[APWG] Native "invaders"?

Tue Sep 18 17:51:21 CDT 2012

Ryan,

If you could be specific about which exaggerations, which marginal cases, 
and which point is being pressed too far, I could then try to respond.

Above all, please be specific about exactly how the statement "Organisms do 
what they can, where they can, when they can" is "unhelpful" in advancing 
science.

Which advance science more, specifics or generalizations?

WT

PS: When it comes to "natural areas management," there's nobody that hates 
ripgut brome and similar pestiferous introductions more than I do, but the 
elephant in the "management" room is "at what cost?" In terms of damage done 
to ecosystems by "control methods," optimal allocation of scarce resources, 
and other consequences of various actions? I see a lot of damage done by 
"control" actions, which often make matters worse. And again, setting up 
conditions that favor healthy ecosystems and discourage population growth 
and persistence of weedy species is an element too often ignored in favor of 
chemicals, more disturbance, and futile whacking. Whatever management action 
is taken should have to prove itself in the long term, not just the 
temporary removal or killing of "weeds." Managers also frequently fail to 
understand the positive but temporary role that alien species can play in 
ecosystem restoration, such as soil-building. By looking at the whole 
dynamic rather than the expediency of a method of mere removal, one can not 
only be more effective and often at far less cost in terms of damage and 
money, one can often discover other ways to take action that fits specific 
cases better. All the rounding up and all the bashing and pulling and 
digging does not necessarily mean that superior results will be secured and 
that such actions will not result in worse conditions than those being 
"controlled."

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ryan McEwan" <the.tsuga at gmail.com>
To: "Wayne Tyson" <landrest at cox.net>
Cc: "Addsum-Tony Frates" <afrates at addsuminc.com>; 
<apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 8:31 AM
Subject: Re: [APWG] Native "invaders"?

> Hi all,
>
> I think Wayne has made a bunch of interesting points, but I also think
> he is exaggerating, or pressing the point to far.  "Invasive"  does
> have some biological meaning, as does "Exotic".  I encourage anyone to
> go back to the original book by Charles Elton. You can get a used copy
> inexpensively.  Cases are very clear of species expanding rapidly
> through native ecosystems reeking havoc along the way.  Pressing into,
> and through, ecosystems that were not radically altered by humans.
> Some of these species CLEARLY have a negative effect on biodiversty
> and/or radically alter ecosystem function.  Some of these species are
> unambiguous in expressing ecological activity that just was not seen
> in native species.  They dont play by "the rules."
>
> So it is a matter of whether we care or not.  Let the landscape become
> an Amur honeysuckle shrubland, with consequent crashing of floral
> biodiversity, or not.  If you want to argue that on an "evolutionary
> time scale" invasive species are not real..that over the great sweep
> of geological time that invasive species are not even a tiny
> hiccup....fine, I wont quibble.  But, to me, that is a senseless place
> from which to make decisions about taking action.  The same thing
> applies to, for instance, climate change, and in fact, to things like
> cancer in humans.  Should humans let those things run their course as
> well?
>
> To me, Wayne, and sometimes others, get so wound up in pointing out
> marginal cases where, truely, cultural issues are present, and
> language seems ambiguous, that they press beyond common sense.  Of
> course, organisms will do "what they can, when they can" etc, but this
> is completely unhelpful for natural areas management or advancing
> science.
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Wayne Tyson <landrest at cox.net> wrote:
>> ALL organisms are "opportunistic." When the requirements for an organisms
>> are met, it will flourish; when not, not. "Weeds" and "invasives" are
>> CULTURAL terms, not ones which fully define what is really going on.
>>
>> Life is a squishy, complex process, a confusion of feedback loops in a
>> constant "state" of flux. Language always will be inadequate; the 
>> challenge
>> is to make it reflect reality more than be misleading.
>>
>> WT
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Addsum-Tony Frates"
>> <afrates at addsuminc.com>
>> To: "Wayne Tyson" <landrest at cox.net>
>> Cc: "John" <jmbarr at academicplanet.com>; 
>> <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
>> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 9:37 AM
>> Subject: Re: [APWG] Native "invaders"?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regardless of the question of adaptation vs. invasion, the question posed
>> is:
>>
>>
>> "Is there a word available to us to describe a biological entity's
>> positive response to human-induced disturbance?"
>>
>>
>> A good article to help to frame the topic in general is:
>>
>> http://www.ias.ac.in/jbiosci/dec2004/461.pdf
>>
>> The term "opportuntistic" has been offered although it seems to me to
>> be generally inadequate (although somewhat helpful).
>>
>> We then end up chasing our tails when, for example, native  plants
>> that are "opportunistic" either in response to disturbances (of all
>> kinds) in their natural range, or because they are "out of place"
>> (also for various reasons but almost always due to us) are then
>> sometimes referred to as "weedy" which then creates all sorts of
>> confusion.
>>
>> So we have to carefully separate the causes of the apparent
>> "explosion" of organisms both based on the type of disturbance and
>> also by whether it is growing outside of the ecosystem from which is
>> naturally evolved - and probably other factors too.
>>
>>
>> Tony Frates
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Quoting Wayne Tyson <landrest at cox.net>:
>>
>>> John,
>>>
>>> It's adaptation, not "invasion." When the context changes, by human
>>> agency or anything else, populations shift accordingly. Organisms and
>>> their environment are in a continuous process of change. Doves and
>>> rodents, for example, respond to increases in things like food supply
>>> (of course, it's more complex than that, but food and water are the big
>>> variables that affect most organisms.
>>>
>>> I have concocted a "Law" of biology: "Organisms do what they can, when
>>> they can, where they can."
>>>
>>> Discuss?
>>>
>>> WT
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John"
>>> To: "john
>>> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 2:14 PM
>>> Subject: [APWG] Native "invaders"?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is there a word or phrase for those species that might be native,   but
>>>> because of their adaptability to humans and human actions,   might be
>>>> considered invasive species?
>>>>
>>>> I am not interested in rehashing the definition of invasive   species,
>>>> these are all native pre-human history.  The negative   impact on 
>>>> humans or
>>>> the environment is lacking in some cases and   clear in others.  I am
>>>> looking for another word or phrase to   indicate those species whose
>>>> population growth is directly tied to   human action.
>>>>
>>>> I know that, in general, armadillo are not considered invasive 
>>>> species
>>>> because they invaded under their own power without an   assist by 
>>>> humans.
>>>>
>>>> In the Austin area, I can think of several bird species that were 
>>>> native
>>>> to the area, but whose populations have exploded because of human's 
>>>> impacts
>>>> on the environment.
>>>>
>>>> They are:
>>>> White Winged Doves
>>>> Boat-tailed Grackles
>>>> Cliff swallows
>>>> Blue Jays
>>>> Purple Martins (I hesitate to include this popular bird, however......)
>>>> Brown headed cowbirds
>>>>
>>>> The White Winged Doves used to be rare to endangered, then they learned
>>>> to nest outside of South Texas thorny scrub and to visit backyard bird
>>>> feeders.  They have moved steadily north from south Texas to Dallas 
>>>> over the
>>>> past 20 years displacing other dove species.
>>>> Boat-tailed Grackles love to congregate in urban areas at night and
>>>> forage in the surrounding suburban and rural areas during the day 
>>>> looking
>>>> for bugs and grubs stirred up by tractors and lawnmowers.
>>>> Cliff Swallows have expanded their range and numbers by using   highway
>>>> underpasses.
>>>> Blue Jays are one of the most problematic.  They follow the 
>>>> encroachment
>>>> of suburban sprawl especially backyard bird feeders,   then eliminate 
>>>> or
>>>> displace the less aggressive Scrub Jays.  Blue   Jays are nest robbers, 
>>>> and
>>>> one of the predators on our endangered   Golden Cheeked Warbler and 
>>>> Black
>>>> Capped Vireos.
>>>> Purple Martins nest almost exclusively in human built houses.
>>>> Brown headed cow birds have become year round residents because   their
>>>> natural affiliation with migratory Bison has been replaced by 
>>>> perennial
>>>> cattle herds in fenced pastures.
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> john in Austin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2437/5273 - Release Date: 09/17/12
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: 10.0.1424 / Virus Database: 2437/5273 - Release Date: 09/17/12
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2437/5275 - Release Date: 09/18/12
> 