[APWG] Ecosystem Restoration and Mathematics Re: Mathematical Constants for weeds and natives

[Wayne Tyson]

Craig and APWG:

Yes, you are quite right about the importance of timing, and this is the 
right time in much of CA.

I agree that test plots can be very useful, though not always 
practical--then the entire project becomes a test plot.

I have used test plots for Leymus/Elymus triticoides, but had to use growing 
plants because of the very low count of viable seeds in the local (hybrid) 
population. This worked out pretty well, as seeds would have cost more per 
unit area than the plants. I have found this true for other species too, 
such as Baccharis viminalis. Cuttings in particular proved more effective, 
quicker-developing, and cheaper than seed, even including all the labor. We 
were careful to collect cuttings from many different plants, thus preserving 
genetic diversity. Later, we got additional seedlings from the cuttings and 
a small fraction of container-grown plants. These are some of the few 
conditions where I planted cuttings or growing plants. Stolons did not work 
well with that population of L. triticoides, by the way. I normally do not 
like asexually produced plants because of weak root systems and genetic 
uniformity, especially when produced by nurseries over which I do not have 
complete control and oversight of propagation operations.

I still don't know what "mathematical constants" or "equations" you're 
talking about.

WT

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Dremann - Redwood City Seed Company" <Craig at astreet.com>
To: <apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:45 AM
Subject: [APWG] Mathematical Constants for weeds and natives


Dear Wayne and All,

Thanks for your email.

Autumn in California is the time of year when we plant our native seeds.
And this is also the time of year when as a consultant, I get to see the
native seeding specs from contractors and landscape architects, that have
never been pretested in small scale test plots.

Whenever I ask the landscape architect or contractor--Where did you get
this seed mix specs from, and can you show me where this mix has been
planted somewhere else, so I can see what the outcome was--of course this
is the first time the particular native mix has been used for any project,
that I am being paid to review.

It would have been much better to do two year's worth of small scale test
plots, and then write the plan based on the results of the plot work.
And keep those test plots around for at least five year, so you can see
what the ultimate result of the planting, might be.

That is what we did for the 600 acre Great Basin pipeline project in the
mid-1990s, and we really needed two years of test plots, because we had
95% failure in the first year of test plots.

However, we took what we learned with the first year and our 5% success,
and produced 100% in the second year, for the species we ultimately
planted in the 600 acres.

The client really wanted solid, weed-free local natives instead of
cheatgrass for that pipeline route that was 100 miles long and 50 feet
wide, and the pipeline company was willing to collect sufficient
quantities of local seeds for the project.  But more importantly, the
pipeline company paid for the two years of test plots, to prove out the
planting plan.  And that does not mean that we were without any snags even
with two years of test plots.

Great Basin wild rye is one of the most common native grass in the area,
but after two years of test plots, we were still unable to get it
established properly, so that species was not included in the 600 acre
planting project.

So knowing what species can do best, in what proportions is one the
biggest gaps in the knowledge, science and use of natives, especially when
we really want natives to grow in our projects instead of weeds.  Like in
pipeline route, or along roadsides, or on mine tailings, or reveg. after
fires, or when old gas wells pads are revegetated.

This reminds me of a meeting I attended in 1994 in Oregon, where we were
watching a slide show of a consultant, showing pictures of a mine tailing
restoration in Washington State, maybe about 100 acres of barren lands.

The "before" picture slide showed the barren tailing pile, then the next
slide listed  the names of the 20 species whose seeds were put into a mix
and sown on the slopes.  That mix had a few native grasses, with the
remainder in wildflower seeds. Looking at that list, I knew some of those
wildflowers seeds were very expensive, like $100-200 per pound.

Then the next slide showed the planting results, a nice solid green stand
of vegetation.  But even viewing that slide from the back of the room, I
could still see that a major problem had occurred in that planting--I only
saw one species of aggressive native grass in the picture, and none of the
other 19 very, very expensive species were there.

I raised my hand to ask, "There seems to be only one species of grass,
where did the other 19 species go"?

The answer was that the one aggressive native grass choked out the other
19 species. So all that money for those other 19 seeds was wasted.   That
is what I am suggesting with pre-testing of our seed specs for project,
hopefully at least a year or two before the big project is planted,
otherwise there could be massive wastes or failures.

And while you are conducting your test plots, or if you are watching your
big project fail for some unknown reason, or while you are doing your
weeding project, or if you are thinking about writing some reveg. specs as
a government agency for contractors--that you keep the concept of
Mathematical Constants for native ecosystems in mind.

And if you are writing specs to sow native plant seeds in any project,
please pretest those planting specs in small scale test plots.  They do
not need to be very big, like my Great Basin plots, which were only one by
two yards for each species and each treatment.

But you can see from the my picture at
http://www.ecoseeds.com/greatbasin.html, that by getting your small scale
test plots to work perfectly first, then you big project will have a much
better chance of success.

The perennial natives are your anchors in the Mathematical Constants
world, and everything else revolves around those anchors.  What I am
suggesting, is that the interactions between native species and weed
species can produce Mathematical Constants, and those Constants can then
be used to write equations, and those equations used to write a computer
program.

And keep in mind, that native intact ecosystems Mathematical Constants
have  surprisingly close tolerances, and that if we fit our planting and
seeding specs within those tolerances, our projects could become much more
successful.

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.


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2441/5294 - Release Date: 09/27/12