Are we really trying to control invasive species?

Over  the past few days, the Better Half and  I have been trying to identify a "new" plant with pinkish flowers that's suddenly appeared in the township roadway easement along part of our property. Today we agreed that it appears to be spotted knapweed, an invasive terrestrial plant according to the Department of Natural Resources, a prohibited plant according to the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. It is not until or unless one clicks on the link to the MDA Spotted Knapweed Fact Sheet that the phrase "Spotted knapweed is listed as a Prohibited – Control noxious weed in Minnesota" appears. Now I'm not a lawyer [INAL], but, the consistent use of proper, accurate terms seems significant when looking at Minnesota statutes noted below. There doesn't appear to be any reference to "prohibited weeds" in either 160.23 or 160.232. (Maybe state agencies should be mandated to hire  the revisor's office to edit regulations for consistency.)

State Prohibited Noxious Weeds have two categories: eradicate and control. Spotted knapweed was added to the control list in 2001. [There are separate lists for: Restricted noxious weeds; Specially regulated plants; County noxious weeds; and, Federal terrestrial and parasitic listed noxious weeds.] It might be helpful if someone, someday, added a reference to the "official?" Minnesota Noxious Weed List to appropriate sections of chapter 160.

does this look like spotted knapweed to you?

Photo by J. Harrington

Following MnDNR's recommendation, we duly reported our "discovery" of what we think is knapweed (neither the Better Half nor I are botanists nor invasive species experts) via email to ArrestThePest. It will be interesting to see what, if any, followup occurs.

In the process of trying to sort out who might be responsible for destroying what may be a noxious weed, I checked the Minnesota Statutes. That revealed a potential additional concern since mowing as a control measure for knapweed may be limited or prohibited under 160.232. It's almost as if no one wanted to make it easy to manage roadsides and noxious weeds. Do we have too many entities involved in invasive, noxious plant management as we have way too many entities involved in managing water quality and quantity and uses in Minnesota? (See the Minnesota Water Sustainability Framework.)

160.23 MS 1953 [Repealed, 1957 c 943 s 72]

160.23 DESTRUCTION OF NOXIOUS WEEDS.

Road authorities, including road authorities of cities shall cause all noxious weeds on their respective highways and streets to be cut down or otherwise destroyed or eradicated as often as may be necessary to prevent the ripening or scattering of seed and other propagating parts of such weeds.

History: 1959 c 500 art 1 s 23; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7 

160.232 MOWING DITCHES OUTSIDE CITIES.

(a) To provide enhanced roadside habitat for nesting birds and other small wildlife, road authorities may not mow or till the right-of-way of a highway located outside of a home rule charter or statutory city except as allowed in this section and section 160.23.
(b) On any highway, the first eight feet away from the road surface, or shoulder if one exists, may be mowed at any time.
(c) An entire right-of-way may be mowed after July 31. From August 31 to the following July 31, the entire right-of-way may only be mowed if necessary for safety reasons, but may not be mowed to a height of less than 12 inches.
(d) A right-of-way may be mowed as necessary to maintain sight distance for safety and may be mowed at other times under rules of the commissioner, or by ordinance of a local road authority not conflicting with the rules of the commissioner.
(e) A right-of-way may be mowed, burned, or tilled to prepare the right-of-way for the establishment of permanent vegetative cover or for prairie vegetation management.
(f) When feasible, road authorities are encouraged to utilize low maintenance, native vegetation that reduces the need to mow, provides wildlife habitat, and maintains public safety.
(g) The commissioner of natural resources shall cooperate with the commissioner of transportation to provide enhanced roadside habitat for nesting birds and other small wildlife.

History: 1985 c 127 s 2; 1986 c 398 art 27 s 1; 1989 c 179 s 1; 1Sp2005 c 1 art 2 s 137

The Lost Colony

By Susan Stewart

They never learned to tell

one bird from another, a shrub

from a weedy sapling, 

or when the season had

forced a flower’s bloom, not 

even if a berry

had ripened into poison.

And yet they drew endless

distinctions between

colors and polish and

coarseness of weave, 

and would not let

their daughters 

marry out.

They didn’t keep

their children, though they

gave them tests and fed 

them. They were known

for meticulous records, for 

trophies and peeling stars.

They burned things up

or wore them down, had ranks

and staff and lecterns, 

machines that moved them

from place to place, bright 

jewels and playing cards.

They were old when they could 

have been young, and young

when they could have been old. 

They left a strange word

in a tree: croatoan,

and a track in the dust of Mars.

********************************************
Thanks for visiting. Come again when you can.
Please be kind to each other while you can.