RIPEOTCDXVI

This is how out of touch they are. Congressman A: DRASTIC MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN, WHAT SHOULD WE DO?

Congressman B: WHY DON'T WE ASK THE PEOPLE?

Congressman C: GOOD IDEA, WHERE DO WE KEEP THE PEOPLE?

Sony: THEY'RE BUSY BUT THEY SAID TO TELL YOU THEY HATE INTERNETS

I'm a habitat manager in the midwest, a landscape with a long history of anthropogenic fire followed by about a century of fire suppression before burns were brought back to the prairies and, more recently, woodlands as managers have noticed a drastic decline in early and mid-successional forests due to a lack of disturbance.

I'm on one of the few parts of the midwest (driftless area) with relatively abundant, albeit small tracts that were never plowed. We've found, once we returned fire to these properties and cleared out much of the shade-tolerant stuff to promote the sun lovers, a natural return of herbaceous species that have not been documented on the site for the decades we've managed them, in some cases 50 years or more.

As an example: we've got some remnant oak savannas that we didn't know were oak savannas until we started burning. Suddenly, all these really conservative wildflower species started showing up at ground level, without any nearby seed sources.

From a fire effects standpoint, how the heck did these species survive? Is it the seed remaining viable in the soil waiting for the right conditions? Is there somehow a tiny little plant under the duff just getting enough light to maintain a rootstock? It's one of the most delightful and fascinating observations I've had but I wish I understood the dynamics better.