About early restoration strategies, grade A prairies, and fire.
Linda Masters was looking through old files and found the documents that inspired Tidbit 1 and 3.
Tidbit 1
This drawing by Bobby Sutton (or actually, a xerox from his notebook) captures some features of the early work of what was then called the
North Branch Prairie Project. First, we were authorized to girdle trees in degraded savannas whenever they were too thick for savanna seed to grow underneath. Second, when we broadcast seed, we always raked it into the soil (as we'd been told to do, but which in time - by experiment - we learned wasn't needed with fall planting). Third, the bag of bagels reminds us that bagels were long our only workday snack, and the site steward bought them, on the way, that morning.
Tidbit 2
The following three photos of the best Grade A section of Somme Prairie remind us of what we faced in our work to recover this "very high quality" prairie:
Most of it was degraded. Dense dogwood brush had blotted out large areas. Note above that fire had killed back the edge of this dogwood clump. Both fire and cutting were needed.
The "two acres" of Grade A actually consisted of four small openings in the brush, divided from each other by the shade of dense trees and shrubs.
But the highest quality parts of the middle inspired us to work and invent as hard as we could. This beautiful rare nature deserved to survive.
Tidbit 3
Controlled burns were little understood by the outside world at that time. Getting approval to burn was not easy. But the system was developing.
We needed to coordinate with the State, the County, and local fire departments. The burning permit from Cook County was especially quaint. Under "Method of Extinguishment" someone had typed "fire extinguisher."
Although we had Forest-Preserve-wide approval for these burn, we were also asked to collaborate with the local staff. Before Cook County Superintendent of Conservation
Roland Eisenbeis had started depending on us, the local Maintenance Superint
endents had been the staff that took care of land outside of the Nature Centers. But mostly they mowed lawns and emptied garbage cans. They had no scientific staff. And even the Conservation Department had few staff experienced with burns. So once the Nature Preserves Commission hired me, the Forest Preserve staff decided to let me take on the work and responsibility for Nature Preserve burns. Not that there weren't bumps in the road. There were many.
This is the record of my conversation with the Superintendent of Maintenance of the Calumet region one beautiful morning.
Me: I just wanted to let you know we’d be burning Zanders Woods Nature Preserve this morning.”
Him: No, you can’t do that. It’s too windy.
Me: Oh, I’m sorry, I wasn’t asking you to authorize it. That’s all been taken care of though the Superintendent of Conservation.
Him: Yeah, but you can’t burn today.
Me: Yes, I want to be clear that you don’t have to worry about trouble. I’m just notifying you. The crew is all here and finishing up the firebreaks. This is crucial, as you know, for the health of the Nature Preserve.
Him: It’s still no.
Me: Yes, I’ll be sure to tell the Superintendent that you have no responsibility for it. We’ll keep it very safe and make sure not to cause any extra work for you.
Him: Well, I guess we’ll just have to play it by the ears.
Do I come across as disrespectful or "difficult" in this? I certainly wouldn't talk with staff like that today. But back then, changes were needed, and when there had been conflict between Maintenance and Conservation, normally it was the powerful patronage haven of Maintenance that won out. I was being supported to facilitate change as best I could.
And so, on this day, about two hundred acres of endangered-species-covered ground had its first burn in years (perhaps since the Potawatomi burned it?). What the Forest Preserve staff called Zanders Woods was called Thornton Lansing Road Nature Preserve by the Commission, and both agencies had responsibility for it. Bit by bit the Maintenance folks increasingly understood that the Conservation superintendent needed to be listened to about Nature Preserves. And as the burns proved safe, the prairie volunteers and the Maintenance supervisors actually got to like each other. Expert, hard-working, and dedicated volunteers deserve respect, and often get it.
3 comments:
The remnants appear to have enough soil moisture to support invasion, so why do you think they were able to delay woody encroachment? Possibilities include shading of invasive seedlings, native plants tying up water & nutrients, allelopathy and/or soil microbiome effects. It’s not clear to me if all those factors plus others add up to create resistance or if one or two dominate.
Don, it's my impression that, in the absence of fire, all prairies will be shaded out and destroyed by brush. So why do some resist longer? I would guess that all the factors you list play a part. A very high quality, original ecosystem uses up most resources, so it's difficult for any new plant to establish. When I've checked into the history of surviving remnants, I've often found hints. One landowner said he had regularly burned the site but couldn't explain why: he just thought it was right. Another said that the surviving prairie area was less grazed than the others because the cows needed to cross a road or stream to get to it, which was extra work for the farmer, so he rarely brought the cows there.
Good point that remnants can survive due to decreased abuse in addition to having inherent resistance. Now that you mention it, I know of similar examples. One remnant was far enough from the barn to be lightly grazed. Another was fenced off from cows, perhaps due to the steep slopes. Another was too dry to have decent forage. Middlefork Savanna was burned by accidental fires from the railroad. Cemetery prairies were mowed or burned.
Post a Comment