John Carlos BaezFeb 2

Here's a tale of how nature triumphs in the end.

Steel mills dumped molten slag in parts of Chicago and nearby areas. The slag hardened in layers up to 5 meters deep. These places became barren wastelands. Other industries dumped hot ash and cinders there.

But eventually the steel mills closed.

The deep layers of hard, toxic material were not friendly to plants. Cottonwoods are usually 30 meters tall or more. In the slag fields, stunted cottonwoods grow to just 2 meters.

But rare species that could handle these conditions began to thrive. The lakeside daisy, a federally threatened species lost to Illinois for decades, turned out to grow taller on slag than on topsoil! The capitate spike-rush, last recorded in Illinois in 1894 and considered locally extinct, was rediscovered growing on slag.

And more! Native prairie grasses like little bluestem. Native milkweeds. Even tiny white orchids called sphinx ladies' tresses.

A team of women ecologists began studying these unusual landscapes. They call themselves the Slag Queens.

(1/2)

Show threadAri "Two Foxes" JacksonFeb 2

@johncarlosbaez thank you for posting this. It is absolutely fascinating!

That is an ongoing conversation in both herbalism and in native plant restoration work. Should we be looking at what "pristine" areas were like and be emulating them? Should we be upset when what we plant doesn't emulate what we assume was originally growing there?

Or, should we be flexible, and go with what works? Let the plants guide us, let the plants tell us what they need and where they want to go?

I'm in the second camp; not only do these plants know exactly what they need, you can't force them to do anything (trust me, I've spent years trying to convince home gardeners that they should add native plants to their yards, but also cautioning them that they can be unruly and downright willful about whether or not they like being in your garden).

They migrate, they creep, they communicate, they make choices about where they're going to grow or not grow. They have a lot more intelligence than we give them credit.

I love that these folks are approaching these areas without bias and just learning about what's happening there now. It's amazing!

Show threadClimate Jenny 2.1Feb 2
@arisummerland @johncarlosbaez I’m with you: Let the plants decide. It’s never clear how much human intervention is helpful, but the track record thus far suggests that the prudent thing is for people to do less. Maybe reintroduce some species and see if they take hold, and maybe remove “crap plants” to let plants that take longer to establish have a chance. But then stand back and let evolution do its thing.
Show threadJohn Carlos BaezFeb 2
@ClimateJenny @arisummerland - it's possible that in the long run, fighting invasive species is a losing battle in most cases. Maybe it's better to just let succession take place: often the first stages of succession involve scrappy species that can survive tough conditions, while later a more complex ecosystem develops. But I'm no expert. I just agree with both of you that plants tends to know more about these issues than people.
Show threadIcarosityFeb 3
@johncarlosbaez @ClimateJenny @arisummerland If you've spent your life loving and looking at the native plants of your area it's still heartbreaking to see them go though. Small wonder people fight to keep them even when it's a fool's errand.
Show threadClimate Jenny 2.1Feb 3

@nancywisser @johncarlosbaez @arisummerland Not a fool’s errand! Every plant you can save holds the possibility of being the one who can re-emerge later when conditions are right. All biodiversity is precious, and we can’t predict which species is going to be crucial later on.

What’s worse is that we don’t have, and probably never will have, the tools to replicate intact ecosystems. The plants are very clever, but our so-called civilization is a bad neighbor. Keep conserving. #NativePlants

Show threadClimate Jenny 2.1
@nancywisser @johncarlosbaez @arisummerland To paraphrase Frank Landis, think of life as an infinite game where the goal is to keep as many players — critters, plants, fungi, ecosystems —in the game as long as possible. All of them will come to an end eventually, but you don’t need to be the one to exterminate any of them.
Feb 3 at 1:27pmWeb
Show threadIcarosityFeb 3

@ClimateJenny I've watched so many species disappear around me and many more will but it's invisible to almost everyone as Leopold says in his famous quotation. Although it doesn't make up for it I'm up to over 40 native species in my little gardens, leaving leaves on the ground and most plants standing until spring in hopes the insects they need will be able to live too.

I've seen too many woodland plants in parks especially wild orchids disappear leaving holes behind where they were dug.

Show threadIcarosityFeb 3
@ClimateJenny The only plants I ever dug were from a woodland where the bulldozers were parked waiting to obliterate it the next day.
Show threadClimate Jenny 2.1Feb 3

@nancywisser Ugh, I hate that. I have a friend, a park volunteer, who leads nature walks in the spring to see the spring ephemerals. She’s found holes too.

I’ve also given over my garden to native plants, including a few rescues. It feels like walking a tightrope to get a balance: On one hand, there is a tiny corner of really nice intact habitat that I want to nurture, while on the other hand there’s the clear-cut suburban lawn that needs major restoration work ASAP.