Kel and All:
Yes, I would like to see the discussion take place here too, but there has
been one going on for some time at a...@lists.plantconservation.org You
might want to post there too. I should warn you, however, that many of the
weed people are likely to take you question as heresy--I was almost tarred
and feathered at a CalIPC conference a few years ago for raising the issue
of setting priorities and questioning the wisdom and necessity of herbicide
spraying in so many cases.
Frankly, m'dear, I don't think Nature gives a damn. All this invasive stuff
is because those of us left over after the dawn of that curse,
"civilization," care about cleaning up after ourselves. Sure, there are
fanatics among us, but I'd rather have, say, 3.5 billion or so of them than
those bent on trashing the earth.
In large part (with some significant exceptions, magnified, for example, in
the case of island biology such as much of Hawaii and Guam, where alien
species introduced by "civilization" [e.g., Homo sapiens and the brown tree
snake have wiped out lots of indigenous species], "we" probably can, and
almost certainly will have to, live with the aliens and their consequences
to some degree.
Not all aliens are actually "invasive" (to the extent of wiping out
indigenous species) by themselves, without help, for example, from other
domestic plants and animals (e.g., wheat in the Great Plains, Mediterranean
weeds in Southern California), and once the "helper" effects are withdrawn,
the alien stands are re-colonized by indigenous species.
In cases where the invader is indigenous to a similar ecosystem, it may
swamp indigenous systems and to a large extent even replace them, as in
kudzu and Tamarix spp.. (See the current discussion on APWG.)
A lot of this "invasive" stuff is related to agriculture, and is infested
with various mythologies that drive the money factor. Many indigenous
species are listed as "noxious weeds," for example, by agricultural
authorities. I don't think ecologists should be at war with
agriculturalists, horticulturalists, foresters, range managers, and the
like, but the distinction between the philosophy of cultivation and
acceptance of "Nature's bounty" as it is should be made as a simple fact. I
hasten to add, however, that I would have to give up the degree of comfort I
enjoy and probably die of my next illness were it not for "civilization."
But that old straw-man fallacy is not the issue; the issue is HOW MUCH
degradation of ecosystems for WHAT ACTUAL BENEFIT will lead the future of
civilization toward survival with minimal misery and maximum happiness for
all. "Population" is the ultimate "answer" (retort, actually), but that
discussion distract us from other options that we continue to ignore.
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelly Stettner" <blackriverclea...@yahoo.com>
To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Biological control of invasive species by import of
alien species Re: [APWG] NEWS: Invasive Saltcedar Triggers Lively Debate
ECOLOGgers all;
I continue to be fascinated by the theory of invasion biology. Why is it
"bad" when a fly fisherman spreads a microscopic cell of algae to a new
water body, but it's apparently "okay" if a migrating duck spreads it? Why
are we so focused on the human impact of species introductions, as though we
are the only means organisms have of relocating? I honestly want to talk
about this. I think that people's individual perspectives are what drives
debates such as this. Some people believe that human activity is bad, no
matter what; yet this seems to be short-sighted and narrow-minded. There
seem to be lots of vectors for species movement, from storms to migrating
creatures.
Also, species adapt and change ~ a population of soapberry bugs, for
instance, adapted its mouthparts over the course of about 40 years to begin
eating the leaves on an introduced goldenrain tree in Florida. Who is to say
that an introduced species won't develop into an important food source for
another species that either it adapts to or that adapts to it?
Taken on a case-by-case basis, are there benefits to the invasive species in
question? Are we focusing on negative effects (or, worse, on PRESUMED
negative effects) because they impact things we humans value?
I get excited by invasion biology theory, because, for me, it raises more
questions than it answers, and many of the questions are about perspective
and values, in addition to those about biological interactions. There is
still so much to observe about invasion biology theory, so much yet to
learn!
Respectfully,
Kelly Stettner
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:41:54 -0700
From: Wayne Tyson <landr...@cox.net>
Subject: Fw: Biological control of invasive species by import of alien
species Re: [APWG] NEWS: Invasive Saltcedar Triggers Lively Debate
Ecolog:
Any comments?
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Tyson" <landr...@cox.net>
To: <a...@lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 10:41 PM
Subject: Biological control of invasive species by import of alien species
Re: [APWG] NEWS: Invasive Saltcedar Triggers Lively Debate
APWG:
Much as I would like to see the truly invasive "saltcedars" sent back
where they came from, we're probably stuck with them--they're just too
seedy.
Much as I would like to see a savior, even in the form of a bug, the
true-believers ("Now land managers are adding new biological control
agents to their arsenal by releasing saltcedar leaf beetles (Diorhabda
elongata) imported from China and Greece. The small insects strip
saltcedar of its leaves, while ignoring native vegetation."
http://www.wssa.net/WSSA/PressRoom/WSSA_SaltCedar.htm ) in insect-messiahs
are at it again. These little buggers may "ignore" native vegetation for a
while, have they been DEMONSTRATED in a peer-reviewed manner with
replicated experiments to have left every species indigenous to the
Western Hemisphere to continue to do so? I await the evidence, and I
should not be expected to chase it down from a press-release.
A more serious question remains to be answered--do we know, to a
"scientific certainty," that such imported populations cannot and will not
evolve to survive on other prey?
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Olivia Kwong" <pl...@plantconservation.org>
To: <a...@lists.plantconservation.org>
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 7:27 AM
Subject: [APWG] NEWS: Invasive Saltcedar Triggers Lively Debate
http://www.wssa.net/WSSA/PressRoom/WSSA_SaltCedar.htm
Invasive Saltcedar Triggers Lively Debats Among Weed Scientists and Land
Managers
Saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) is an invasive plant that is crowding out native
vegetation and dominating the shorelines of southwestern rivers and
streams. But put a room full of weed scientists and land managers
together
to discuss how to tame the aggressive plant and you'll trigger a lively
debate about how -- or even whether -- it should be controlled.
See the link above for the full text of the press release.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.69/2328 - Release Date: 08/26/09
12:16:00
