LOL 1Pointer...
You’re a funny guy some times, try hard as you do, there are still a number of things lacking, it's not your fault, and things will change over the years as you gain more knowledge into your chosen subject of life
I've "thought" about this topic very hard for many years; when I press for a little info on this board, names start to be bandied about and the threads go to shit... go figure...
I fully understand both sides of this issue, maybe not all plant and animal species involved to make it work but the lack of understanding.... I think not....
Here's a scenario on management some won't get it because they can't see the big picture and the topic gets clouded or lost out of hatred for me, their loss not mine):
Old people are taking care of their yard, working hard year in and year out to keep it the most beautiful yard in the neighbor hood, weed free and just the right mix of every thing to keep it a fairly healthy ecosystem
Problem with what’s been created, not all the species cultivated or left to their own devices are compatible to what nature has intended for the microclimates or spaces that have been created
Plus all the surrounding areas off the property are overgrown and unkempt
One spouse gets sick or dies and the other looses interest for a few years, the yard goes to hell in a hand basket and now the work to get it back is far to much for the one person to ever get back into a "managed" state
These people don't have the money or energy to put it back the way it was, and control what they have so now have to pay to manage it and that is just barely enough to keep things in check
The surrounding yards and spaces continually are at battle with this yard which is kept in check and control or "Managed" as you will and eventually close in and take over the yard unless huge efforts are kept at management
Remember, and I sure hope your keeping up, this is only a small amount of ground and these people really love and cherish this area, working their whole lives to "manage"
Another word for manage by the way is "CONTROL"
Nothing in nature can be fully controlled (maybe a small portion at a given time frame but in the big picture and long haul, it will want to revert to what it is programmed to do)
Now bring this into a larger picture that is sitting at the same level of "Management" only larger, let’s say a million acres
We spend a ton of money, time, and materials to keep our chosen areas under control
The neighboring lands may not have any controls, state, private, federal......
Lets say some thing happens to the money that is used for management and funds get cut, it will take almost an act of congress as the saying goes to get refunded and retooled to the point to start taking that space back and placed under control again, at what cost, it will run more in time and material the second time than it did the first (not always but typically it does)
What happens to an area that has been managed at great expense with great effort if it's left to its own devices for a number of years and allowed to revert?
I'm not advocating just "letting it go", nor to stop management practices all together
I am saying there are better approaches that help cohabitate all species (native and non) to live in an environment together
Maybe not 100% peacefully, but nothing in nature is sitting at 100%
A person would have to be deranged to think it's possible for all species to live in perfect harmony
Now comes management
I've seen good and bad management on my cross country forays
The people who have been given the "power" to implement their own brand of management upon the landscape and now have put their lives and reputation on the line to bring these ideas to life will fight tooth and nail to preserve their ideas no matter how wrong or convoluted they may be and are usually in a position to keep the status quo so in the end create a larger problem than if they had just left it alone
Now comes Mother Nature
This is the one part of the equation I see these people want to control and not work with
If for example (as I've alluded to for years) as Shoots strait pointed out about the beetle and knap weed
I've researched this little critter, it can do more good/harm than all the people out there trying to control knap weed and it doesn't cost near as much once established as it will reproduce and work tirelessly to eat up it’s food source
Will their be repercussions by removing all or most of the knap weed, more than likely, some thing else has to fill in the space
Does it take longer, well... depends on how you look at it seeing as there has never been an effective control measure shy of pulling every thing up, and even that fails miserably as soon as the affected area is left alone for a short time
One possible "fix" to the cheat grass issue, not a cure, just a fix
This region used to have tall grasses covering it (part of the reason such large animal herds of every sort before it was settled and the landscape changed with new plant species)
Getting a taller variety of grass to grow will choke out the smaller under story (if you opened your eyes and looked at a bigger picture, you would know there are other things that grow taller than cheat grass that aren’t trees)
Will their be problems, of course, you can't introduce/re-introduce some thing back into a landscape just because it used to be there with out some issues, it is now the invading species
When measuring assets and liabilities one must take into account if it’s more productive for the environment in the end than a hindrance?
Who can tell until the "great experiment" takes place
I could keep rambling like this for hour’s because it’s such a large topic and if you had been reading what I've been posting for YEARS, you would understand how shallow and uninformed this statement is
Management is much different than 'fixing' a problem. Once you think about that for a while and understand you'll be better able to discuss such topic.
People like ol' Butz here in the past have made huge mistakes (notice I mentioned the word “like”), but because they have devoted their whole lives to the cause no matter how right, wrong or noble, will fight tooth and nail to keep every thing they have set into place as "the way it should be", no matter what new ideas or techniques come along (example would be controlling fires to the extent which took place over the last 70 or so years and creating a large pile of fire wood that covers vast amounts of area, far to much fuels to actively control or “manage” at the moment)
If any one shows dissention in the ranks, this or a few individuals will denounce any one with opposing views on a topic and because of the respect these individuals have garnered as the "professional" of their trade or simply time in trade, others will follow blindly, never challenging issues that are just plain wrong out of fear of retribution or ignorance
Is Butz good at what he does?
I have no doubt he is...
Is his approach wrong?
Yep...
You can learn some thing from every person you come in contact with if you’re willing to look for it and not go thru life closed minded, blinded and in a box to new possibilities as I tried to explain to you over dinner many years ago
Any one who says they are "it" when it comes to any topics concerning nature should be looked at with a jaded eye
They always tend to not look at an issue objectively or to the possibility there are better ways to fix a problem or at least better manage it
There is no room for ego in this case if you want to do it right
In an ideal world, taxpayer money would go toward planting seedlings (native or not) to jump start the forests growing again.
