The McNeely and McCallum posts have greatly contributed to my enlightenment on this subject, and I hope they will keep it up. While I grew up in central Texas and have traveled in the other areas mentioned, I do not have a good grasp of the specifics. Most of my grassland work has been outside of the Great Plains and adjacent regions, primarily in California, and now that I am retired I must draw upon experiences that recede in time. I have tried to develop an understanding of the fundamentals that drive ecosystems rather than to limit myself to regions, but as so much of my work has been in southern California, I necessarily must indulge in some careful guesswork, combined with brief observations in my travels, to understand what is going on in other regions. McNeely and McCallum have hit upon most of my central assumptions, and I hope that they will continue to contribute here, and that others will join them. I also hope that those who disagree also will contribute.
What is the future (and history) of the CRP program? Why and by what authority is CRP land returned to agriculture? Can switchgrass be profitably grown anywhere without subsidy? What is the history of the Great Switchgrass Boondoggle? Who are the promoters? Where are they getting their money? Are ecologists involved? Which ones? How many ecologists who are not involved believe that switchgrass is a viable "feedstock" for "biofuel" production? I hope they will post their arguments in favor. WT ----- Original Message ----- From: "David L. McNeely" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] ENERGY Biofuels and their questionable potential Re: [ECOLOG-L] Switchgrass Conference September 2013 Malcolm, I agree with you. Most of the CRP land I have seen is in Central and West Texas, Eastern New Mexico, and in Western Oklahoma. The great majority was previously farmed, and before that was mixed grass and short grass prairie. Some of it has made some recovery toward being prairie again. Wildlife does use some of the land, including white tailed and mule deer, pronghorn, and large numbers of small and medium sized mammals. Most importantly, some of it is used by Lesser Prairie Chickens, particularly that that was not farmed, though it may have been grazed in the past. Some of this land is being returned to agriculture, though it failed at that before. Switch grass is not suited to the mixed and short grass prairie region, as it needs more water than is generally available. Most of the land suited to irrigation is currently under irrigation, and is planted to corn, cotton, grain sorghum, alfafa, other hay crops, or is in pasture. Those are the fields that might be profitably planted to switch grass, but will the result be more fuel, or more fuel spent? There is switch grass in those areas, but it is confined to riparian zones, some of them narrow canyons unsuited to cropping. We have been down this road before, with miracle crops of other sorts. Cropping takes water, and there is less and less of it available as we spend more and more fossil fuel to pump it out of deep aquifers. Some of the farmers moving to switch grass are being mislead by those promoting it, being made to believe it is a dry land crop. It is not. David McNeely ---- malcolm McCallum <[email protected]> wrote: > CRP is not CR^P, it has a lot of value as wildlife habitat and for > erosion control, particularly of value for the Gulf. However, just > like all programs there are aspects that need revision to make the > program more effective. Why pay someone to lay 1 A of erodible land > fallow when in all probability that land would never be farmed anyway? > Also, anyone with a basic understanding of island biogeography knows > that it is better to have 1 100 A field instead of 100 1 A fields. > I'ld like to see the program refined to improve large parcel > participation and only allow small parcel participation if they are > all connected. > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Wayne Tyson <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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" > > <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> > >>> To: <[email protected]> > >>> 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 <[email protected]> > >>> 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 <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> > >>>>> To: <[email protected]> > >>>>> 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 [email protected] or [email protected]. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> ----- > >>>>> 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 > > > > > > > > -- > 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. -- David McNeely ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3204/6008 - Release Date: 07/21/13
