<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7654.12">
<TITLE>RE: [PCA] Human sacrifice and ecosystem function</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Thanks Tony, for effectively giving us a definition of an invasive species. The situation you describe is one of a species that originated elsewhere colonizing a portion of a geographic region<BR>
new to it, to an extent that local native plant communities are diminished in function, diversity, and one could argue, beauty. I believe native species can be invasive, too, as has happened with Juniperus virginiana taking over xeric grasslands east of the 100th meridian, mesquite in southwestern grasslands, sugar maple in oak-hickory woodlands, etc., etc., etc. This doesn't really address the original Phragmites question, but at least settles the issue that has diverted the conversation from that question.<BR>
<BR>
James C. Trager, Ph. D.<BR>
Restoration Biologist<BR>
Shaw Nature Reserve<BR>
Gray Summit MO<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: native-plants-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org on behalf of Addsum-Tony Frates<BR>
Sent: Thu 9/6/2012 10:51 AM<BR>
To: native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>
Subject: Re: [PCA] Human sacrifice and ecosystem function<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Management practices are no doubt part of the issue (and not just the <BR>
control of water - excessive and inappropriate grazing in the West as <BR>
been as much of a destructive factor as any).<BR>
<BR>
But, we aren't going to eat our way out of Cheatgrass, Euphorbia <BR>
myrsinites, Linaria dalmatica nor Russian Olive or Tamarisk problems. <BR>
And it isn't scientists that made a monster out of Tamarisk - if we <BR>
want to label anyone as monsters (which is way over the top), it would <BR>
be those who brought these things here in the first place (as a result <BR>
of inadvertence, imcompetence, sheer arrogance and a general lack of <BR>
foresight and a complete lack of ecological understanding). The <BR>
"war" on invasives is indeed a fight with this past legacy of <BR>
stupidity on the part of primarily European immigrants. The plants <BR>
are of course not good or bad but we use those labels sometimes to <BR>
denote what should occur naturally in an ecosystem and what should <BR>
not, and in according to what Darwin meant by survival of the fittest <BR>
(and not as commonly construed by the public). Simply accepting the <BR>
status quo and doing nothing is unacceptable.<BR>
<BR>
The environmental ethics and awareness that occurred in the 1970's was <BR>
critical. We are just up against a huge, complex problem. And while <BR>
we may struggle with definitions (just as we struggle to define many <BR>
other words in the constitution, let's say, that have nothing to do <BR>
with biology), the fact that we continue to try to do so is important, <BR>
and U.S. legislation and executive orders have been based on science <BR>
and while they could all stand to be improved, I would not want to be <BR>
without them either. We do have invasive species. These are species <BR>
that are not LOCALLY native to an area in question, and that did not <BR>
EVOLVE naturally in that area typically but rather were abruptly <BR>
simply dumped there (or spread from areas where they were suddenly <BR>
dumped).<BR>
<BR>
I have also very recently personally firsthand seen the tremendous <BR>
positive impact that a Russian Olive removal had on a local wetlands <BR>
area. Dozens of trees were removed and that removal no doubt caused <BR>
impact on the grounds (and yes there are still ongoing weed problems). <BR>
But wetlands can be very resilient if they have plenty of sunshine <BR>
and enough water. Like Tamarisk, Russian Olive ultimately and if <BR>
unchecked turns into dense forests and chokes out the light leading to <BR>
the extirpation of native species within a given place which I have <BR>
also witnessed firsthand. In less than an eight month period <BR>
following an off-season removal of the <BR>
noxious-alien-exotic-plants-out-of-place-and-therefore-bad Russian <BR>
Olive, the wetlands in question has been literally reborn. The <BR>
efforts were well worth it and fully appropriate.<BR>
<BR>
So the key ingredient to the recipe here was to add sunshine. That <BR>
could ONLY be accomplished by removing the Russian Olive, a tree that <BR>
incredibly is still commonly used for plantings sometimes even in very <BR>
misguided so-called revegetation projects.<BR>
<BR>
And of course also, the exploding and unsustainable human population <BR>
growth component can never be forgotten or dismissed (about which our <BR>
species particularly in the 1970's was warned but has continued to <BR>
largely ignore), and many of our endangered and threatened plant and <BR>
animal species will remain under threat until human populations <BR>
stabilize, and some may therefore never be unable to "recover" or at <BR>
least be secure until that occurs, and for some it will be too late. <BR>
A stable, sustainable human population is an essential recipe for the <BR>
future and ultimately for the controlling invasive species.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tony Frates<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Quoting Joe Franke <sapogordoeco@comcast.net>:<BR>
<BR>
> Gena,<BR>
><BR>
> Very well stated.<BR>
><BR>
> I tried to bring about a little of that contextual shift that you mention by<BR>
> writing ³The Invasive Species Cookbook², which will be in its second edition<BR>
> within the year. At the risk of this sounding like and advert for the book,<BR>
> Iıd welcome any new recipes that people would like to contribute. The book<BR>
> was met with a certain amount of derision when reviewed in Ecology and<BR>
> Ecological Restoration, mostly because there was a widespread<BR>
> misunderstanding of the booksıs purpose by the reviewers in that they<BR>
> thought that I was advocating human consumption as a means of species<BR>
> control. In reality the central purpose of the book is to help people to<BR>
> think a bit differently about invasives, both plant and animal.<BR>
> Parenthetically, it was suggested several times by readers of the first<BR>
> edition of the book that I include recipes for humans, our species being the<BR>
> most ³invasive² and destructive of the worldıs biota, but Iıve elected not<BR>
> to for several reasons, commercial and ethical. Iım not quite ready for that<BR>
> broad a contextual change!<BR>
><BR>
> Even if such a contextual shift isnıt immediately possible, I think that the<BR>
> discussion about how we might get there is one worthy of discussion now. How<BR>
> we view the worldıs biota, to what degree we value fully functioning<BR>
> ecosystems and how much weıre willing to sacrifice in order to get them to<BR>
> get to the point where we have sufficient tools at our disposal to really<BR>
> bring them back, rather than just treating symptoms of the disease (e.g.<BR>
> Tamarisk and Phragmites) are things that we should be talking about, even<BR>
> while we chop and poison with fingers crossed in hope that weıre doing some<BR>
> good...which is sometimes not the case. Iıve seen plenty around here that<BR>
> would indicate that weıre actually doing more damage than good. Some<BR>
> invasive plants seem to thrive on abuse, take Russian olive for example.<BR>
><BR>
> How to induce the necessary cultural change in thinking that will allow for<BR>
> more water in the river...thatıs the rub. Environmental education as it has<BR>
> existed since the O70s is largely a failure because it has done little to<BR>
> change ³natureıs² place in the values hierarchy. But without this essential<BR>
> set of changes we as a species are doomed, and the sneaking suspicion that<BR>
> what weıre doing in restoration work is largely a proverbial finger in the<BR>
> dike.<BR>
><BR>
> JF<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> On 9/5/12 8:20 PM, "Gena Fleming" <genafleming@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> Joe, I really think the point you are bringing up is essential. An academic<BR>
>> discussion may be where we start; at least the topic is being broached. <BR>
>> Focussing on invasive plants instead of the "ecological perturbations" is<BR>
>> exactly what's allowing these ecological perturbations to continue.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> The problems we are facing are going to require an essential shift of<BR>
>> context. This need for contextual shifting (or perhaps I should say for a<BR>
>> conceptual shift towards contextual thinking) is not unique to <BR>
>> invasive plant<BR>
>> discussions; it applies to just about every problem we are facing right<BR>
>> now ---- including education, medicine, economics, etc. Imagine every<BR>
>> discipline mirroring the same conceptual flaw in a hologram.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> I think that's why it's so hard to change our thinking. Letting go of the<BR>
>> invasive plant focus doesn't make sense within the existing socioeconomic<BR>
>> context. But if we lived in a society where we were eating <BR>
>> invasive plants,<BR>
>> making medicine out of invasive plants, making paper out of invasive plants,<BR>
>> and using invasive plants for bioremediation, well pretty soon the situation<BR>
>> might resolve itself.<BR>
>> In fact, maybe that's why they are invasive ---- they're an underutilized<BR>
>> resource.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> We keep trying to tweek things with efforts to mitigate the symptoms we are<BR>
>> creating, only to allow us to continue pursuing business as usual. <BR>
>> I realize<BR>
>> we can't change the game overnight, but at least we can start having these<BR>
>> conversations.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Anyway, I appreciate your contribution. Also, If you are the author of the<BR>
>> "Invasive Species Cookbook," will you please tell me where I can get a copy?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Gena Fleming<BR>
>> <BR>
>> <BR>
>><BR>
>> <BR>
>> On 5 September 2012 20:40, Joe Franke <sapogordoeco@comcast.net> wrote:<BR>
>>> Well, so far itıs only an academic discussion. When you point out these<BR>
>>> problems to funders of restoration projects, they donıt want to hear about<BR>
>>> it. Itıs a little like American politics in that itıs easier to ³other² a<BR>
>>> politician than to look at the social conditions that brought them to power<BR>
>>> and do something about the ³root² problems.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Itıs been horrifying to see how much money has been wasted here on the<BR>
>>> unsuccessful attempted ³control² of tamarisk, Russian olive and <BR>
>>> Siberian elm<BR>
>>> in cottonwood Bosque along the Rio Grande.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> I would recommend that people look at some of Mathew Chewıs work, <BR>
>>> including:<BR>
>>> Chew, M.K. 2009. The Monstering of Tamarisk: How scientists made a <BR>
>>> plant into<BR>
>>> a problem. Journal of the History of Biology 42:231-266<BR>
>>> <BR>
>>> He has some more technical articles out as well that I have yet to <BR>
>>> read, but<BR>
>>> will do so shortly. I think that there is a lot to discuss here, <BR>
>>> and Iıd be<BR>
>>> very interested to hear what other people have to say about the <BR>
>>> general topic<BR>
>>> of focusing on specific invasive species and not the ecological <BR>
>>> perturbations<BR>
>>> that allow them to dominate entire ecosystems.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Joe Franke<BR>
>>><BR>
>>><BR>
>>><BR>
>>> On 9/5/12 7:14 PM, "Gena Fleming" <genafleming@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>
>>><BR>
>>>> I think you are having the most relevant discussion out West. <BR>
>>>> It's time to<BR>
>>>> start focussing on the real problem. <BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> On 5 September 2012 15:18, Joe Franke <sapogordoeco@comcast.net> wrote:<BR>
>>>>> There is a perhaps different but related discussion thatıs going on out<BR>
>>>>> here in the West concerning Tamarisk. To many of us attempting to do<BR>
>>>>> restoration work weıve realized that the spread and extreme <BR>
>>>>> ³weediness² of<BR>
>>>>> plant is more of a symptom of poor water management than an evil unto<BR>
>>>>> itself, and becomes a convenient shill that distracts (mostly <BR>
>>>>> federal) land<BR>
>>>>> managers from the real problem: not enough water on the land, <BR>
>>>>> and disrupted<BR>
>>>>> flood cycles. We can blame tamarisk all we want, but the real <BR>
>>>>> problem lies<BR>
>>>>> in our speciesı wasteful use and mismanagement of the water resource.<BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>> On 9/4/12 7:35 PM, "Robert Layton Beyfuss" <rlb14@cornell.edu> wrote:<BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Thanks to all who have responded and elaborated on my original query. I<BR>
>>>>>> think the general consensus is that native plants cannot be ³officially²<BR>
>>>>>> invasive but they surely can be problematic! I have a colleague <BR>
>>>>>> at Cornell<BR>
>>>>>> who refers to native weeds that behave like invasives as ³interfering²<BR>
>>>>>> vegetation. No one has ever satisfactorily defined ³exotic² in <BR>
>>>>>> my opinion<BR>
>>>>>> and I consider Clintonıs executive order as a political gaffe that has<BR>
>>>>>> mostly served to make ecologists fight over semantics as the exchanges<BR>
>>>>>> here seem to verify. I am not so sure how much science has <BR>
>>>>>> advanced due to<BR>
>>>>>> executive orders. It has also generated a backlash that causes <BR>
>>>>>> people to<BR>
>>>>>> hate plants from Europe or Asia in general and to create black lists and<BR>
>>>>>> white lists of plants which I find very disturbing. Vastly different<BR>
>>>>>> ecosystems exist even within a given state or region. I consider it<BR>
>>>>>> impossible to say that a plant which is native to Canada is exotic<BR>
>>>>>> anywhere in n North America but it surely does not exist in <BR>
>>>>>> many American<BR>
>>>>>> ecosystems.. So where does one draw the border line? Black <BR>
>>>>>> locust, as one<BR>
>>>>>> poster mentioned is a classic example of a plant that grew <BR>
>>>>>> satisfactorily<BR>
>>>>>> in one particular place, but now seems to be a problem in other <BR>
>>>>>> places not<BR>
>>>>>> very far away. Some states consider it as exotic. Plants donıt recognize<BR>
>>>>>> borders and neither should we in trying to tell ³good² plants from ³bad²<BR>
>>>>>> plants based on their lack of green cards. Ecosystems are highly dynamic<BR>
>>>>>> as succession creates profound changes in species composition. <BR>
>>>>>> Almost all<BR>
>>>>>> plants have their merits and demerits in ecosystems and many <BR>
>>>>>> exotic plants<BR>
>>>>>> have served us very well indeed. Poison ivy may provide food <BR>
>>>>>> for 60 or 70<BR>
>>>>>> bird species but so do Autumn olive and multiflora rose without being<BR>
>>>>>> toxic to touch. Introduced species are now hybridizing with related<BR>
>>>>>> native ones as is the case with Phragmites and probably others. How will<BR>
>>>>>> we classify their offspring? If they originate in the US, are they not<BR>
>>>>>> native? If the hybrids become even more invasive does that fact become<BR>
>>>>>> moot because they originated here? <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> From: Claudia Thompson-Deahl [<A HREF="mailto:CLAUDIA@reston.org">mailto:CLAUDIA@reston.org</A>]<BR>
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 1:34 PM<BR>
>>>>>> To: Marc Imlay; Patricia_DeAngelis@fws.gov; Robert Layton Beyfuss<BR>
>>>>>> Cc: native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org;<BR>
>>>>>> apwg@lists.plantconservation.org; 'Katy Cummings'<BR>
>>>>>> Subject: RE: [APWG] [PCA] Native Phragmites Data<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> I would be surprised if Poison Ivy is on the National Park <BR>
>>>>>> Service Exotic<BR>
>>>>>> Plant Management Teams list as I have heard about 70 species of <BR>
>>>>>> birds eat<BR>
>>>>>> the berries and it is a native.<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> Claudia Thompson-Deahl<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Environmental Resource Manager<BR>
>>>>>> ISA Certified Arborist # MA-5203A<BR>
>>>>>> 12250 Sunset Hills Road<BR>
>>>>>> Reston, VA 20190<BR>
>>>>>> 703.435.6547 <tel:703.435.6547> <tel:703.435.6547 <tel:703.435.6547> ><BR>
>>>>>> claudia@reston.org <<A HREF="mailto:claudia@reston.org">mailto:claudia@reston.org</A>><BR>
>>>>>> Reston Association Employees Make the Difference: Caring for, Serving &<BR>
>>>>>> Enhancing the Reston Community.<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> RA Vision: Leading the model community where all can live, <BR>
>>>>>> work, play, and<BR>
>>>>>> get involved.<BR>
>>>>>> RA Mission: To preserve and enhance the Reston Community through<BR>
>>>>>> outstanding leadership, service, and stewardship of our resources.<BR>
>>>>>> RA Core Values: Service~Collaboration~Stewardship~ Innovation~Leadership<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments to it may contain<BR>
>>>>>> privileged and confidential information from the Reston <BR>
>>>>>> Association. This<BR>
>>>>>> information is only for the viewing or use of the intended recipient.<BR>
>>>>>> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> From: apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>
>>>>>> [<A HREF="mailto:apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org">mailto:apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org</A>] On Behalf Of <BR>
>>>>>> Marc Imlay<BR>
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 8:02 AM<BR>
>>>>>> To: Patricia_DeAngelis@fws.gov; 'Robert Layton Beyfuss'<BR>
>>>>>> Cc: native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org;<BR>
>>>>>> apwg@lists.plantconservation.org; 'Katy Cummings'<BR>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [APWG] [PCA] Native Phragmites Data<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> I show my volunteers how Poison ivy is dominant in eary succession<BR>
>>>>>> habitats after an unnatural disturbance but becomes a minor species in<BR>
>>>>>> fully recovered woodlands. The same for sweetgum.<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Marc Imlay, PhD,<BR>
>>>>>> Conservation biologist, Park Ranger Office<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> (301) 442-5657 <tel:%28301%29%20442-5657> <tel:%28301%29%20442-5657><BR>
>>>>>> cell<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> ialm@erols.com<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Natural and Historical Resources Division<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> www.pgparks.com <<A HREF="http://www.pgparks.com/">http://www.pgparks.com/</A>> <<A HREF="http://www.pgparks.com/">http://www.pgparks.com/</A>><BR>
>>>>>> <<A HREF="http://www.pgparks.com/">http://www.pgparks.com/</A>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> From: apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>
>>>>>> [<A HREF="mailto:apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org">mailto:apwg-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org</A>] On Behalf Of<BR>
>>>>>> Patricia_DeAngelis@fws.gov<BR>
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 10:25 AM<BR>
>>>>>> To: Robert Layton Beyfuss<BR>
>>>>>> Cc: native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org;<BR>
>>>>>> apwg@lists.plantconservation.org; Katy Cummings<BR>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [APWG] [PCA] Native Phragmites Data<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Cheers, Bob!<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> My two cents:<BR>
>>>>>> * A native can most definitely be an invasive. Teal and Mark's comments<BR>
>>>>>> elucidate that issue well.<BR>
>>>>>> * I'm not sure what list you might be referring to, but from what I<BR>
>>>>>> understand of the Federal Noxious Weed list, I believe that plants that<BR>
>>>>>> are either naturalized or have completely overrun the US will not end up<BR>
>>>>>> on that list. I believe that list tends to include species that <BR>
>>>>>> are in the<BR>
>>>>>> earlier stages of invasion where prevention of further influxes <BR>
>>>>>> can still<BR>
>>>>>> make a difference for slowing the spread. I also doubt it would <BR>
>>>>>> be on any<BR>
>>>>>> state list - those often tend to be geared to non-natives and ornamental<BR>
>>>>>> plants - of which poison ivy is neither. <BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> It seems like poison ivy falls into a strange no-man's land - <BR>
>>>>>> as a native,<BR>
>>>>>> it doesn't seem to fit on the PCA ALien Plant WOrking Group listserve -<BR>
>>>>>> yet the expertise on that list may be more appropriate (versus this<BR>
>>>>>> general native plant listserve) because they are the folks with specific<BR>
>>>>>> insight on invasive species biology.<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> I wonder if any of the National Park Service Exotic Plant <BR>
>>>>>> Management Teams<BR>
>>>>>> have identified it as among their top ten target taxa in any of their<BR>
>>>>>> regions? <BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> -Patricia<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Patricia S. De Angelis, Ph.D.<BR>
>>>>>> Botanist, Division of Scientific Authority-US Fish & Wildlife<BR>
>>>>>> Service-International Affairs<BR>
>>>>>> Chair, Medicinal Plant Working Group-Plant Conservation Alliance<BR>
>>>>>> 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 110<BR>
>>>>>> Arlington, VA 22203<BR>
>>>>>> 703-358-1708 x1753 <tel:703-358-1708%20x1753> <BR>
>>>>>> <tel:703-358-1708%20x1753><BR>
>>>>>> FAX: 703-358-2276 <tel:703-358-2276> <tel:703-358-2276 <BR>
>>>>>> <tel:703-358-2276><BR>
>>>>>> ><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Promoting sustainable use and conservation of our native <BR>
>>>>>> medicinal plants.<BR>
>>>>>> <www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal <<A HREF="http://www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal">http://www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal</A>><BR>
>>>>>> <<A HREF="http://www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal">http://www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal</A>><BR>
>>>>>> <<A HREF="http://www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal">http://www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal</A>> ><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Follow International Affairs<BR>
>>>>>>> > on Twitter <A HREF="http://twitter.com/USFWSInternatl">http://twitter.com/USFWSInternatl</A><BR>
>>>>>>> > on Facebook <BR>
>>>>>> <<A HREF="http://twitter.com/USFWSInternatl">http://twitter.com/USFWSInternatl</A>><BR>
>>>>>> <A HREF="http://www.facebook.com/USFWS_InternationalAffairs">http://www.facebook.com/USFWS_InternationalAffairs</A><BR>
>>>>>> <<A HREF="http://www.facebook.com/USFWS_InternationalAffairs">http://www.facebook.com/USFWS_InternationalAffairs</A>><BR>
>>>>>> Robert Layton Beyfuss <rlb14@cornell.edu><BR>
>>>>>> Sent by: native-plants-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org 08/27/2012<BR>
>>>>>> 09:45 AM<BR>
>>>>>> To Katy Cummings <katy.e.cummings@gmail.com>,<BR>
>>>>>> "native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org"<BR>
>>>>>> <native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org><BR>
>>>>>> cc <BR>
>>>>>> Subject Re: [PCA] Native Phragmites Data<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> Hi All<BR>
>>>>>> I am a bit confused and hope you can enlighten me. I thought that the<BR>
>>>>>> basic definition of an invasive plant was that it had to be <BR>
>>>>>> exotic. There<BR>
>>>>>> are many native plants that create almost solid monocultures such as<BR>
>>>>>> common goldenrod yet can it be ³undesirable² at any density? . <BR>
>>>>>> Poison ivy<BR>
>>>>>> can overrun entire areas but I have never seen it listed as invasive.<BR>
>>>>>> Bob <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> From: native-plants-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>
>>>>>> [<A HREF="mailto:native-plants-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org">mailto:native-plants-bounces@lists.plantconservation.org</A>] On Behalf Of<BR>
>>>>>> Katy Cummings<BR>
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2012 9:28 PM<BR>
>>>>>> To: native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>
>>>>>> Subject: [PCA] Native Phragmites Data<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> Fellow Conservationists-<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> I work for The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in Door County, WI. My main<BR>
>>>>>> project this summer has been mapping exotic and native stands of<BR>
>>>>>> Phragmites (Phragmites australis and Phragmites australis americanus)<BR>
>>>>>> throughout TNC properties in Door County. I have some questions and<BR>
>>>>>> experiences to share with you as our organization tries to learn more<BR>
>>>>>> about the native/exotic Phragmites issue. <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> We all know what havoc the exotic Phragmites subspecies can wreak on an<BR>
>>>>>> ecosystem, but do we know anything about the native subspecies? <BR>
>>>>>> Is there<BR>
>>>>>> any research out there showing that the native Phragmites can behave as<BR>
>>>>>> aggressively as the exotic? In Door County, the native usually grows in<BR>
>>>>>> scattered to moderate densities along with other wetland plants, with a<BR>
>>>>>> few patches showing denser concentrations. There are a few areas where<BR>
>>>>>> the native has reached undesirable ³dense² concentrations, but as of yet<BR>
>>>>>> we donıt know why.<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> What other plants are associated with the native Phragmites? <BR>
>>>>>> TNC will be<BR>
>>>>>> setting up monitoring plots soon on some of our native patches, and when<BR>
>>>>>> we get that data Iıll send it to any interested people from this list.<BR>
>>>>>> The only list Iıve been able to find is from a chapter by <BR>
>>>>>> Laura Meyerson<BR>
>>>>>> et al. in ³Invasions in North American Salt Marshes² entitled <BR>
>>>>>> ³Phragmites<BR>
>>>>>> australis in Eastern North America: A Historical and Ecological<BR>
>>>>>> Perspective². Does anyone know of other lists from different regions of<BR>
>>>>>> the U.S.?<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> Are there any patterns to where native Phragmites is found? During my<BR>
>>>>>> mapping of the plant in Door County, Iıve generally found native<BR>
>>>>>> Phragmites set back from the edge of waterways and growing in <BR>
>>>>>> more marshy<BR>
>>>>>> areas.<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> What have you all seen as far as size of patches, number of patches,<BR>
>>>>>> location, rate of spread, etc. of the native Phragmites in your area?<BR>
>>>>>> Most of the wetlands in Door County are fed by alkaline ground water<BR>
>>>>>> discharge as a result of movement through the underlying dolomitic<BR>
>>>>>> bedrock. I assume that because of these alkaline conditions we have a<BR>
>>>>>> higher population of native Phragmites than perhaps other regions of the<BR>
>>>>>> Midwest. Is this true? <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> To help answer these questions, The Nature Conservancyıs Door Peninsula<BR>
>>>>>> office has temporarily halted eradication measures of native lineages of<BR>
>>>>>> Phragmites. We are in the process of developing long-term monitoring<BR>
>>>>>> plots in native Phragmites stands throughout Nature Conservancy holdings<BR>
>>>>>> in Door County, WI. The goals of this monitoring project will be to<BR>
>>>>>> assess the following questions:<BR>
>>>>>> 1. Under what conditions do native stands become aggressive?<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> 2. At what threshold is a native stand damaging to the community?<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>> 3. What plants are commonly associated with native <BR>
>>>>>> Phragmites in the<BR>
>>>>>> Great Lakes region?<BR>
>>>>>> If you are interested, I can send you a more detailed <BR>
>>>>>> methodology for our<BR>
>>>>>> monitoring project, including what parameters we will be sampling. <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> As an additional note, Iıd encourage people to mention there is a native<BR>
>>>>>> variety of Phragmites and differentiate between the two strains in any<BR>
>>>>>> publications or documents.<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> I look forward to your input!<BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> <BR>
>>>>>> Thanks again,<BR>
>>>>>> Katy Cummings<BR>
>>>>>> katy.e.cummings@gmail.com<BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>>><BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>> Joe Franke<BR>
>>>>> Sapo Gordo Ecological Restoration Services<BR>
>>>>> Chile Dog Designs, Inc.<BR>
>>>>> 1228 Lafayette Dr. NE<BR>
>>>>> Albuquerque, NM 87106 USA<BR>
>>>>> ph: 505-515-8736 <tel:505-515-8736> <tel:505-515-8736 <BR>
>>>>> <tel:505-515-8736> ><BR>
>>>>> Sapogordoeco@comcast.net<BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>> _______________________________________________<BR>
>>>>> PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list<BR>
>>>>> APWG@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>
>>>>> <A HREF="http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconserv">http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconserv</A><BR>
>>>>> ation.org<BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>>> Disclaimer<BR>
>>>>> Any requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the<BR>
>>>>> opinion of the individual posting the message.<BR>
>>>>><BR>
>>>><BR>
>>><BR>
>>><BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Joe Franke<BR>
>>> Sapo Gordo Ecological Restoration Services<BR>
>>> Chile Dog Designs, Inc.<BR>
>>> 1228 Lafayette Dr. NE<BR>
>>> Albuquerque, NM 87106 USA<BR>
>>> ph: 505-515-8736 <tel:505-515-8736><BR>
>>> Sapogordoeco@comcast.net<BR>
>>><BR>
>><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Joe Franke<BR>
> Sapo Gordo Ecological Restoration Services<BR>
> Chile Dog Designs, Inc.<BR>
> 1228 Lafayette Dr. NE<BR>
> Albuquerque, NM 87106 USA<BR>
> ph: 505-515-8736<BR>
> Sapogordoeco@comcast.net<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
native-plants mailing list<BR>
native-plants@lists.plantconservation.org<BR>
<A HREF="http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org">http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org</A><BR>
<BR>
Disclaimer<BR>
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.<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to native-plants-request@lists.plantconservation.org with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line.<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>