Making hard choices in the field

This past week while on a training run through a local forest preserve, I was shocked to see what appeared to be an aggressive mowing campaign already started in a large section of property where a restored prairie meets a meadow managed for grassland birds.

The second week in June is prime breeding time for grassland bird species. That's why the sight of the mowed fields was so shocking. Just a week before, I'd run the same path and heard a species of bird called Henslow's sparrow singing on territory. There were also bobolink, sedge wrens, yellowthroat and meadowlarks present. All depend on this section of preserve for breeding habitat because just beyond the acres protected by the county are corn and bean fields as far as the eye can see. No bird can breed in that environment, and it covers virtually all of northern Illinois.

Appeal to the county

I wrote a message first to IBET, an Illinois birding network where people communicate about sightings and issues of importance to Illinois birds. "Isn't it early for mowing in grasslands?" I asked.

The consensus was "Yes."

So I contacted the county forest preserve district and reached the restoration manager in charge of mowing projects in the system. He confirmed there is a mowing program going on. He wrote me back:

"The prairie mowing at (name of) Forest Preserve is being conducted as one part of an integrated management plan that we create for most of our preserves across the county. The fields are being mowed in an effort to control yellow and white sweet clover. These plants are both biennials. Each plant lives for two years. The first year is spent as a small basal rosette and the second year it will flower and produce seed. By mowing the plants when they are in flower we can prevent them from producing seed. This allows us to manage the population effectively since the mowed individual will die at the end of the year and won’t have reproduced."

Makes perfect sense. Clover and other weedy invasives do take over natural areas if restoration managers do not find some way to knock them back. But what about the birds?

"To make this strategy work, however, the timing must be very specific. If the plants are cut too early in the year they will have enough energy stored in their roots to bolt again and flower. If they are mowed too late, they will have already produced seed. Unfortunately, nature can have cruel timing and these plants need to be treated between mid-June and early July which coincides directly with peak nesting/fledging of grassland birds. The protection of these birds is of great concern to us. We try to do as much spot treatment as possible, mowing only where the invasive species are present and leaving the rest intact in an effort to save as many nests as possible. This lead to the odd patterns/crop circles that you often see in the fields."

Thus there are hard choices to make every year. If habitat managers let 'nature' take its course, there are a host of aggressive invasive species waiting to upset the balance of an ecosystem. A plant called garlic mustard has taken over our local woodlands. Plants such as purple loosestrife can dominate a wetland. Trees called buckthorn can clog the understory of once healthy woods.

Imbalances everywhere

It also happens that a species of bird called a cowbird invades woods shrunken by development to lay eggs in the nests of other birds. Back when woodlands were larger and cowbirds fewer, the risk of population damage to woodland species was far less. But the effects of human manipulation of the environment has changed those balances. Cowbirds are a symptom of our presence just as white and yellow clover are evidence of our highly mobile habits as a culture. We've made the world a better place for parasitic species such as cowbirds while making it a difficult place for species such as yellow warbler, flycatchers and wood thrush.

Management

So the very same people charged with eradicating deleterious invasive grassland plant are responsible for protecting the endangered birds that rely on June grasslands for nesting habitat. Over the long run, the goal of restoration managers is to create habitat that is more in balance with native species of plants and birds. In the meantime, hard choices must be made in a wrestling match with the law of averages. Save nesting birds or mow down invasive clovers? Tough call. But it's amazing that some people refuse to understand that human beings need to engage in natural management practices at all. People who love the notion of superior business management can be ignorant when the idea of managing ecosystems comes into play. The paradigms between business and nature are quite often similar, and quite often connected. Yet some people see them as entirely different realms. They are not.

It all takes management

The idea that nature is self-adjusting when it is already so highly impacted by introduction of non-native species is absurd. So is the expectation that wetlands will be permanent when water tables are affected by development and drainage systems generated by human activity. Often these are altered to the point where naturally occurring wetlands are starved of runoff from other water sources. Then they shrink or dry up. That's when cattails move in, clogging the basin with silt and so-called 'natural succession' eclipses the open water that once served many species of wildlife. That's when flooding occurs, because water no longer has anywhere else to go. Humans create their own problems more often than not.

Climate models

On the broadest of scales, this commitment to management against the impacts of human beings is true even at the climactic level. With climate data documenting the invasive levels of CO2 in our atmosphere, and rising temperatures globally as a result, there are hard choices to make on that level as well.

Scientists have difficult discussions about what the data shows. And like the restoration managers who must make hard choices about whether to save more birds or mow clover before it takes over an entire field, there are consequences to every action. But flat-out denial that a problem even exists is not anything like a solution in progress. Because denial is the 'do-nothing' approach to any problem on earth. Basing that denial on speculative economics and claims that it is too expensive to consider is both naive and dumb. All human progress is based on enterprise, and new energy alternatives hold promise that we can generate the energy we need while protecting the environment.

Leap of faith

It takes a leap of faith in some respects to explore these prospects. Those consumed by greed and self-interest for the polluting industries they seek to protect at the expense of all human beings are not the practical resource they claim to be. Anachronism has never proven to be the source of progress for America.

And yes, leaving some energy practices behind or changing strategies may cause some short term impact. Yet in the long run, the goal is a more reliable, sustainable 'eco' system that encourages better economics and environmental quality. That's a true win-win objective. But denial won't get us there. Some hard choices must be made between the systems of the past and the promise of the future. Denial is never a solution.

And we should not trust those who claim that it is.