CI and Ecolog:
May be, but I wish it was less "rangy" and more science. But what needs to
be acknowledged is the simple fact that the introduction of organisms that
did not evolve in a place--especially when they evolved under similar
conditions elsewhere--disturbs and perturbs indigenous systems, and that the
evidence is clear; no additional study is needed to confirm the obvious.
Research with respect to the details and processes of said transformation
is, however, legitimate, provided it actually produces useful results.
"Management" can further disturb and perturb, especially in "marginal" lands
into which the pastoralists were ultimately pushed by the "sodbusters," who
introduced monocultures into the Great Plains, which could have been managed
to provide "food security" at low cost (and lower profits for the
exploiters, who, by the way, didn't and don't give a damn about the starving
hordes and exponentionally expanding world population.
As long as we can maintain intellectual honesty, we should be able to keep
our oranges properly distributed and distinguished from the lemons.
"Rangeland science," let's face it, is not aimed at maintaining ecological
diversity, it is aimed at exploiting it at the expense of others. There's a
name for this, but in the interest of intellectual discipline, I'll refrain
from mentioning it here.
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ciee Icee" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2013 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecology and Range Management Compatible? Re:
[ECOLOG-L] tree encroachment models
The
revolutionary land use changes, necessary to support national and global
food
security, potentially make rangeland science more relevant now than
ever.
Herrick, et al. 2012. Revolutionary Land Use Change in
the 21st Century: Is (Rangeland) Science Relevant? Rangeland Ecol Manage
65:590–598.
http://www.srmjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.2111/REM-D-11-00186.1
Dr. Diego
Steinaker
Assistant
Director CIEE/ICEE
Canadian
Institute of Ecology and Evolution/ Institut canadien d’écologie et
d’évolution
Institute of
Environmental Change and Society
University of
Regina
Regina, SK S4S
0A2
Tel. (306) 337
8867
http://ciee-icee.com/
Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> 23/03/13 16:01 >>>
---------------------- Information from the mail header
-----------------------
Sender: "Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news"
<[email protected]>
Poster: Wayne Tyson <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Ecology and Range Management Compatible? Re: [ECOLOG-L]
tree
encroachment models
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David,=20
Thanks for your remarks and thoughts. As I said in my postscript, the =
post was written in my Op-Ed style, not in my usual Ecolog post style. =
Sorry to hear about the intentional and expensive intrusion of pines =
into oak woodland by THE AUTHORITIES.=20
As to my post, a careful reading will reveal my uncertainty about the =
"sage-grouse" project and my qualification regarding the presumptive =
good intentions of the author of the post which gave rise to my =
comments. It is all about ISSUES, not personalities.=20
WT
"The suspension of judgment is the highest exercise in intellectual =
discipline." --Raymond M. Gilmore
"Nine-tenths of the hell being raised in the world is well-intentioned."
=
--Anonymous
----- Original Message -----=20
From: David Burg=20
To: Wayne Tyson=20
Cc: [email protected]=20
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 8:19 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Ecology and Range Management Compatible? Re: =
[ECOLOG-L] tree encroachment models
Wayne, I think you must have flunked your Dale Carnegie course. Which =
is just one of the many things I like about your thinking, my fellow =
cynical curmudgeon. You make many good points. The very concept =
"range" is a self serving rancher construct, isn't it? =20
Your example of the Oregon juniper removal project is something seen =
frequently, in my experience. Even where there is some kernel of good =
thought, like maintaining some former landscape-level vegetation =
pattern, the execution is often foolish. And often such plans just =
happen to result in lots of spending by agencies and contractors. Here =
in NYC the parks department has an idea of preserving "diversity". So =
they have, at great expense, been creating pine plantations in one of =
the rarest relict oak woodlands in the country. See Reed Noss's fine =
old article "Do We Really Want Diversity" on misuse of that concept by =
foresters. I mention this because it may be comparable with what is =
being done for sage grouse.=20
I do not think that it is wrong to try to figure out how we can =
preserve as much nature as we can while also making accomodations for =
people. And while there is no substitute for field work, it does no =
good, Wayne, to dump on those who want to use modeling and other =
quantitative tools. =20
But there is a problem with what Malthus calls the "insensible bias", =
where we see the universe through the lense of human "need". A raging =
problem now in "Nature Protection", particularly with concepts of =
"productivity" of forests, grasslands, hoofed mammals, fish, etc. And =
then there always seems to be some special interest that looks to jump =
on a bandwagon and twist it to their own benefit. Is sage grouse =
protection another example of that? The fuzzy term "Land Health" would =
seem to be very susceptible to such twisting. =20
It couthe die-off of the mega fauna. I would try to give Jessa Davis the =
benefit of the doubt and hope she (he?) is mindful of the trickiness of
=
the issues you raise, Wayne. =20
David Burg
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> =
wrote:
Ecolog:
Now I've heard everything! Models? Models? We don't need no stinkin' =
MODELS! (Paraphrased from the great old movie, The Treasure of Sierra =
Madre, one of the earliest attempts to illustrate environmental =
responsibility)
What we need is to get out on the "range" (a bogus concept for most =
of the Great Basin [GB]), which is a romanticized Hollywood-cowboy =
notion anyway, and LOOK at what's ACTUALLY happening and has been =
happening since the arrival of the hoofed locusts in the 19th century. =
THEN, if need be, go back to the air-conditioned offices and crunch some
=
numbers.
The trees wouldn't BE encroaching if it weren't for livestock, and =
the ecosystems would be at maximum potential productivity, including =
plenty of healthful animal protein like pronghorns and elk and, in =
places, bison instead of cattle and other livestock that did not evolve
=
under GB conditions.
It was huge herds of cattle that caused the mesquite "invasions" in =
Texas and beyond, cattle that caused the "invasions" of juniper or =
"cedar" elsewhere in the west, not to mention cheatgrass and other alien
=
species that have reduced GB and other ecosystems to far below their =
original productivity. This "range management" is not ecology, not even
=
"applied" ecology, it is simply propping up a lousy idea that is so =
entrenched that we will never get rid of it.
All over The West, huge amounts of our tax money has been squandered =
on chaining, cutting, and poisoning trees (including pinyons) under the
=
unwarranted assumption that they were "stealing" water and nutrients =
from the grasses. I thought the yahoos in the pockets of "ranchers" (I'm
=
all for small locally-owned ranches, but not for the non-resident-owned
=
corporate landlords who are interested only in money and to hell with =
the future) were a thing of the past, and that now the government =
"management" agencies had some ecologists and biologists in them that =
would not perpetuate this kind of "Alice in Wonderland" myth that the GB
=
is primarily for cows and that indigenous species are "invading" and =
thus degrading the "range." Balderdash!
I went to see the "experiment" in "controlling" the "invasion of =
junipers at Steen's mountain in SE Oregon a few years ago. Their little
=
propaganda signs, while admitting the fact that great herds of livestock
=
(sheep and cattle primarily) had been brought in the last couple of =
centuries, but did not admit that the proliferation of junipers had =
anything to do with said the true invasion of cattle and sheep. They did
=
some field trials, not experiments, where they used different methods to
=
"control" the juniper "invasion." They cut down big junipers that were =
perhaps a couple of hundred years old when the livestock first arrived,
=
not just the little ones that had actually invaded, which could have not
=
been "invaders" themselves, thus cutting down badly needed "stock =
shade," instead of thinning out some of the "offending" seedlings that =
sprang up in response to the pulverizing of the soil and much of the =
ecosystem, including the cryptobiotic soil crust fraction of the =
ecosystem that was in equilibrium, including sage grouse, before the =
devastating disturbance that favored the proliferation of junipers, to =
wit, the cow-burning of the West. The Great Plains is another story.
This has been a blatant opinion piece, and were it not for the =
inability of the present-day newspapers to separate the sheep from the =
goats, the wheat from the chaff, I would send it to one of them as I =
sometimes did in the last century (and the early 21st), but they are so
=
inundated with submittals today that one has a snowbal
PS: I have no way of knowing for sure, but I would like to know, =
intentionally or unintentionally, whether or not the sage grouse program
=
might be a surrogate subterfuge for sucking up more dollars for "range =
improvement" for corporate ranching. I presume that Jessa is =
well-intentioned, but she could be a pawn for the corporate interests, =
which can be very clever in manipulating the public, including =
"environmentalists."
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jessa Davis" =
<[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:58 PM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] tree encroachment models
All,
I was wondering if anyone has done any serious modelling of tree
encroachment? Specifically pinyon-juniper in the Great Basin. I am =
testing
out models/tools for encroachment on rangelands in conjunction =
with sage
grouse habitat restoration. LandFIRE has been tossed out there, =
and there's
been some toying with in house methods. The higher the resolution, =
the
better. If anyone has any suggestions, they would be greatly =
appreciated!
Thanks,
JD
--
Jessa Davis
Land Health Assessment Project Lead
Ely District
The Great Basin Institute
702.606.5483 (cell)
775.289.1968 (desk)
"Be the change you want to see in the world." - Gandhi
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2641/5694 - Release Date: =
03/21/13
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2641/5698 - Release Date: =
03/23/13
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2641/5701 - Release Date: 03/24/13
