Friday, June 15, 2012

I was having a conversation with the director of the Audubon Society, Chicago region, and we were just talking about restoration in general.

An interesting note about my prairie restoration site is that audubon is quite involved.  In fact, our seed mix is geared towards grassland birds who don't like tall grasses.  That means we have no big bluestem out there!  It's not the end of the world, but I do miss the great qualities that come with big blue.  The matrix these grasses create out in the prairie helps suppress invasives.  The question then becomes, is this an artificial prairie (not self-sustaining)?

I tell the director that what we do as restorationalists is take what farmers want to do, and we do the opposite.  In case you didn't know, farming is a cash cow........Thus there is a ton of information on the subject.

Sometimes the info goes both ways.  Both the farmer and restorationalist want to combat invasive species to protect their crops/natives (teasel, thistle, purple loosestrife, garlic mustard).  Other times, farmers will want to plant an aggressive invasive for forage for their cattle to feed on (Birdsfoot trefoil, white sweet clover, fescue, brome).  Aaaand restorationalists what nothing to do with these forage crops.

Farmers like them so much because they're aggressive and self sustaining.  Once the forage seed is established, the rancher will only have to worry about over grazing and certain diseases.  The early years in a prairie, restoration managers even have to watch out for their own natives, goldenrod especially, to make sure they don't crowd out other higher quality plants.

That brings up another point.  Conservation value (C-value) determines how important (valuable) a plant is.  The highest a C-value can get is 10.  A C-10 plant will be very rare, and will only grow within a high quality, well established prairie.  This is how you determine how healthy a prairie is.  These C-value plants act as indicator species.

Although there isn't a lot of material on how to get rid of these money making aggressive invasives, there are tons of articles for how to manage them to thrive.  When an article says, "Do not mow at a certain time to allow the plant to restore its energy back to its roots for the winter," you bet your ass we're going to mow during that time!

Sunday, June 3, 2012

Graze/Burn/Mow quick thoughts


I just finished reading a couple articles.  You ever get when you read these scientific articles that more often then not they’ll just contradict another article and leave you with no clear solution??  It’s like everyone’s always just thinking out loud.  
Obviously I kid, but it does get old.  How about instead of doing small sample sizes, you do large ones, and instead of short term studies, you make them all long term!!!  Go out and get that money!
Ok…
The first article was about installing prairie seed on an old grazing field that will continue to be grazed.  
Things I took away from this:
- When grazing is implemented, drill seeding came out better than broadcast seeding. 
- if the object of a land manager is truly to get the land back to what it used to be, grazing is one of the methods needed on a prairie restoration (Bison).  
The second article spoke about how there was little to no effect of mowing or burning on a prairie within the soil.  They did say that this may be due to a short sample size.

- Out of PH, water content and organic matter within the soil, moisture was the most significant change.  Reasoning behind this is a simple one.  With the litter burned off, sunlight directly hits the soil, which increases evaporation.  The top layer of the soil profile is less dry than the lower. 

Photos!

 Dickcissel
 King Bird and Mallards
 Bobolink
Plains Garter