[PCA] Fw: [Pollinator] Roads and pollinators - again

Fri Sep 1 07:02:59 CDT 2006

This is fascinating, thank you for your interesting story of highway mowing!

As environmental consultants, my husband and I have worked on rare butterfly 
and rare plant surveys, as well as surveys of the highly invasive species, 
cogongrass.  We pay attention to what happens on roadsides.

What I have observed is that in the southeastern US, because of a reluctance 
to use burn management in these states, most of the natural areas are grown 
up so much as to be virtually devoid of native grasses and forbs.  Areas 
that have not been developed, put into agriculture, silviculture, or 
"improved" for grazing, are almost always overgrown and unsuitable for an 
enormous diversity of grasses and grassland species that used to make the 
Southeast one of the wealthiest areas in the country for biodiversity.

Looking for grassland that would support the rare Arogos Skipper, we found 
almost nothing throughout the southeast, aside from a few powerline cuts. 
The exception was a few beautiful wetland areas that are probably developed 
now, or will be soon, because of the change in the Corps of Engineer's 
definition of what a wetland is a few years back.

In Georgia in particular, even the powerline cuts were farmed, with legumes 
and other exotics seeded in to attract deer for hunters.  Indeed, the 
problem of attracting deer to roadsides may be a symptom of the lack of open 
habitat anywhere else.  Along the southeastern coastal plain, which was 
historically basically a grassland/prairie ecosystem, many species which 
were formerly abundant are gone and disappearing.

We have found that roadside (and powerline) mowing is very helpful for 
biodiversity in that it creates grassland refugia for many species.  On the 
other hand, habitat management to promote open native grasslands would be 
highly preferable to roadside mowing!

One of the primary means of spreading of Cogongrass, an exotic invasive 
which is a menace to biodiversity as well as an economic menace to 
silviculture and grazing, is roadside mowing.  And when roadsides are 
scraped and planted with turf, the environmental damage is compounded.  Turf 
can come with cogongrass, is inherently an exotic species, and takes up the 
space that our natives might otherwise thrive in.

The DOT policy of planting wildflowers is another issue.  In Florida 
roadsides are often planted with non-native wildflowers, which are pretty, 
but also take the place of native species.  It is basically substituting a 
wildflower farm for the natives that might otherwise grow on roadsides.  The 
wildflowers may also tend to attract wildlife, which is killed by cars.  The 
point about roadsides being a sink for wildlife is a great question.  It 
seems that pollinators such as butterflies and native bees and wasps, and 
their predators, such as dragonflies and birds, and grazers, such as rodents 
and deer, and other wildlife favoring open land, including armadilloes, and 
all of their predators, such as owls and hawks and panthers, are all 
attracted to open roadsides, where they are likely to meet their death by 
automobile.

It seems as though the millions of acres of roadside land could be a great 
resource for biodiversity, if designed and managed properly.  However, 
management would have to be done in a wise and individualized manner, 
because a general prescription or policy for a large region would not work 
with the variety of habitats roads traverse.  DOT certainly has the 
financial resources, perhaps just not the collective will, to do this.

Maria Minno
Gainesville, FL

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harper-Lore, Bonnie" <Bonnie.Harper-Lore at fhwa.dot.gov>
To: "mangodance" <bmn at iglou.com>; 
<native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [PCA] Fw: [Pollinator] Roads and pollinators - again

>I am a technical resource for all 50 State DOTs.
> The mowing tradition is a tough one to crack.  Doing so is part of my
> job description.
> I have been trying for 13 years...so feel free to carp!!!
> The safety reason has no scientific basis and is overused, because it is
> "the way we've always done it".
> The clear zone policy of many DOTs is not accurate.  Reasonable mowing
> of one swath only is what is needed for vehicle recovery and parking for
> emergencies.  One swath is all that is needed for visibility at
> intersections and in forested areas.
> Mowing itself in some states is admittedly attracting large mammals to
> the roadside to eat.  We shoot ourselves in the foot with over mowing.
> Honestly, there are only two answers I have found:
> 1.  Calls from the public to the top of the DOT or the Governor, and/or
> 2.  State legislation.  At least 3 States have reduced mowing by DOT
> laws that allow only one swath except during one month in the end of
> summer where they can mow right of way fence to right of way fence.
> They think the public wants it to look neat.  Let them know if you
> prefer a natural look.  The 3 States who do have mowing law imposed on
> DOTs did so to protect nesting birds.  Reduced mowing would also protect
> other small critters, and pollinators.  We did a study in Iowa some
> years back and showed that butterflies prefered native unmowed grassland
> habitat and did not increase butterfly roadkill.  Every State in the
> U.S.  has some kind of grassland community to emulate.  I advocate
> grasslands, because highway engineers will be comfortable with a
> softscape solution that they can at least mow the edge and on occasion
> all to prevent forest encroachment.
>
> Their fear is litigation.  One tree and one vehicle collide on their
> right of way, and the responsibility has been historically costly.  This
> is a difficult fear to overcome.  It has a lot of history and dollars
> lost behind it.
>
> Perhaps these insights will give you some ideas about how you can help
> them mow less.  Let them know you do not want the agricultural approach
> to vegetation management, but a more natural and ecologically-based
> solution.  They really want to "do the right thing" too.
>
> Good luck,
> Bonnie.
>
>
> Bonnie L. Harper-Lore
> Restoration Ecologist
> Office of Environment, HEPN-30
> Federal Highway Administration
> 360 Jackson Street, Ste. 500
> St. Paul, MN  55101
> 651-291-6104
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
> [mailto:native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of
> mangodance
> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 8:18 AM
> To: native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
> Subject: Re: [PCA] Fw: [Pollinator] Roads and pollinators - again
>
> Lewis_Gorman at fws.gov wrote:
>
>>
>> It's hard to believe that managing Interstate and limited access
>> highways, clover leaves, etc. by merely not mowing them (except for
>> safety requirements) would not be of overall advantage to all
> wildlife.
>>  Is a study really required to determine an overall benefit?
>> Increased biodiversity alone should justify supporting a reduced
>> mowing policy on highway lands.
>> There must be millions of acres being mowed at great cost, petroleum
>> energy use, and associated air pollution that would be significantly
>> reduced by halting mowing, except as minimally required by federal
>> highway safety specifications.
>
> I've been carping about not mowing for years (even before I got there).
>  Mowing is basically a jobs program.  The contracting for mowing is as
> ugly as any defense contracting.  The safety aspect is ridiculous.  They
> tell me they're afraid people will go off road and hit a tree.
> Apparently all the rock walls, drop-offs to creeks, and similar things
> are not dangerous to people leaving the road.
>
> Additionally, if it was REALLY safety they were after, they wouldn't put
> all that optimum deer browse next to the roads.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> native-plants mailing list
> native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.
> plantconservation.org
>
> Disclaimer
> Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual who is
> posting the message; they are not official opinions or positions of the
> Plant Conservation Alliance.
>
> _______________________________________________
> native-plants mailing list
> native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org
>
> Disclaimer
> Posts on this list reflect only the opinion of the individual who is 
> posting the message; they are not official opinions or positions of the 
> Plant Conservation Alliance.
> 