Thank you for this overview! I always wondered how to balance the positive value for birds with the impetus to eradicate. I sure see a lot of birds using the R-os here inCanon City. Maybe thinning is the best or most realistic approach. Laura Gorman
On Tuesday, September 15, 2020 at 10:33:29 AM UTC-6 Dave Leatherman wrote: > The Russian-olive removal at Crow Valley Campground was done at the behest > of the US Forest Service who is in charge of the area. These days the USFS > does almost all on-the-ground work, except firefighting, through > contractors. I believe the removal of the olives at Crow Valley Campground > was performed by some locals out of Briggsdale. My guess as to how this > all went down is that there was a pot of money in a veg management account > that would have to be returned if not spent by September 30 (the end of the > federal fiscal year), somebody in Greeley or Washington knew about, or > ascribed to, the paradigm that R-o is evil, also knew that giving a > contract to the two guys with a dog, chainsaw, magnetic sign and pick-up > would give somebody brownie points for "hiring local", and it was done > deal. As far as I can tell, it was a quick and dirty operation with no > removal of the cut wood, no treatment of the stumps, no replacement > planting of "better" species, no interpretive material on-site or > explanation given to the Campground Host (in case he was asked why it was > done). If somebody knows a different story about how this all happened, I > am open to correction. > > As stated, the paradigm amongst most CO natural resource agencies, be they > federal, state, county or city, is that Russian-olive is evil and deserves > eradication. This is a fairly new school of thought. Following the Dust > Bowl, R-o was planted widely promoted and planted as a helpful remedy on > the Great Plains. The federal Soil Conservation Service (now the NRCS) was > its biggest promoter. R-o grows well in harsh places and we all know the > world is getting harsher by the minute. The Colorado State Forest Service > I used to work for has the last government tree nursery standing in CO and > grows/sells approximately 2 million seedlings of all types a year. They > only quit offering R-o in the 1990's, mostly because it was PC to do so. > We all know the tree is a mixed bag, and considering only the issue of > attracting birds, it is decidedly a positive. I have extolled the positive > aspects of this tree for birds for many years. These efforts started out > not so much as promotion of the tree but as an effort to "stand up" for it > a bit, and balance the rhetoric. The knocks against it are: 1) it has > potential to take over riparian areas to the exclusion of native, better > trees like willow and cottonwood, and 2) it doesn't host very many insects, > and, thus, doesn't support a very robust set of nesting birds. The fear of > riparian area take-over has been erroneously extended to upland sites > (which Crow Valley essentially is since it rarely experiences creek bed > flow any more). I have only seen the total takeover and stagnation of > riparian areas in a limited number of places in CO, mostly along the > Arkansas e of Pueblo. In my mind, tamarisk (aka "salt-cedar") is way worse. > > The primary insect R-o does have, an aphid (*Capitophorus elaeagni*)*,* > is very attractive to birds. The fruits are very attractive to many birds > including warblers, woodpeckers, flycatchers, thrushes, waxwings, mimic > thrushes, finches, sparrows and many others including even upland gamebirds > and gulls. Wood ducks love them. When discovered, the 1st or 2nd State > Record Brown-crested Flycatcher, Fork-tailed Flycatcher and > Tropical Kingbird were in or near Russian-olives, no doubt using fruits to > sustain their wayward adventures. Hey, Duane, any chance the > Sulphur-bellied Flycatcher was doing the same? Thickets are used by > certain marquis birds like cardinals and cuckoos as nest sites. Owls like > long-ears roost/nest in R-o thickets, and I have even seen a pygmy-owl at > low elevation in winter in a R-o thicket. > > I am not sure what birders should do but I think the approach SeEtta > mentions of at least injecting some balance into veg management planning > early-on is good. The resource managers, for the most part, have not heard > our point of view that the tree could be good, and they need to hear it as > something to weigh when considering the final plan. My problems with > *every* R-o "eradication" project I've witnessed are: > > - Major assault on peace and quiet > - Never get them all, miss many small trees > - Never enough $ to plant, establish and maintain "better" species > - Never account for sprouting that will have the site right back where > it was in 10-20 years > - Never account for recruitment by bird droppings and seeds floating > in on moving water > - In net, just dumb these areas down as a bird habitat and rec > experience for 10 years minimum > > Dave Leatherman > Fort Collins > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/63e79998-9c1f-4606-8d33-118c7616346bn%40googlegroups.com.
