<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Cambria Math;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Calibri;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@page WordSection1 {margin: 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman","serif"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"
}
.MsoChpDefault {
}
DIV.WordSection1 {
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE id=owaTempEditStyle></STYLE>
<STYLE title=owaParaStyle><!--P {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0px
}
--></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=#ffffff ocsi="x">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>Honorable Forum:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>I can appreciate Stringer's points. I am perhaps a
little less determined to stamp out the grapes of wrath entirely, and a little
more accepting of what Nature actually does with respect to most weeds, but I do
believe that a less reckless and more nurturing approach to reconciling the
needs and works of humankind with those of the earth and its life might no be
all bad. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>But at the same time, I am not at all certain that
many of the actions might not have been better not taken. I have blathered
elsewhere about "the zero option," and spoken of the value of weeds to ecosystem
restoration (or a substitute term). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>WT</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4>----- Original Message -----
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><FONT
size=4><B>From:</B> </FONT><A title=bstrngr@clemson.edu
href="mailto:bstrngr@clemson.edu"><FONT size=4>William
Stringer</FONT></A><FONT size=4> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4><B>To:</B> </FONT><A
title=rlb14@cornell.edu href="mailto:rlb14@cornell.edu"><FONT size=4>Robert
Layton Beyfuss</FONT></A><FONT size=4> ; </FONT><A
title=katie@westernwatersheds.org
href="mailto:katie@westernwatersheds.org"><FONT size=4>Katie
Fite</FONT></A><FONT size=4> ; </FONT><A title=landrest@cox.net
href="mailto:landrest@cox.net"><FONT size=4>Wayne Tyson</FONT></A><FONT
size=4> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4><B>Cc:</B> </FONT><A
title=apwg@lists.plantconservation.org
href="mailto:apwg@lists.plantconservation.org"><FONT
size=4>apwg@lists.plantconservation.org</FONT></A><FONT size=4> ; </FONT><A
title=rwg@lists.plantconservation.org
href="mailto:rwg@lists.plantconservation.org"><FONT
size=4>rwg@lists.plantconservation.org</FONT></A><FONT size=4> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 27,
2012 8:40 AM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4><B>Subject:</B> RE: [APWG] [RWG]
Ecosystem Restoration Collapse</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 13px; COLOR: #000000; DIRECTION: ltr; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
<DIV><FONT size=4>As to ecosystem restoration , we are not proposing to
make a man-made Hope Diamond here. We are proposing to work from our
admittedly limited knowledge base of what should be there, and what should
not. We take out, to the degree that we can, the should-nots,
particularly the known exotic invasive should-nots. We then try to place
into the site local-source propagules of known natives in a patchwork of
mixtures of relatively compatible species. At that point we have
probably done most of what we can contribute. We can manage the site to
the degree that we can simulate natural disturbance phenomena. But
mostly at this point we stay out of the way and let natural phenomena drive
the restoration. The only exception would be if outbreaks of exotic
invasive species begin to threaten. Then, we monitor and
learn</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=tahoma size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=tahoma size=4>What we cannot do is let micro-analysis of the
term restoration immobilize us into total inaction.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=tahoma size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=tahoma size=4>Bill Stringer</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><FONT face=Tahoma color=#000000><B>From:</B>
apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org
[apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of Robert Layton Beyfuss
[rlb14@cornell.edu]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 27, 2012 10:26
AM<BR><B>To:</B> Katie Fite; Wayne Tyson<BR><B>Cc:</B>
apwg@lists.plantconservation.org;
rwg@lists.plantconservation.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [APWG] [RWG] Ecosystem
Restoration Collapse<BR></FONT><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>I do not understand how ecosystems can be restored since I consider
them as dynamic and constantly changing. It is not possible to completely
re-create the environmental conditions that led to a given ecosystem at any
given time in the past. If ecosystems represent the interactions of living and
environmental factors, to restore an ecosystem requires replicating the
previous environmental factors that affect the living organisms. The level of
carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has doubled in the past 80 years. Plant
growth, reproduction and survival is profoundly affected by carbon dioxide
levels. I consider attempts to restore ecosystems as no more than
human’s creating new ecosystems using species of plants that previously
occurred because humans liked the previous once more than the current one.
</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4></FONT></SPAN> </P>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>From:</FONT></SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'"><FONT size=4>
apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org
[mailto:apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Katie
Fite<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 27, 2012 9:12 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Wayne
Tyson<BR><B>Cc:</B> apwg@lists.plantconservation.org;
rwg@lists.plantconservation.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [APWG] [RWG] Ecosystem
Restoration Collapse</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><FONT size=4>Wayne,<BR><BR>I am
interested in the discussion.<BR><BR>And discussions of what ecological
restoration is, and also discussions of how the term "restoration" is
currently being used by agencies or at times industry - to
describe imposing major disturbances on mature or old growth woody vegetation
communities - with such disturbances often then leading to weed
invasions.<BR><BR>Katie Fite</FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4>On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Wayne Tyson
<</FONT><A href="mailto:landrest@cox.net"><FONT
size=4>landrest@cox.net</FONT></A><FONT size=4>> wrote:</FONT></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>All:</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>One of my fellow subscribers has been corresponding with me off-list
the subject of ecosystem restoration standards, and I have been unsuccessful
in persuading the subscriber to keep the discussion on-list, as I believe the
subject is of broad common interest. This person apparently believes that I am
the only one (with one or two others) interested, because no one else has
weighed in on the subject. Is this person right? Are none but three or four of
us interested in this topic? Should this and related topics be kept off list
(to keep topics of restricted interest from clogging the in-baskets of the
majority? If so, how many subscribers are there to APWG and RWG?
</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>I am hereby taking the liberty to broach the most recent topic, the
collapse of ecosystem restoration projects, signified by the return of weed
dominance in some cases. I would add to this that ecosystem restoration
projects also "collapse" or fail to "take" whether or not weeds dominate. The
off-list poster confined the comments to grasslands, so I will primarily
address that issue, but the same principles hold true for other biomes and can
be more broadly applied. </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">First, the "return" of grassland
restoration projects to weed-dominance.</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"> </SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>There are a number of reasons for this, some related to context
issues like soil type, some related to restoration methods, but
consideration of soil type must be part of the restoration assessment,
planning, and execution process. Soil type is important; in the case of
grassland restoration, it is preferable (actually essential) that a grassland
soil is present--if it isn't, all the King of Restoration's horses and all the
KoR's men and women will not be able to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear
(without some major alterations to the soil). I invite others to expand and
expound on this subject; I will mention only some factors.
</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>True grassland soils tend to have identifiable characteristics. They
tend to develop on alluvial or aeolian soils of finer texture and containing
considerable natural humus and soil flora/fauna, as well as mineral deposits
at depth (commonly at or near the effective bottom of the root
zone) such as calcium and sodium. Disturbance of such soils can render
the site largely incapable of supporting a true grassland, such as when
bulldozed or otherwise excavated and the surface is changed from a
grassland-type soil to a jumbled mass, sometimes consisting of coarse
B-horizon or deeper deposits unsuited to grassland development. This should be
determined in the initial assessment and feasibility investigation, and
consideration should be given to restoring an ecosystem/plant community type
other than grasslands, at least as a transitional measure until something
resembling a grassland soil can be developed. (Wholesale replacement of the
degraded soil with grassland soil can be done, but it is terribly expensive.)
</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>If one tries to establish a grassland on non-grassland soils, one is
most likely going to be disappointed, and "failure" is almost foreordained. I
have, however, attempted to grow hair on such billiard-ball sites, with
limited success. If other conditions are favorable, a soil can sometimes be
developed (or its development accelerated) by certain tricks (e.g., praying
for gopher or prairie-dog invasions, adding mycorrhizal fungi and other
essential soil organisms, and transitional plantings of annual
plants--sometimes even grasses, but more commonly dicots like weeds and
flowers that will be humus-builders. Short-lived perennial plants, even some
shrubs, also can be used. This approach is much cheaper than soil importation,
and sometimes can be better. The actual strategy should fit the context.
</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>I should make it clear that my first fifteen years of attempting
ecosystem restoration projects were all failures by my own standards, and I
have continued to make some mistakes once ever since. One must, I believe,
learn from actual experience. However, just experience is no guarantee of
expertise. If I had stubbornly held on to what I "knew" and refused to
consider that what I knew might be wrong, I would have continued to fail. I
did get to the point that could reliably initiate ecosystem processes and
avoid "collapse." All restoration practitioners can do is to accelerate
ecosystem development anyway, largely by setting up conditions that will
permit or even maybe encourage natural ecosystems processes to work. We don't
actually restore living systems. </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>In short, most failures can be traced back to the kind of work done and
not done to set up favorable conditions for natural forces to work upon.
</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>In short, two of my biggest mistakes (there have been many others) have
been to: </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>a. fail to properly assess site conditions and develop a restoration
program that modifies or matches those conditions. </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>b. plant too many seeds and plants, spending far too much money and
doing far too much presumptuous guesswork. </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>If a grassland soil is present, indigenous species can persist and
eventually re-assert dominance over weed populations. If one can mimic
grassland soils, one has a chance of fostering the development of grassland,
but one must out-draw the Lone Ranger to do it. If one is presumptuous enough
to believe that all that needs to be done is to kill weeds and scatter seeds,
collapse, unless one is terribly lucky, is rather more likely than not.
</FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>Disturbed sites (from bulldozing to trampling) tend to favor weeds.
They are the scabs, as it were, on the scarred face of the earth--not pretty,
but an inevitable result of land mismanagement. </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>2. Collapse of "restored" ecosystems that do not necessarily result in
dominance of weeds.</FONT></SPAN></B></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>This phenomenon is often the result of simply seeding or planting too
many and/or the wrong balance of the right (and/or wrong) species at the wrong
time, possibly including "maintenance." </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'"><FONT
size=4>This can be the subject of another discussion, but I have run out of
time . . . (and since it does not include weeds so much, it might be
"inappropriate" for these lists. </FONT></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4><SPAN
style="COLOR: #888888; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial','sans-serif'">WT</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: #888888"></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #888888"><FONT
size=4></FONT></SPAN> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #888888"><FONT
size=4></FONT></SPAN> </P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #888888"><FONT
size=4></FONT></SPAN> </P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><BR><BR><FONT
size=4>_______________________________________________<BR>PCA's Restoration
Working Group mailing list<BR></FONT><A
href="mailto:RWG@lists.plantconservation.org"><FONT
size=4>RWG@lists.plantconservation.org</FONT></A><BR><A
href="http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/rwg_lists.plantconservation.org"
target=_blank><FONT
size=4>http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/rwg_lists.plantconservation.org</FONT></A></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=4></FONT> </P></DIV></DIV></DIV><FONT
size=4>
<HR noShade SIZE=1>
</FONT><A></A>
<P class=avgcert align=left color="#000000"><FONT size=4>No virus found in
this message.<BR>Checked by AVG - </FONT><A href="http://www.avg.com"><FONT
size=4>www.avg.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT size=4>Version: 10.0.1424 / Virus
Database: 2113/4835 - Release Date:
02/27/12</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>