Honorable Ecolog:
As usual, McCallum gives us a combination of knowledge and insight.
I don't doubt, nor am I particularly surprised that CRP is a bunch of CR^P.
I would like to learn more about the details of such cynical deception, and
get an overview of the issue.
Vegetation is a reflection of the state of the site, and may be more
temporary than permanent (or more permanent than temporary). Either way, the
productive potential of any site can't produce more biomass than the amount
of water, nutrients, and climate/weather can support or be restricted by. If
the site is (or was) shortgrass prairie, for example, the productivity of
the site for switchgrass will be correspondingly short of projections made
based on data from tallgrass prairie sites; hence, such projections would be
irresponsible (or, unless developed in unforgivable ignorance, fraudulent).
To the degree that a site was degraded by erosion, say, since the sod was
first busted, a once productive site could be greatly diminished. I would
like to learn some specifics of such sites, including their potential for
restoration. I must add that true restoration of such sites can be a very
lengthy process, particularly if soils that took thousands or tens of
thousands of years to develop have been lost.
If humans are to be considered simply part of ecosystems, the effects of
human culture upon the rest of the ecosystem must be included. Cultural
aspects of ecosystems must be considered as well, such as food production
and policies like food stamps. As cultural populations expand, and as the
demand for products ultimately derived from ecosystems and their degradation
or extirpation also expands, something's gotta give. What we are seeing now
looks an awful lot like Corporate Kingdom-building to me.
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "malcolm McCallum" <malcolm.mccal...@herpconbio.org>
To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2013 9:50 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] ENERGY Biofuels and their questionable potential Re:
[ECOLOG-L] Switchgrass Conference September 2013
I too am pretty concerned about the CRP reductions.
However, based on some work my spouse has been doing, there is a lot
of CRP (at least what we are seeing) that that would never be farmed
for much, often not even hay due to the steep terrain or exceptionally
poor soils. Meanwhile, many parcels are very small and frankly
unmanaged weedfields. They play a role in erosion reduction, but that
is about it. The subclasses of CRP are very important to evaluate
when addressing this issue. An acre of weeds is of little wildlife
value except to insects, and many of those inhabitating it will be
largely super tramps and tramps.
I am still pretty perturbed with the Farm Bill.
Don't forget the house eliminated funding for food stamps, is that
still in their?
At first, that might not sound like it is relevant to ecology, but
there is a lot more pressure to fish and hunt (and poach) when you
have little to no food than when you have some food. I recall the
depression was likely a signficant factor to the extirpation of white
tailed deer in many areas going into the 1950s. Folks ate them, my
grandfather lived on deer in Escanaba Mi from the time he was born
until he left for the navy in WWII! Lots of people did, and it is
largely unrecorded. This contribution to species impairment is
assuredly ignored. What impact does a large population of unfed
people have an wildlife populations?
they really need to fund the food stamps and CRP among a lot of other
things in the farm bill.
Anyone not fed up with the legislative, executive and judicial
branches of government?
M
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Silvia Secchi <ssec...@siu.edu> wrote:
I understand Wayne's frustration. However, to put things in perspective,
the Farm Bill that passed the senate substantially cut the funding for CRP
and capped it to 25 million acres (it was 32 million acres in the 2008
bill, and 39 in the one before). The fact of the matter is that USDA is
moving towards funding more "working land" conservation. What is more, we
are already under the 32 million cap because farmers are reluctant to
re-enroll in the program with these high crop prices.
We need to understand that the "old" CRP program may not be viable in the
near future if no changes are made to accommodate for higher crop prices.
We may not like them either, but it looks like they are going to stay and
we need to live with that in the conservation community.
Switchgrass may not work for grouse habitat, but may be better than corn
on
high slopes in other parts of the US. Some smarter targeting of funding
and
programs will be necessary, and switchgrass is likely to be part of the
mix.
Silvia
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Wayne Tyson <landr...@cox.net> wrote:
If I understand the purpose of Ecolog correctly, it is a place for
announcements of matters of interest to ecologists and their
fellow-travelers, and a place for informal discussion of such matters.
The
most basic unwritten rule that governs discourse in a forum of any kind
is
to be specifically responsive to the points made by fellow participants.
Condescension in any form, direct or indirect, is considered by most to
be
unkind at best, but rude, really--"bad form," as some might say.
I look forward to an open and honest discussion of the points made by the
discussants. It should be pretty simple to clearly and concisely state
the
evidence for and against such hare-brained stunts as converting CRP lands
to switchgrass monocultures. Similarly, those knowledgeable enough to
foster conferences should be able to state the net energy yields of
switchgrass plantations, a simple matter of an input/output calculation.
I hope that these pivotal issues will not be evaded by those who have
vested interests in, say, switchgrass culture.
WT
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Raasch" <jaraa...@tds.net>
To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] ENERGY Biofuels and their questionable potential
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Switchgrass Conference September 2013
Hello Wayne and David.
Thank you for voicing your concerns and contributing to the discussion.
It
is important to look at the big picture and recognize the full impact of
human activity on the landscape.
Regarding the switchgrass conference, there will be a session devoted to
environmental services and impacts. The first speaker for this will be G.
Philip Robertson, Professor of Ecosystem Science, Michigan State
University.
There's also a two-day poster session and still room in the schedule for
additional oral presentations. I hope people will take adavantage of the
opportunity to present research covering their concerns.
http://www.dfrc.wisc.edu/**switchgrass/<http://www.dfrc.wisc.edu/switchgrass/>
John
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 13:40:38 -0500, David L. McNeely <mcnee...@cox.net>
wrote:
I did not see conservation listed as a discipline involved
in "Switchgrass II." There is a move afoot in Oklahoma and Kansas to
convert Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands, which have been
succeeding toward something resembling a prairie in those states after
having been inappropriately farmed, to switchgrass production. Some of
these CRP lands are important Lesser Prairie Chicken habitat, a formerly
hugely abundant grouse that has been seriously declining and is proposed
as an endangered species.
Farmers and ranchers, partly because of misinformation, partly because
of
experience, distrust the endangered species program but work
cooperatively
with the CRP program -- mostly because it pays to do so, but the result
is
more habitat for chickens.
If it is all converted to monoculture, where will the Lesser Prairie
Chickens go?
David McNeely
---- Wayne Tyson <landr...@cox.net> wrote:
Do I hear a "Giant Sucking Sound?" What is the evidence that
switchgrass can
produce more energy that it takes to get said energy to the point of
doing
work more efficiently than alternatives? What are the implications for
the
ecosystems that would be effectively destroyed by widespread planting of
switchgrass? Upon what theoretical foundations is the whole concept
based,
including the "use" of "marginal" lands? Does anyone really think that
marginal lands will not produce marginal amounts of energy? At what
cost in
dollars and degradation/destruction of ecosystems?
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Raasch" <jaraa...@tds.net>
To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 10:11 AM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Switchgrass Conference September 2013
Announcing SWITCHGRASS II, taking place in Madison, Wisconsin, USA, 10-
12
September 2013 at the Monona Terrace Convention Center. Registration,
housing, and abstract submission information available at the following
website: www.dfrc.wisc.edu/switchgrass.
The conference will bring together scientists and students interested
in
switchgrass and other prairie grasses to discuss the state of the art
of
prairie grass research. It will be an excellent opportunity to meet and
interact with researchers from a wide range of disciplines, including
agronomy, physiology, ecology, soil science, pathology, entomology,
genetics, genomics, and molecular biology. The conference will include
a
field tour, several plenary presentations, selected volunteered oral
presentations, a poster session, and a community workshop.
Program Highlights:
All-day tour of prairie/savanna and bioenergy research.
Eight topical areas, each with one invited speaker.
One-day poster session, organized according to the eight topical areas.
A small group of abstracts from each topical area will be chosen, with
the
author's permission, for oral presentations. The committee will make
this
decision before the conference, so that authors have time to plan for an
oral presentation.
Abstract submission deadline: 11:59pm Friday 16 August (Central
Daylight
Time USA)
Registration deadline: 1 September
For more information contact mdcas...@wisc.edu or jaraa...@tds.net.
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3199/5926 - Release Date: 06/20/13
--
David McNeely
==============================**==============================**
=============
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3204/6003 - Release Date: 07/19/13
--
Silvia Secchi
Assistant Professor, Energy and Environmental Policy, Department of
Agribusiness Economics
Co-Director, Environmental Resources & Policy Ph.D. Program
Agriculture Building - Mailcode 4410
Southern Illinois University
1205 Lincoln Drive
Carbondale, Illinois 62901
Phone:(618)453-1714
Fax: (618)453-1708
*Vous avez beau ne pas vous occuper de politique, la politique s'occupe de
vous tout de même.*
Charles Forbes de Montalembert
*The way we organize the modern American university fragments our
knowledge
badly. Not only are we divided by discipline, but we are divided by the
methods that scholars use. *
Elinor Ostrom
--
Malcolm L. McCallum
Department of Environmental Studies
University of Illinois at Springfield
Managing Editor,
Herpetological Conservation and Biology
"Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" -
Allan Nation
1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert
1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,
and pollution.
2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction
MAY help restore populations.
2022: Soylent Green is People!
The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi)
Wealth w/o work
Pleasure w/o conscience
Knowledge w/o character
Commerce w/o morality
Science w/o humanity
Worship w/o sacrifice
Politics w/o principle
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message.
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3204/6006 - Release Date: 07/20/13
