Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund 2012-2013 Request for Proposals (RFP) 052-C2 ENRTF ID: Project Title: Developing Economic Incentives for Eradicating Buckthorn C2. Invasive Species ‐ Terrestrial Topic Area: Total Project Budget: $ 366,766 Proposed Project Time Period for the Funding Requested: 3 yrs, July 2013 - June 2016 Other Non-State Funds: $ 0 Summary: Our project aims to find economic value for removing invasive buckthorn, in order to incentivize eradication. We will target markets that motivate removal from private as well as public lands. Name: Jonathan Schilling Sponsoring Organization: U of MN Address: 108 Kaufert Lab, 2004 Folwell Ave St. Paul MN 55108 Telephone Number: (612) 624-1761 Email schillin@umn.edu Web Address http://schillinglab.cfans.umn.edu Location Region: Statewide County Name: Statewide City / Township: _____ Funding Priorities _____ Multiple Benefits _____ Outcomes _____ Knowledge Base _____ Extent of Impact _____ Innovation _____ Scientific/Tech Basis _____ Urgency _____ Capacity Readiness _____ Leverage _____ Employment _______ TOTAL ______% 05/06/2012 Page 1 of 6
Environ nment and d Natural Resource es Trust Fu und (ENRT TF) 2012 ‐ 20 013 Main Proposal PROJEC CT TITLE: Developing economic in ncentives for r eradicating g buckthorn I. PROJ JECT STAT TEMENT Buckthor rn is a non- -native, inva asive plant t that is an on ngoing prob blem in Min nnesota. Two o key species ( (European a and glossy) were widely y introduced d as ornam mentals in th he late 1800 0’s as shade-tol lerant hedgi ing with ber rries that att ract birds, w with persiste ent leaves, a nd that natu urally suppress ses weeds. T These attribu utes, howev ver, have all lowed buckt thorn to inv vade our for rests. Buckthor rn grows we ell in shade u under tree ca anopies, out tcompeting n native plants s for sunligh ht. Its berries p provide food d to birds, but harbor r a laxative e that encou urages local l seed dispe ersal. Buckthor rn also exud des compoun nds that are allelopathic, , meaning th hey suppress s growth of other plants. C Combined, bu uckthorn’s b biology lends s an advanta age over nat ive plants, r resulting in d dense buckthor rn thickets a and degrade ed habitat. T This poses a a serious thr reat to intac ct forests ran nging from wet tlands to sav vannahs, and d eradication n is a critical l challenge, p particularly on private la ands. The goa al of our pr roject is to identify ec conomic use es for buckt thorn that incentivize e its rem ova al on priva te as well as public lands but also do not promote cu ultivation. H Hand- pulling o or cutting bu ckthorn, foll lowed by app plication of herbicides t to reduce stu ump-sprouti ng, is the princ cipal remova al method. T This has led t to massive e efforts, largel ly volunteer r, from those e who understa and the ecolo ogical value e of killing b uckthorn. W We want to a attach econo om ic value t to the buckthor rn as it is re emoved, in o order to mak ke removal m more worthw while to priv vate landow wners. To do thi is statewide without enc couraging cu ultivation re equires defin ning flexible , even temp orary market o options of a appropriate scale. This would be most efficie ent if done in tandem with product developmen nt, not post hoc. Our pr roject and co ollective exp pertise have e been assem mbled following g this logic, a and we are p partnered wi th others de eeply familia ar with eradi cation issue s. The tacti ic we propos se (a ‘carrot’ not a ‘stick’ ’) has been u used before f for woody in nvasives but t with different markets. O One example is a project t focused on n removal of f woody inva asives aroun nd St. Paul, inc centivizing e eradication w within a 75- -mile radius s by burning g residues f for energy a at the District Energy cog generation p plant. We a aim to buil ld a compl lementary, not compet titive, approach h that would d be less cen tralized and d might bette er target priv vate lands. A As an examp ple of this dece entralized tac ctic, the Stat te of Virginia a published a landowne er’s manual i in 2009 targ geting value-add ded options s when remo oving invasiv ve Ailanthu s, the ‘tree of heaven.’ For that pro oject, whose co o-investigato ors included d an investi gator on th his proposal , Dr. Omar Espinoza, w wood propertie es were cha racterized a and options for harvest ting in tand dem with oth her species were assessed. . This is sim milar to our p proposal, bu ut many aspe ects will not t translate, p particularly t those related t o solid woo od products not possible e from an u understory s shrub. Ther refore, we e will focus on n all buck kthorn tissu ues (bark, , etc.) and uses m ark rket valuat tion to iden ntify thresho olds in dem m and, abov ve which th here m ight be incentiv ve to plant t buckthorn n. II. DESC CRIPTION N OF PROJE ECT ACTIV VITIES Activity y 1: Capture e and chara acterize ex xtractable c com ponen nts Bud dget: $130 ,9 22 We will target two c components s of bucktho orn: solid re esidues and extractives. Composites s can integrate e chipped (fla aked) or gro ound bucktho orn into a so olid product. . Extractive compounds from buckthor rn, which h have some h history in d dyes and me edicines, lik kely harbor other ‘bioa active’ qualities (eg, anti-fu ungal activity y) that rema ain poorly d defined. We will first ch haracterize s solids and extra acts from all l plant tissue es, varying tr ree age and e extraction to o assess a ra nge of optio ns. O Outcom es ( Dates ) Com pletion A A. Separation n & varied ex xtraction of b buckthorn (v varied ages/ / locations) ( Jan. 31, 2 2014) B. Physical pr B roperty char racterization n of bark, hea art- and sapw wood (Jan. 31, 2 2015) C. Chemical c C characterizat tion of water r/ organic ex xtracts from all tissues (June 30, 2 2015) 1 05/06/2012 Page 2 of 6
Recommend
More recommend
