This plan is not driven by ‘best science’: Comments by local ecologist Dr. Tim Seastedt on Draft Boulder County IWM Plan
Dr. Tim Seastedt is a professor emeritus of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at CU Boulder, focused on terrestrial ecosystem ecology, grassland ecology, and plant-soil-animal interactions. He has specialized for 30+ years in studying invasive species. His full comments (with citations) on Boulder County’s Draft Integrated Weed Management Plan are shared below in a downloadable pdf, excerpts of which appear below.
Dr. Seasted’s Comments Excerpts:
“The County weed management plan is not being driven by ‘best science’. Rather, to use the terminology of this program, it is being driven by ‘what tools are in the toolbox.’ The key example of this involves the current emphasis on cheatgrass. Without vested interests touting the ability to kill cheatgrass (and any other seed in the vicinity) with Indaziflam, the current cheatgrass effort that uses high-cost and unknown-risk procedures would not exist.
Until new chemicals appeared [on the market], cheatgrass as a weed issue was largely ignored in favor of those species that were vulnerable to the chemical stockpile. This leads one to the conclusion that we kill it now because we can, not necessarily because we need to. As detailed herein, cheatgrass is neither a known or demonstrated threat to native biodiversity or an increased fire risk relative to other grasses in Boulder County. Cheatgrass is not a desirable species; its control is appropriate under limited conditions, but in terms of potential threats, it simply does not deserve the attention or taxpayer money it is receiving.”
____________
“Of all weed management techniques, chemical control comes with the most uncertainty in terms of risk effects on living things. The County program bases its ‘best science’ on studies performed in areas not representative of our [local] climate, soils or vegetation communities. I term this approach ‘science-informed management’. Best management is based upon empirical findings obtained in our area, known as ‘science-based management’. While the former approach is what one must do in the absence of local data, local data must be used to drive best-management restoration.”
———————————
“The current weed management program developed from weed management programs developed for agricultural purposes 70+ years ago. The program has not been sufficiently updated and fails to provide an adequate vegetation management program for many of the more natural areas in Boulder County.
…The far more urgent climate crisis now requires weed management to be subsumed within a climate mitigation and adaptation program. The program should not be considered a ‘stand-alone’ activity.
…The solution is to create an actionable, co-production science program that nests weed management within a larger framework focused on nature-based solutions for climate mitigation and enhancement of biological diversity.”
———————————
“The County’s multiple ecological and land management programs have, to my knowledge, never undergone rigorous external scientific review. Assumptions and ‘facts’ used in management to date have not been vetted. The current process should undergo independent scientific evaluation to establish credibility. Best management practices demand that scientists, stakeholders, and managers participate in the actual formulation of the program, not a review of something written by a single focused group.”
———————————
“We are now in the Anthropocene, where human impacts are driving environmental changes, including climate change. All ecosystems -- natural, agricultural, and built environments -- are undergoing directional climate change in addition to an assortment of more localized anthropogenic effects. Environmental programs developed prior to directional change are unlikely to be efficient for future actions…
…Invasive species management should no longer be seen as a stand-alone management focus or program. Rather, invasive species management should be embodied within a climate mitigation framework, such that decisions involving ecosystem services and human well-being are explicit and incorporated into management decisions.”