[PCA] Roadside refugia of Utah, 273 more miles of the 1997 Megatransect

Thu Sep 28 10:19:42 CDT 2006

Bonnie,
How would a state apply for the mapping of highway vegetation funding?
Lew

"Harper-Lore, Bonnie" <Bonnie.Harper-Lore at fhwa.dot.gov> 
09/28/2006 10:52 AM

To
"Craig Dremann" <craig at astreet.com>, <Lewis_Gorman at fws.gov>
cc
<apwg at lists.plantconservation.org>, 
<native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org>, 
<native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org>, 
<rwg at lists.plantconservation.org>
Subject
RE: [PCA] Roadside refugia of Utah,273 more miles of the 1997 Megatransect

FYI:  The current transportation bill (SAFETEA-LU) passed in August of 
2005.  It was 2-3 years late.
Another transportation bill will not occur until 2010.

In the meantime, SAFETA-LU did have a relevant paragraph in Section 6006, 
329.
The Control of Noxious Weeds and the Establishment of Native Plants.
No new money, but it opens the door to the eligibility of these issues for 
use of federal-aid dollars.
In our guidance (interpretation of the bill) we listed five activities 
that are eligible for that use.
The #1 eligible activity is inventory/mapping of all right-of-way 
vegetation.
Just a little hope for this discussion. 

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 
Craig Dremann
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 6:46 PM
To: Lewis_Gorman at fws.gov
Cc: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org; 
native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org; 
native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org; 
rwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: [PCA] Roadside refugia of Utah,273 more miles of the 1997 
Megatransect

Dear Lew and All,

Thanks for your email. 

You wrote, 

"Now, how to design a national policy/program to deal with this?  Or is it 
on a state by state basis?  IN has received $350,000 to plant native 
grasses on their interstate highway, reducing cost and creating habitat.
Lew" 

==========================

One possible answer to your question---Federal funds for every State DOT, 
whenever the Federal Transportation bill is renewed, to start Iowa-type 
Native Roadside Vegetation "Ecotype Projects" in each of the 50 States. 
See http://www.uni.edu/ecotype/

Funds are needed to do at least four things:

1.) Map the remaining roadside native understory vegetation, 2.) Do 
genetic studies, to develop seed-transfer zones of the native roadside 
species within a State.
3.) Get local native "ecotype" seeds hand-harvested, and then commercially 
reproduced in bulk.

And probably most importantly... 

4.) Invent methods and equipment to get the native grasses/native plants 
successfully, rapidly and permanently established in a 99+% weed-free 
condition.

REGARDING THE MEGATRANSECT: I compiled the UTAH data of my 3,400 roadside 
vegetation Megatransect this afternoon (Hwy 21 to I-15 to I-70 to Colo. 
border, 8-24-97):

273 total miles through Utah ---

186 miles, no native grasses seen: (68%) --Ag fields = 41 (15%) --Canyons 
= 6 (2%) --Crested wheat sown within R/W = 27 (10%) --Cheatgrass present= 
12 (4%) --Desert, no vegetation either native or weeds = 6 (2%) 
--Junipers, weed-free and native grass-free = 36 (13%)

87 miles with native grasses: (32%)
--Natives thin, infested with cheatgrass = 10 (3.6%) --Oryzopsis pristine 
= 10 (3.6%) --Oryzopsis thin or only in R/W = 37 (13.5%) --Stipa comata 
thin = 5 (1.8%) --Stipa pristine = 8 (2.9%)

So out of 273 miles, 18 miles are pristine, or about 6.5% of the total 
Utah Megatransect section, which is a higher percentage than Nevada's 
Megatransect (2.8%). 

Utah in 1997 had a lower percentage of Cheatgrass compared to Nevada (4% 
vs.8.3%); but nearly double the Crested Wheatgrass sown by the DOT in the 
R/W (10% Utah vs 5.8% NV).

The Utah stretch of the Megatransect, shows how cheatgrass was only able 
to get established where the native grasses are completely absent, or 
whenever the native grass cover was too thin, where there are empty spaces 
in the ecosystem for the weeds to get established. 

I call the cheatgrass a "default-weed", because it is there by default, 
only getting established when there has been damage to the native
ecosystem's perennial grass cover. 

Fortunately, if properly replanted, the local perennial native grass 
species easily crowd out the cheatgrass, as you can see in the pictures at 
http://www.ecoseeds.com/greatbasin.html --there's not a cheatgrass plant 
to be seen.

In science, that effect is called "allelopathy." (See the Journal of 
Chemical Ecology, for example, especially Dr. Liu's pioneering barley 
studies in 1994 and 1995). 

I personally know, after 35 years of Ecological Restoration studies, that 
allelopathy is an unopened treasure-trove--one of the most important 
future tools, that could help us convert millions of weedy acres back to 
solid local natives, including tens of thousands of miles of weed-infested 
roadsides--if there is a desire to do so.

Sincerely,  Craig Dremann (650) 325-7333

_______________________________________________
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.

To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to 
native-plants-request at lists.plantconservation.org with the word 
"unsubscribe" in the subject line.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20060928/d4dc49a2/attachment.html>