Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Invasive species are...nice?

Expand Messages
  • Peter Bernhardt
    The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars. The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make
    Message 1 of 9 , May 20 6:04 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.


      Peter
    • Stoner, Kimberly
      This discussion has been going on for years in the permaculture world. http://permaculturenews.org/2013/11/12/weeds-wild-nature-permaculture-perspective/ Kim
      Message 2 of 9 , May 20 6:33 AM
      • 0 Attachment

        This discussion has been going on for years in the permaculture world.

        http://permaculturenews.org/2013/11/12/weeds-wild-nature-permaculture-perspective/

         

        Kim

         

        From: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com [mailto:beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com]
        Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 9:04 AM
        To: Bee United
        Subject: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

         

         

        The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.

         

         

        Peter

      • Alicia Basilio
        Hi, The habitat are not all equal.  Invasive species have been used for habitat restoration. Where nothing is growing, coverage and biomass are valuable. 
        Message 3 of 9 , May 20 6:53 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi, "The habitat" are not all equal. 
          Invasive species have been used for habitat restoration. Where nothing is growing, coverage and biomass are valuable. 
          But, to my knowledge, the dynamics of invasive species make good competitors against native species in more stable habitats. Bumbus terrestris, or Vespula germanica for example, seem to have some desfavorable impact on native bees in Patagonia.
          Alicia

          De: "Peter Bernhardt bernhap2@... [beemonitoring]" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
          Para: Bee United <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
          Enviado: martes, 20 de mayo de 2014 10:04
          Asunto: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

           
          The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.


          Peter


        • Leo Shapiro
          I think, as often happens in biology, researchers asking reasonable questions about the actual impacts of non-native species (i.e., species moved long
          Message 4 of 9 , May 20 7:10 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            I think, as often happens in biology, researchers asking reasonable questions about the actual impacts of non-native species (i.e., species moved long distances in recent times as a result of human activity) have sometimes packaged their findings and views as a radical challenge to prevailing (sometimes strawman) views because academia rewards this--and the popular press oversimplifies and rewards even further! Of course, the popular press oversimplifies "prevailing views" as well (e.g., confusing "non-native" with "invasive" ).

            The attached PDF from Conservation biology (and references cited therein) give a flavor of this.

            Leo
          • Peter Bernhardt
            Dear Alicia: Funny you should mention this. According to a geneticists and entomologists, the introduction of alien bumblebees to Argentina introduced viruses
            Message 5 of 9 , May 20 8:27 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Alicia:

              Funny you should mention this.  According to a geneticists and entomologists, the introduction of alien bumblebees to Argentina introduced viruses that wiped out native species of Bombus.  The findings were presented at Washington U. a year ago in a symposium honoring the retirement of Allan Templeton.  

              The idea, that it's OK to introduce alien species to check erosion, and other things, comes back to bite conservationists in the ass over and over.  Here's an embarrassing case in point.  The crown vetch of Eurasia (Securigera varia) was so popular as an erosion stopper in Pennsylvania it was voted as the state conservation flower in 1982.  Now check up this species on the web and see how illegal it is to import and grow it in most states.  Isn't it interesting how people are quick to condemn the introduction of animals (starlings, cane toads, gypsy moths etc.) but turn blind eyes to plants.  How could a plant do any damage to the environment?  Plans are so... passive.

              And Leo, it's naughty to blame academics for negative research on introduced species.  The fact remains that state and federal scientists/bureaucrats (not those employed by any university) have ultimately made the biggest and most expensive decisions as to what to bring in then (as years pass) what to extirpate (without much success).  The biggest sick joke right now is a pending decision in New York to shoot every mute swan (Eurasian species) because they supposedly compete with native ducks and geese for limited food.  It could become illegal to feed a swan in a public park (check the New York TImes).

              Peter   


              On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Alicia Basilio <apis1b@...> wrote:
              Hi, "The habitat" are not all equal. 
              Invasive species have been used for habitat restoration. Where nothing is growing, coverage and biomass are valuable. 
              But, to my knowledge, the dynamics of invasive species make good competitors against native species in more stable habitats. Bumbus terrestris, or Vespula germanica for example, seem to have some desfavorable impact on native bees in Patagonia.
              Alicia

              De: "Peter Bernhardt bernhap2@... [beemonitoring]" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
              Para: Bee United <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
              Enviado: martes, 20 de mayo de 2014 10:04
              Asunto: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

               
              The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.


              Peter



            • Weber, Don
              Peter, You are right that a number of very misguided introductions have been made by governmental entities. That could go back to Spanish conquistadores
              Message 6 of 9 , May 20 8:46 AM
              • 0 Attachment

                Peter,

                You are right that a number of very misguided introductions have been made by governmental entities.    That could go back to Spanish conquistadores introducing human disease to the New World.

                And, you are also correct in saying that invasive plants, though viewed by many as passive, can be very damaging in the long run.

                Taking the example of the mute swan though, this species was not introduced by either academics or government personnel, and is not a plant, but is very damaging to wetland ecosystems, so your dismissing it as a problem hard for me to understand. 

                Please, let’s steer clear of that ecological intellectual disease which is the urge to over-generalize!  There are animals and plants and fungi and other organisms which when introduced to new continents or regions are very damaging, and this introduction process has been abetted by goverments and other institutions including universities, private companies, and individuals.

                Don Weber

                 

                From: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com [mailto:beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com]
                Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:27 AM
                To: Alicia Basilio
                Cc: Bee United
                Subject: Re: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                 

                 

                Dear Alicia:

                 

                Funny you should mention this.  According to a geneticists and entomologists, the introduction of alien bumblebees to Argentina introduced viruses that wiped out native species of Bombus.  The findings were presented at Washington U. a year ago in a symposium honoring the retirement of Allan Templeton.  

                 

                The idea, that it's OK to introduce alien species to check erosion, and other things, comes back to bite conservationists in the ass over and over.  Here's an embarrassing case in point.  The crown vetch of Eurasia (Securigera varia) was so popular as an erosion stopper in Pennsylvania it was voted as the state conservation flower in 1982.  Now check up this species on the web and see how illegal it is to import and grow it in most states.  Isn't it interesting how people are quick to condemn the introduction of animals (starlings, cane toads, gypsy moths etc.) but turn blind eyes to plants.  How could a plant do any damage to the environment?  Plans are so... passive.

                 

                And Leo, it's naughty to blame academics for negative research on introduced species.  The fact remains that state and federal scientists/bureaucrats (not those employed by any university) have ultimately made the biggest and most expensive decisions as to what to bring in then (as years pass) what to extirpate (without much success).  The biggest sick joke right now is a pending decision in New York to shoot every mute swan (Eurasian species) because they supposedly compete with native ducks and geese for limited food.  It could become illegal to feed a swan in a public park (check the New York TImes).

                 

                Peter   

                 

                On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Alicia Basilio <apis1b@...> wrote:

                Hi, "The habitat" are not all equal. 

                Invasive species have been used for habitat restoration. Where nothing is growing, coverage and biomass are valuable. 

                But, to my knowledge, the dynamics of invasive species make good competitors against native species in more stable habitats. Bumbus terrestris, or Vespula germanica for example, seem to have some desfavorable impact on native bees in Patagonia.

                Alicia


                De: "Peter Bernhardt bernhap2@... [beemonitoring]" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                Para: Bee United <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                Enviado: martes, 20 de mayo de 2014 10:04
                Asunto: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                 

                 

                The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.

                 

                 

                Peter

                 

                 





                This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.
              • Peter Bernhardt
                Dear Don: You have not been reading my messages about monarch butterflies and butterfly pollination in general, have you? I ve been trying to make it a point
                Message 7 of 9 , May 20 9:22 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dear Don:

                  You have not been reading my messages about monarch butterflies and butterfly pollination in general, have you?  I've been trying to make it a point NOT to over generalize and NOT base conservation policies and budgets on the basis of a sheer lack of research. Yes, lots of plants, animals and microbes have been introduced to North America without a single government employee involved but those government scientists and career bureaucrats seem to be in the most prominent positions these days regarding what we should do, or not do, about proliferating non-natives. Have you ever wondered why we are supposed to hate Euarasian, purple loosestrife?  It can outgrow cattail and, therefore, supposedly fails to provide the cover, nesting sites and nourishment for water fowl.  The duck hunters lobby hates it so Fisheries and Wildlife hate it as well. 

                  That's why I'm less serious about the mute swan question.  The study that leads to the new "wipe 'em out" edict has been criticized for a lack of dependable data and I'm not going to upset myself until I see that hard data for myself.  Until then. I will offer these birds bread crusts (in city parks) and not insist that local ballet companies put on performances of "Canada Goose Lake." Who wants to hear a ballet score dominated by hissing instruments anyway, or look at sets overly decorated with greenish droppings?  

                  Meanwhile, I am hoping that a new version of "The Nutcracker" will feature the "Waltz of the Kudzu" complete with male dancers dressed in convict orange choreographed to see them spraying and uprooting corps de ballets dressed in green tutus with red-purple tiaras.  Seriously, using convict labor to clear highways of this, and other invasive species is an old practice that may have some merit according to older, wiser plant ecologists (don't ask me, I'm older but not wiser).  The Bernhardt/Meier and Allison Miller labs are doing serious research on the reproductive biology of this liane and when we release that research it may also have an awful lot to say about the misguided introduction of insects, as well.  

                  Peter    


                  On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Weber, Don <Don.Weber@...> wrote:

                  Peter,

                  You are right that a number of very misguided introductions have been made by governmental entities.    That could go back to Spanish conquistadores introducing human disease to the New World.

                  And, you are also correct in saying that invasive plants, though viewed by many as passive, can be very damaging in the long run.

                  Taking the example of the mute swan though, this species was not introduced by either academics or government personnel, and is not a plant, but is very damaging to wetland ecosystems, so your dismissing it as a problem hard for me to understand. 

                  Please, let’s steer clear of that ecological intellectual disease which is the urge to over-generalize!  There are animals and plants and fungi and other organisms which when introduced to new continents or regions are very damaging, and this introduction process has been abetted by goverments and other institutions including universities, private companies, and individuals.

                  Don Weber

                   

                  From: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com [mailto:beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com]
                  Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:27 AM
                  To: Alicia Basilio
                  Cc: Bee United
                  Subject: Re: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                   

                   

                  Dear Alicia:

                   

                  Funny you should mention this.  According to a geneticists and entomologists, the introduction of alien bumblebees to Argentina introduced viruses that wiped out native species of Bombus.  The findings were presented at Washington U. a year ago in a symposium honoring the retirement of Allan Templeton.  

                   

                  The idea, that it's OK to introduce alien species to check erosion, and other things, comes back to bite conservationists in the ass over and over.  Here's an embarrassing case in point.  The crown vetch of Eurasia (Securigera varia) was so popular as an erosion stopper in Pennsylvania it was voted as the state conservation flower in 1982.  Now check up this species on the web and see how illegal it is to import and grow it in most states.  Isn't it interesting how people are quick to condemn the introduction of animals (starlings, cane toads, gypsy moths etc.) but turn blind eyes to plants.  How could a plant do any damage to the environment?  Plans are so... passive.

                   

                  And Leo, it's naughty to blame academics for negative research on introduced species.  The fact remains that state and federal scientists/bureaucrats (not those employed by any university) have ultimately made the biggest and most expensive decisions as to what to bring in then (as years pass) what to extirpate (without much success).  The biggest sick joke right now is a pending decision in New York to shoot every mute swan (Eurasian species) because they supposedly compete with native ducks and geese for limited food.  It could become illegal to feed a swan in a public park (check the New York TImes).

                   

                  Peter   

                   

                  On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Alicia Basilio <apis1b@...> wrote:

                  Hi, "The habitat" are not all equal. 

                  Invasive species have been used for habitat restoration. Where nothing is growing, coverage and biomass are valuable. 

                  But, to my knowledge, the dynamics of invasive species make good competitors against native species in more stable habitats. Bumbus terrestris, or Vespula germanica for example, seem to have some desfavorable impact on native bees in Patagonia.

                  Alicia


                  De: "Peter Bernhardt bernhap2@... [beemonitoring]" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                  Para: Bee United <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                  Enviado: martes, 20 de mayo de 2014 10:04
                  Asunto: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                   

                   

                  The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.

                   

                   

                  Peter

                   

                   





                  This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.

                • Alicia Basilio
                  I agree with Don. Who would agree to return to the Old World cattle, wheat, orange, yet they changed the face of America, (and in reverse, tomato, maize etc.).
                  Message 8 of 9 , May 20 9:31 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I agree with Don.
                    Who would agree to return to the Old World cattle, wheat, orange, yet they changed the face of America, (and in reverse, tomato, maize etc.). As Rappaport said, globalization is on the way, though we spend much time discussing whether it is good or bad. 
                    Many things have been naturalized, even though we try to avoid intruduccion of new species, at least on purpose.

                    Alicia



                    De: "Weber, Don" <Don.Weber@...>
                    Para: Peter Bernhardt <bernhap2@...>; Alicia Basilio <apis1b@...>; "beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                    Enviado: martes, 20 de mayo de 2014 12:46
                    Asunto: RE: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                    Peter,
                    You are right that a number of very misguided introductions have been made by governmental entities.    That could go back to Spanish conquistadores introducing human disease to the New World.
                    And, you are also correct in saying that invasive plants, though viewed by many as passive, can be very damaging in the long run.
                    Taking the example of the mute swan though, this species was not introduced by either academics or government personnel, and is not a plant, but is very damaging to wetland ecosystems, so your dismissing it as a problem hard for me to understand. 
                    Please, let’s steer clear of that ecological intellectual disease which is the urge to over-generalize!  There are animals and plants and fungi and other organisms which when introduced to new continents or regions are very damaging, and this introduction process has been abetted by goverments and other institutions including universities, private companies, and individuals.
                    Don Weber
                     
                    From: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com [mailto:beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com]
                    Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:27 AM
                    To: Alicia Basilio
                    Cc: Bee United
                    Subject: Re: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?
                     
                     
                    Dear Alicia:
                     
                    Funny you should mention this.  According to a geneticists and entomologists, the introduction of alien bumblebees to Argentina introduced viruses that wiped out native species of Bombus.  The findings were presented at Washington U. a year ago in a symposium honoring the retirement of Allan Templeton.  
                     
                    The idea, that it's OK to introduce alien species to check erosion, and other things, comes back to bite conservationists in the ass over and over.  Here's an embarrassing case in point.  The crown vetch of Eurasia (Securigera varia) was so popular as an erosion stopper in Pennsylvania it was voted as the state conservation flower in 1982.  Now check up this species on the web and see how illegal it is to import and grow it in most states.  Isn't it interesting how people are quick to condemn the introduction of animals (starlings, cane toads, gypsy moths etc.) but turn blind eyes to plants.  How could a plant do any damage to the environment?  Plans are so... passive.
                     
                    And Leo, it's naughty to blame academics for negative research on introduced species.  The fact remains that state and federal scientists/bureaucrats (not those employed by any university) have ultimately made the biggest and most expensive decisions as to what to bring in then (as years pass) what to extirpate (without much success).  The biggest sick joke right now is a pending decision in New York to shoot every mute swan (Eurasian species) because they supposedly compete with native ducks and geese for limited food.  It could become illegal to feed a swan in a public park (check the New York TImes).
                     
                    Peter   
                     
                    On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Alicia Basilio <apis1b@...> wrote:
                    Hi, "The habitat" are not all equal. 
                    Invasive species have been used for habitat restoration. Where nothing is growing, coverage and biomass are valuable. 
                    But, to my knowledge, the dynamics of invasive species make good competitors against native species in more stable habitats. Bumbus terrestris, or Vespula germanica for example, seem to have some desfavorable impact on native bees in Patagonia.
                    Alicia

                    De: "Peter Bernhardt bernhap2@... [beemonitoring]" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                    Para: Bee United <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                    Enviado: martes, 20 de mayo de 2014 10:04
                    Asunto: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?
                     
                     
                    The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.
                     
                     
                    Peter
                     
                     




                    This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.


                  • Weber, Don
                    I was making a general plea not to generalize, Peter. I have been reading some but not all of your messages. I felt that with the mute swan case, you seemed
                    Message 9 of 9 , May 20 10:10 AM
                    • 0 Attachment

                      I was making a general plea not to generalize, Peter.  I have been reading some but not all of your messages.  I felt that with the mute swan case, you seemed to be defaulting to a judgment that “this is ridiculous to spend any time on” when maybe, in fact, you had looked at all the evidence of the case.

                      Don

                       

                       

                      From: Peter Bernhardt [mailto:bernhap2@...]
                      Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 12:22 PM
                      To: Weber, Don; Allison Miller; Steven Callen
                      Cc: Alicia Basilio; beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                       

                      Dear Don:

                       

                      You have not been reading my messages about monarch butterflies and butterfly pollination in general, have you?  I've been trying to make it a point NOT to over generalize and NOT base conservation policies and budgets on the basis of a sheer lack of research. Yes, lots of plants, animals and microbes have been introduced to North America without a single government employee involved but those government scientists and career bureaucrats seem to be in the most prominent positions these days regarding what we should do, or not do, about proliferating non-natives. Have you ever wondered why we are supposed to hate Euarasian, purple loosestrife?  It can outgrow cattail and, therefore, supposedly fails to provide the cover, nesting sites and nourishment for water fowl.  The duck hunters lobby hates it so Fisheries and Wildlife hate it as well. 

                       

                      That's why I'm less serious about the mute swan question.  The study that leads to the new "wipe 'em out" edict has been criticized for a lack of dependable data and I'm not going to upset myself until I see that hard data for myself.  Until then. I will offer these birds bread crusts (in city parks) and not insist that local ballet companies put on performances of "Canada Goose Lake." Who wants to hear a ballet score dominated by hissing instruments anyway, or look at sets overly decorated with greenish droppings?  

                       

                      Meanwhile, I am hoping that a new version of "The Nutcracker" will feature the "Waltz of the Kudzu" complete with male dancers dressed in convict orange choreographed to see them spraying and uprooting corps de ballets dressed in green tutus with red-purple tiaras.  Seriously, using convict labor to clear highways of this, and other invasive species is an old practice that may have some merit according to older, wiser plant ecologists (don't ask me, I'm older but not wiser).  The Bernhardt/Meier and Allison Miller labs are doing serious research on the reproductive biology of this liane and when we release that research it may also have an awful lot to say about the misguided introduction of insects, as well.  

                       

                      Peter    

                       

                      On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Weber, Don <Don.Weber@...> wrote:

                      Peter,

                      You are right that a number of very misguided introductions have been made by governmental entities.    That could go back to Spanish conquistadores introducing human disease to the New World.

                      And, you are also correct in saying that invasive plants, though viewed by many as passive, can be very damaging in the long run.

                      Taking the example of the mute swan though, this species was not introduced by either academics or government personnel, and is not a plant, but is very damaging to wetland ecosystems, so your dismissing it as a problem hard for me to understand. 

                      Please, let’s steer clear of that ecological intellectual disease which is the urge to over-generalize!  There are animals and plants and fungi and other organisms which when introduced to new continents or regions are very damaging, and this introduction process has been abetted by goverments and other institutions including universities, private companies, and individuals.

                      Don Weber

                       

                      From: beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com [mailto:beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com]
                      Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:27 AM
                      To: Alicia Basilio
                      Cc: Bee United
                      Subject: Re: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                       

                       

                      Dear Alicia:

                       

                      Funny you should mention this.  According to a geneticists and entomologists, the introduction of alien bumblebees to Argentina introduced viruses that wiped out native species of Bombus.  The findings were presented at Washington U. a year ago in a symposium honoring the retirement of Allan Templeton.  

                       

                      The idea, that it's OK to introduce alien species to check erosion, and other things, comes back to bite conservationists in the ass over and over.  Here's an embarrassing case in point.  The crown vetch of Eurasia (Securigera varia) was so popular as an erosion stopper in Pennsylvania it was voted as the state conservation flower in 1982.  Now check up this species on the web and see how illegal it is to import and grow it in most states.  Isn't it interesting how people are quick to condemn the introduction of animals (starlings, cane toads, gypsy moths etc.) but turn blind eyes to plants.  How could a plant do any damage to the environment?  Plans are so... passive.

                       

                      And Leo, it's naughty to blame academics for negative research on introduced species.  The fact remains that state and federal scientists/bureaucrats (not those employed by any university) have ultimately made the biggest and most expensive decisions as to what to bring in then (as years pass) what to extirpate (without much success).  The biggest sick joke right now is a pending decision in New York to shoot every mute swan (Eurasian species) because they supposedly compete with native ducks and geese for limited food.  It could become illegal to feed a swan in a public park (check the New York TImes).

                       

                      Peter   

                       

                      On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Alicia Basilio <apis1b@...> wrote:

                      Hi, "The habitat" are not all equal. 

                      Invasive species have been used for habitat restoration. Where nothing is growing, coverage and biomass are valuable. 

                      But, to my knowledge, the dynamics of invasive species make good competitors against native species in more stable habitats. Bumbus terrestris, or Vespula germanica for example, seem to have some desfavorable impact on native bees in Patagonia.

                      Alicia


                      De: "Peter Bernhardt bernhap2@... [beemonitoring]" <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                      Para: Bee United <beemonitoring@yahoogroups.com>
                      Enviado: martes, 20 de mayo de 2014 10:04
                      Asunto: [beemonitoring] Invasive species are...nice?

                       

                       

                      The following link will take you to the latest stage in the ecological propaganda wars.  The argument here is that introduced species that become invasive make habitats more diverse, not less.  The author is unfamiliar to me and I must read the publication but this is an argument that goes back to one of the first books that spooky old Michael Pollan wrote.

                       

                       

                      Peter

                       

                       





                      This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately.

                       

                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.