next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects
On 5/6/2018 11:35 AM, David wrote:
> The prejudice against "invasives" is spread if not created by
> organizations; "Send money and we may be able to overcome this crisis."
* I wouldn't want to comment on organizations, which seem to convert
every wrinkle of the daily news to "Send money and we may be able to
overcome this crisis," but there's more to it than that.
On the [Aliens-L] list there was a recent thread on "Do non-native
species contribute to biodiversity?" And I reposted my long-standing
definition of an invasive species as one that decreases the diversity of
a site which it colonizes - http://www.pinicola.ca/limvade.htm
A naturalized species is an addition to measured diversity (whatever
judgement one may make about native/alien value), but an invasive
species drives other species out and decreases the biodiversity at the
site. So many prevalent definitions of invasiveness are so premised on
economic harm or human inconvenience that they're scientifically
meaningless.
The value of native species to thoughtful people is their history as
natives and how they got to their native ranges and evolved to live
together. If you're living in Nova Scotia you're living in communities
haphazardly built up in the irregularities of colonization as sea levels
and isostatic rebound interacted after deglaciation, just as those of us
who live in eastern Ontario live in the outwash of the Champlain Sea,
among the hybrid swarms of Atlantic and Mississipian colonists who met
each other here.
In the case of Glossy Buckthorn, here's a prophesy that has come true:
Catling, Paul M., and Z. Sue Porebski. 1994. The history of invasion and
current status of Glossy Buckthorn, Rhamnus frangula, in southern
Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 108(3): 305-310.
In southern Ontario Glossy Buckthorn, Rhamnus frangula, became
established in three urban centres, London, Ottawa and Guelph, at the
turn of the century. By 1930, it had still only been found in these
three urban centres, and by 1950 it had not extended beyond 40 km from
any of them. By 1970, it had spread to sites up to 150 km distant but
still appeared to have a sparse and largely urban distribution in the
southern part of the province. Currently Rhamnus frangula occurs
throughout much of southern Ontario and is locally common. In some sites
it comprises more than 90% of the green biomass over areas of several
acres and it has become a major component of regionally and provincially
significant plant communities. Berries of Rhamnus frangula are eaten by
American Robins, Bohemian Waxwings, Cedar Waxwings, Rose- breasted
Grosbeaks and Starlings. The shrub probably has a number of different
avian and mammalian dispersal agents. Over the next 10-20 years, it is
expected that R. frangula will become abundant and dominant in open and
semi-open wetlands over most of the southern part of the province. While
small scale management technology is available, the problem is one that
requires a consideration of management on a large scale.
It not only takes over florally rich wetlands, but also the interior of
woods, shading out regeneration after thinning, and contributing to the
decline of insects by chemically preserving the oval outlines of its
leaves intact until they fall, when they contribute alleloltoxins to the
soil... Also both Buckthorns are considered inedible by Beavers.
If organizations had any gumption, they'd be growing both European
Buckthorns in greenhouses, encouraging the 'natural enemies' that make
our native Buckthorns SAR to switch to the invaders, but until then we
can just take the place of herbivores by whacking the Rhamnus down and
burning them for fuel. Buckthorn-whacking would be a much more useful
national sport than hockey - and with a much smaller carbon footprint,
since in the invaded areas it can be done in everybody's back yard.
fred (Bishops Mills' leading Buckthorn-whacker)
------------------------------------------------------------
> It helps to have a good crap detector when reading anything and an open
> mind when looking. There may be exceptions but typically "invasive"
> plants exploit underutilized real estate. And believe it or not, some
> try to eradicate an invasive by pulling it out thereby creating
> underutilized real estate on which it or other "invasives" will be able
> to flourish.
> Even native plants may take advantage of bare soil and light. In the
> early 80s a graveled logging road with ditches was built near my woodlot
> and a common but seldom flowering woodland plant, Petasites palmatus
> with flowers soon became abundant along part of the ditch. It has a
> pleasant odor and insects like it so I planted some in the Kentville
> garden. And soon removed every trace from the garden because it started
> to spread like a bad weed.
> Japanese Knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) is another victim of
> misinformation and the perfect weed-free lawn mentality which assigns
> total control of all living things to the lawn manager. Bees, (including
> Honey Bees) and other insects are often abundant on these late flowering
> plants. And they rarely establish new colonies except when transplanted
> by earth moving equipment. And patches may remain the same size for many
> decades if they come up against established plant cover. Along flood
> prone brooks they can slow soil erosion.
> I never appreciated how rapidly secondary succession can change
> herbaceous plant cover until I visited the same woodlots over a period
> of decades (78 & 37 yrs). To paraphrase a glib saying; the only constant
> is change.
> And the very small house lot is similar. Plants come and go; the
> number of species observed has increased over time but as new ones
> appear some of the old die out. Enough gossip.
> Yt, DW, Kentville
>
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "David&Jane Schlosberg" <dschlosb-g@ns.sympatico.ca
> <mailto:dschlosb-g@ns.sympatico.ca>>
> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
> Sent: 5/5/2018 6:30:33 PM
> Subject: RE: Glossy Buckthorn was :Re[4]: [NatureNS] Dog-strangling vine
> in Nova Scotia
>
>> David, your posts are always interesting. I consulted Papa Google,
>> and it seems the glossy buckthorn is damned by a great many
>> people—Nature Conservancy, Tree Canada, et al. Could it be that this
>> plant is damaging to the ecosystem in climates like Ontario, but not
>> such a problem in Nova Scotia? Your comments have helped me
>> appreciate the complexity of ecology. It’s worse than middle eastern
>> politics. 😉
>>
>>
>>
>> Jane Schlosberg
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
>> <mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca> <naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca
>> <mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>> *On Behalf Of *David
>> *Sent:* May 5, 2018 5:09 PM
>> *To:* naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
>> *Subject:* Glossy Buckthorn was :Re[4]: [NatureNS] Dog-strangling vine
>> in Nova Scotia
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Nick & All,
>>
>> Glossy Buckthorn IMHO is a positive for thinned woodland; thinned
>> by windfall, tree death or cutting. Provided seeds are present it
>> becomes established and grows rapidly and thus captures many mobile
>> nutrients which might otherwise be lost. It discourages the gross
>> overstocking by Ash which otherwise become a thicket of runts.
>> Buckthorn, unless held up by other shrubs typically grow lanky, flop
>> over and die. The odd one survives the floppy stage and generates a
>> nurse canopy for real trees which typically take longer to get
>> established. My once Buckthorn thickets are now largely Buckthorn
>> fragments.
>>
>> By arrangement I would be delighted to walk anyone interested
>> through some of the patches which remain./ /It spreads rapidly because
>> [gasp] birds mob these shrubs in season. But it does not "invade"
>> small openings in the canopy so is absent or very sparse in most of my
>> woodlot.
>>
>>
>>
>> Frankly I think the notion that it is undesirable is founded upon
>> prejudice and nothing else.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yt, DW, Kentville
>>
>>
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>>
>> From: "Nick Hill" <fernhillns@gmail.com <mailto:fernhillns@gmail.com>>
>>
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
>>
>> Sent: 5/5/2018 4:37:04 PM
>>
>> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [NatureNS] Dog-strangling vine in Nova Scotia
>>
>>
>>
>> Calm...i lived in southeast Kentucky
>>
>> We had kudzu vine that swallowed abandoned houses...crossex roads
>> via phone lines
>>
>> Scary but before we call Jesus and Mary we notice it did not enter
>> intact woodland and was restricted to about 30m from the roaside.
>>
>> We do have a couple of plants that are 9f concern because they do
>> get into fairly intact ecosystems. I'd put glossy buckthorn at the
>> top of the list and then in terms of potential for harm given
>> reports from elsewhere, I'd be concerned about the spread of
>> garlic mustard.
>>
>>
>>
>> Glossy? It's naturalized now and is part of swamps and early
>> forest succession. It's not the end of the world...its green it's
>> a laxative for birds and it fits into a red maple alder tudspuck
>> sedge swamp with no apparent diversity or community function effects.
>>
>>
>>
>> Fight clearcutting and our inability to get any marine protected
>> areas for the eastern shore because we don't want any impingement
>> on rockweed harvest or oil and gas development.
>>
>>
>>
>> Great name!
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 5, 2018, 1:21 PM David, <dwebster@glinx.com
>> <mailto:dwebster@glinx.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dave P., Bev and all.
>> What an unfortunate name to be saddled with. Just this
>> side of
>> 'wanted dead or alive'. I wish to add to Bev's comments about the
>> abundance of 'invasives'.
>> As a general rule of thumb animals and plants eventually
>> generate
>> conditions which threaten their well being/survival. And those
>> which
>> prevail may do so by "invading" fresh territory which is not
>> loaded with
>> diseases or parasites.
>> Consequently, if something is threatened the best recovery
>> remedy may
>> be to move a starter kit of it elsewhere. Before lighting long
>> distance
>> flame throwers think about this in general terms. What is the
>> better
>> choice 1) act to preserve a flora and fauna which is free of
>> "invasive"
>> species or 2) act to enable survival of species which may be
>> endangered
>> ?
>> Yt, DW. Kentville
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> From: "Bev Wigney" <bkwigney@gmail.com
>> <mailto:bkwigney@gmail.com>>
>> To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca <mailto:naturens@chebucto.ns.ca>
>> Sent: 5/5/2018 9:35:44 AM
>> Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Dog-strangling vine in Nova Scotia
>>
>> >Bad news if Dog-strangling vine (DSV) is here as it is quite a scourge
>> >in eastern Ontario. Everyone struggles to keep it out of their gardens
>> >and it grows rampant on vacant properties or even in woodlands. I was
>> >in Ontario all last summer and went for walks in several places around
>> >Ottawa and found it growing profusely everywhere. Fred Schueler may
>> >comment on the prevalence there and perhaps here as well. Another up
>> >and comer I saw there spreading out from what might have been its
>> >Ground Zero in an abandoned industrial park was Tartarian Maple.
>> >*sigh*
>> >
>> >As for invasive plants, I haven't found that there is much concern
>> >over them here in NS although maybe there is a department that records
>> >such things. I did try to find out about this a few years ago after
>> >taking note of an incredible acreage which was just covered with a
>> >non-native vine -- Wisteria sinensis. I made mention of it here on
>> >NatureNS at the time (summer 2013). It grows rampantly all over the
>> >woods at this property, but also along the roadside and actually up
>> >over the powerlines - smothering everything in its path. I've seen it
>> >spreading out from there, but it seems that is not considered
>> >problematic. At the time, I did some readng up on it and discovered
>> >that just about everywhere, it is considered a serious invasive.
>> >Reminds me of the Japanese Knotweed around here -- growing along Route
>> >201 and in vacant land in Annapolis Royal. When I first moved here, a
>> >neighbour offered to give me some roots of his "bamboo". He used to
>> >chop it down and toss it into a ravine on his own property and now
>> >it's growing down there. I see a lot of it around Bridgetown next to
>> >the river too. It seems to be everywhere. However, I don't think
>> >there is much concern. The truth is, here around Annapolis Royal, if
>> >all of the particularly invasive, non-native plants (multiflora roses,
>> >goutweed, tansy, knotweed, phragmites, wisteria, etc..) ever
>> >disappeared overnight, their absence would leave something of a
>> >wasteland. I suspect European and Asiatic plants probably outnumber
>> >natives by about 2 to 1. I've found that to be the case with snails
>> >and slugs and to some extent with insects as well, by the way. No
>> >doubt, many of these plants came with the settlers and seem to have
>> >done quite well over the centuries. Definitely has an impact on the
>> >ecology of the area -- less native plant hosts for our native insects
>> >-- and so on.
>> >
>> >Bev Wigney
>> >Round Hill
>> >
>> >On 5/5/18, David Patriquin <David.Patriquin@dal.ca <mailto:David.Patriquin@dal.ca>> wrote:
>> >>Some discussion about Dog-strangling vine (Cynanchum rossicum &
>> >>Cynanchum
>> >>louiseae) came up in a discussion forum on Woods and Waters Nova
>> >>Scotia; I
>> >>had not heard of it before in NS and cannot find it in any lists of
>> >>invasive
>> >>plants for NS.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>From the discussion forum, from a resident in the Port George area:
>> >>
>> >>"...can see out my window where it starts . my next door neighbours
>> >>bush is
>> >>blanketed . from the tops of his mature spruce to the ground....the
>> >>vines
>> >>next door , that’s where it starts , then it went through our
>> >>blackberry
>> >>field and mostly killed it . now it’s in our woods
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>So I am wondering how common it is now in NS - I would appreciate any
>> >>comments, observations from NatureNS folks
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Another question - is there a group or gov agency in NS that is
>> >>actively
>> >>keeping track of invasive plants?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>At http://www.invasivespeciescentre.ca/ its distribution is cited
>> as "
>> >>in
>> >>parts of Ontario, southern Quebec and several American states"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Short description
>> >>
>> >>Dog-strangling vine is found in parts of Ontario, southern Quebec and
>> >>several American states. This plant grows aggressively by wrapping
>> >>itself
>> >>around tress and other plants, and can grow up to two metres high.
>> >>This
>> >>forms dense stands that overwhelm and crowd out native plants and
>> >>young
>> >>trees, preventing forest regeneration. The plant produces bean-shaped
>> >>seed
>> >>pods for to seven centimetres long and pink to dark purple star-shaped
>> >>flowers
>> >>
>>
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Frederick W. Schueler & Aleta Karstad
Fragile Inheritance Natural History
Mudpuppy Night in Oxford Mills - http://pinicola.ca/mudpup1.htm
'Daily' Paintings - http://karstaddailypaintings.blogspot.com/
4 St-Lawrence Street Bishops Mills, RR#2 Oxford Station, Ontario K0G 1T0
on the Smiths Falls Limestone Plain 44.87156° N 75.70095° W
(613)258-3107 <bckcdb at istar.ca> http://pinicola.ca/
------------------------------------------------------------
"Feasting on Conolophus to the conclusion of consanguinity"
-
http://www.lulu.com/shop/frederick-w-schueler/feasting-on-conolophus-to-the-conclusion-of-consanguinity-a-collection-of-darwinian-verses/paperback/product-23517445.html
------------------------------------------------------------
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects