

 <mailto:Marc.Imlay at pgparks.com>  <mailto:Marc.Imlay at pgparks.com>
<mailto:ialm at erols.com> ialm at erols.com

Natural and Historical Resources Division

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission

 <http://www.pgparks.com/> www.pgparks.com

  _____  

From: Wayne Tyson [mailto:landrest at cox.net] 
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 5:53 PM
To: Ty Harrison; Michael Schenk; Marc Imlay
Cc: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: Re: [APWG] Invasion and cropping Re: rate of change

APWG:

Relevance, relevance, RELEVANCE! Why do we so often forget this? Context is
EVERYTHING. At least without it you are drawing against the Lone Ranger (or
arm-wrestling with Superwoman). GIGO! 

Most "invasive" species are disturbance-dependent rather than invasive of
dynamically stable (dynamic equilibrium state) ecosystems or insinuated into
open niches (let the ecosystem without at least some open niches please
stand up and be counted). In the Intermountain west and many other areas
where grazing and trampling of livestock unlike the indigenous species with
which the vegetation evolved, proceeds unabated, cheatgrass and other scabby
plants, indigenous and foreign, are bound to attempt to bind up the wounds
where Mother Earth has been so scarred, and the scabs are bound to remain in
some form for years to come. Pick off the scabs in such cases all you want,
Monsantoize it all you will, but as long as the processes that caused the
wounds in the first place continue, the scabby cheatgrass and its pals will
continue to reform. "Experts" make careers and fortunes pulling rabbits out
of the hat, convincing the rubes that the magic will last, but sooner or
later the piper will have to be paid. And the rubes invite the experts back
for another dose of salts, having refused to take his/her incantations with
a grain of it. 

WT

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Ty Harrison <mailto:tyju at xmission.com>  
To: Wayne Tyson <mailto:landrest at cox.net>  ; Michael
<mailto:schenkmj at earthlink.net> Schenk ; Marc  <mailto:ialm at erols.com> Imlay

Cc: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org 
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: [APWG] Invasion and cropping Re: rate of change

APWG:  I like Tyson's metaphor (sexist?):  Whizzing up wind is what many of
use are doing rather than using locally relevant ecological models as he
recommends.  Or as others ecologists have said:  weeds and other invaders
occupy "emtpy niches in the old corral".  But this only goes so far.  Many
weeds can insinuate themselves into these "empty niches" in disturbance
prone (drought?) ecosystems which we have out west (eg. Cheatgrass,
Cranesbill, Star Thistle, Dalmatian Toadflax etc. etc. etc.).  Ty Harrison

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Wayne Tyson <mailto:landrest at cox.net>  
To: Michael Schenk <mailto:schenkmj at earthlink.net>  ; Marc Imlay
<mailto:ialm at erols.com>  
Cc: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org 
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 4:41 PM
Subject: [APWG] Invasion and cropping Re: rate of change

Y'all:

When you change something in an ecosystem, other things change, including
"invasions" (aka colonization). Ecosystems tend toward sequestering most or
effectively all of the nutrients in the biomass--or try to. Much of
colonization consists of a drive in that direction. This is why some
ecologists have said that an ecosystem in equilibrium resists invasion. This
is a sustained/sustainable situation, but that is far different from the
invented and spun context in which "sustainable" is bandied about today. 

To cut to the chase, modern agronomic practice is 180 degrees out of phase
with this principle, hence with ecosystems. Study sites where the best
ginseng grows, and study them completely. Then compare those conditions with
the ones in which you are attempting to grow it as a crop. If there is any
significant difference, it is likely that you are whizzing upwind. 

This is already indulging in more conjecture than justified by the scant
information about the ecological context of your project, so take it with a
grain of salt and see if any of the principles mentioned help. I hope so. 

WT

----- Original Message ----- 
From:  <mailto:schenkmj at earthlink.net> Michael Schenk 
To:  <mailto:ialm at erols.com> Marc Imlay 
Cc:  <mailto:apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
apwg at lists.plantconservation.org 
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 4:21 PM
Subject: [APWG] rate of change

Bingo! It's the rate of change that counts. When a new species arrives every
thousand years, a time scale roughly consistent with "natural" climate
change disturbances, the ecosystem has a chance to respond and integrate the
new species.

If you keep on rocking the boat and never give it a chance to steady out,
somebody's gonna get wet. Sometimes I feel like we're arguing over angel
dancing space. The fact is, the boat is swamping, and we need to slow down
the rate of change.

I'm a small landholder, trying to plant sustainable harvests of ginseng,
etc., in the face of encroachment from garlic mustard, stiltgrass,
tearthumb. I don't have the time or resources for massive intervention. I
need affordable, time-efficient methods of non-toxic removal.  I've already
spent hundreds of hours and many dollars on weedwhackers and native seed.
For me, the combination of mechanical removal and planting native grasses is
at least holding the stiltgrass steady. I'd like to learn about other
successful practices that fit with a modest budget and a working schedule.

Cheers,
Mike 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Marc Imlay 
Sent: Feb 28, 2012 7:35 AM 
To: "'Hempy-Mayer,Kara L (CONTR) - KEC-4'" ,
apwg at lists.plantconservation.org 
Cc: rwg at lists.plantconservation.org 
Subject: Re: [APWG] [RWG] Ecosystem Restoration Collapse 

  _____  

_______________________________________________
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 message.
Checked by AVG -  <http://www.avg.com> www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2113/4840 - Release Date: 02/28/12

  _____  

_______________________________________________
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 message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4844 - Release Date: 03/01/12

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2113/4844 - Release Date: 03/01/12

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20120301/3af42d21/attachment.html>