<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>APWG AND RWG: </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>For the sake of brevity and clarity, I'm going to
annotate Harrison's remarks [[thus. WT]]</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=tyju@xmission.com
href="mailto:tyju@xmission.com"><FONT size=4>Ty Harrison</FONT></A><FONT
size=4> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4><B>To:</B> </FONT><A
title=landrest@cox.net href="mailto:landrest@cox.net"><FONT size=4>Wayne
Tyson</FONT></A><FONT size=4> ; </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 4:04 PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4><B>Subject:</B> Re: [APWG]
Ecosystem Restoration Collapse</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>Wayne et al.: I have been following these
restoration/collapse discussion with great interest. I suspect many of
us are, but have limited time to compose thoughtful contributions to the
discussions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[While I fully understand the problem of time,
any comments at all, from everyone, will contribute to a wider understanding
and appreciation of this or any issue. WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> It is wonderful to hear from you
professionals who have had much more experience in these dry, western
grassland restoration projects.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[Anyone can contribute insights and experiences;
in fact professionals often miss points that a non-professional can see more
clearly. There should be no hierarchy, no pecking-order here; we are all
joined in a mutual effort to understand ecosystems and the role of weeds in
them. WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> My experience has been on a much smaller
scale, but I am bothered by many partial failures. One of the biggest
issues has been to find a methodology to eliminate or control perennial grassy
weeds as well as annual weeds which prevent the small, native seedling grasses
to become established in sufficient density to eventually out compete the
weeds after two or three years of mowing. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[["Partial failures" may not be failures at all.
Our expectations of Nature and natural processes may be unrealistic. The
important thing is the trend or direction in which a natural system is moving.
WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> An additional frustration is that it
has been almost impossible to get success in perennial native forb
establishment with a native grass/forb mix on some of my semi-successful
seeding projects. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[While everything is context-driven at root
(npi), there are a few generalizations that tend to apply to a number of
contexts. For example, many indigenous species have a low survival rate (I
can't remember the citation, but a doctoral dissertation by Robinson at
Oklahoma State University, if I remember correctly, studied survivorship of
Stipa pulchra in the 1960's or '70's that demonstrated and
exceedingly low seedling survival rate when directly sowed in the field). I
have found that planting "colonies" of small [1" x 3" container-grown
seedlings in groups of about ten containers each to be quite
successful, especially when combined with a small amount of inoculum from
healthy stands to pencil out better in every respect [cost/effectiveness] than
direct seeding. However, direct seeding with inoculum also can be effective in
some situations. WT]] </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>I agree that to be successful you have to have
the native grassland soil there, but many times that is not
possible. I need to know what kinds of soil amendments or treatments
need to be made to insure survival of the natives over the
weeds. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[Unless the basic requirements for the
development of a grassland are present, one is not likely to achieve a
grassland; some other plant community may be more suited to the site, and that
fact should be faced. However, I have found that if the soil is fine-grained
rather than coarse-grained, growing what I call "transitional" species can
provide tons of humus and proper aerification, not to mention soil flora and
fauna (e.g. fungi and earthworms) that would be prohibitive in cost and
practicality to importing commercial "amendments" (unless the latter consist
of topsoils). The roots of annual plants are notable for "amending" otherwise
sterile and structureless dirt. When they die, such roots leave behind organic
matter and root casts that increase water infiltration and percolation as well
as available water capacity, just to name a few benefits, that commercial
amendments cannot provide. Weeds and certain annual crop plants, especially
those which rank low on persistence and reproduction, can accomplish this in a
very short time. Planting the aforementioned colonies--just a few each
year--will advance the project toward the ultimate goal and at the same time
provide a demonstration of the degree of effectiveness and the trend,
demonstrating the level of effectiveness at each stage of development.
WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> My past experience, in contrast to
Dreman's, is that highly fertile or fertilized soils simply allow the annual
weeds to grow faster, shading out the slowing growing native seedling.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[Exactly. One of the major differences
between ecosystems and cultivated monocultures or plant assemblages is that
ecosystems tend to sequester most or all of the available nutrients in their
tissues, thus discouraging weed growth. Both fertilizer and water tend to
favor weeds in most upland situations. Putting the ecosystem under what good
agronomists and horticulturists would call "stress" fosters the development of
the organisms best-adapted to it, while discouraging those ill-adapted to
stress. You might say that in ecosystems, stress is the "name of the game."
WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>Which indicates to me that first year mowing is
critical for almost any annual weed infested grassland
restoration. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[Well, yes, mowing can open up the soil to light
and heat, favoring the organisms that require those conditions, which can
sometimes be the more slowly-developing perennial native species. Mowing is,
however, a double-edged sword (pi), so one must use some caution. For example,
one might not want to mow at certain times and one might want to rake up the
hay. Seemingly tiny differences can be crucial in restoration.
WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> I have seen one very successful native
grass/forb seeding project on an Interstate Highway ROW, but it was destroyed
by a highway maintenance reconstruction project.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> In terms of "restoration
collapse", of which I have seen many, weed re-colonization in any available
open soil site, or small scale soil disturbances by rodents or fire, is the
source of collapse due to lack of follow-up weed control. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[It ain't necessarily so. A lot of the problem
with collapse is due to failure to know what's actually going on. I am not a
fan of "follow-up" work of any kind, especially so-called "weed control,"
because such activities, while viscerally and intuitively satisfying, often
introduce more cons than pros. WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> Please keep these discussions
going. I would like to learn more about assessment standards and
techniques which are practical. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>[[This is a big subject, perhaps deserving of its
own thread. My own feeling about standards is that the initial presence of the
right organisms is the first requirement, and most of the rest of it involves
trend--up rather than down. Dr. Dremann and I disagree on some things, and
without speaking for him, I understand that he believes "cover" is an
important measure. I almost always believe that cover is not only misleading
but counter-productive. I am well aware of the popularity of "cover" as a
requirement that is quite popular with many agencies and that I am in the
minority on this point. If there is sufficient interest, I will try to explain
my reasoning and the observations that have led me to that conclusion. Unlike
some, who have popped out of the womb of the university in an all-knowing and
near-perfect state, I have made, and continue to make, more than my share of
errors. For that reason, I am always happy to stand corrected on the merits or
demerits of my statements and practices. WT]]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4> Regards, Ty Harrison, Emeritus Professor
of Biology and consultant, Salt Lake City, Utah</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>----- Original Message ----- </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="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><FONT
size=4><B>From:</B> </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>To:</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> Saturday, February
25, 2012 8:33 PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=4><B>Subject:</B> [APWG] Ecosystem
Restoration Collapse</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>All:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><FONT face=Arial>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. </FONT><FONT face=Arial>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></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><FONT size=4><STRONG>First, the "return" of grassland
restoration projects to weed-dominance.</STRONG> </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>In short, two of my biggest mistakes (there
have been many others) have been to: </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>a. fail to properly assess site conditions and
develop a restoration program that modifies or matches those conditions.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4>b. plant too many seeds and plants, spending
far too much money and doing far too much presumptuous guesswork.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4><STRONG>2. Collapse of "restored" ecosystems
that do not necessarily result in dominance of weeds.</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial 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></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>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<P><FONT size=4></FONT></P><FONT size=4>
<HR>
</FONT>
<P></P><BR><FONT
size=4>_______________________________________________<BR>PCA's Alien Plant
Working Group mailing
list<BR>APWG@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org<BR><BR>Disclaimer<BR>Any
requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the opinion of
the individual posting the message. </FONT>
<P></P><FONT size=4>
<HR>
</FONT>
<P></P><A></A>
<P class="" align=left avgcert?? 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: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4835 - Release Date:
02/27/12</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE><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>