Grass versus trees
A proxy debate for deeper anxieties about competing stream worlds
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5148747 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Caroline Gottschalk Druschke (0000-0001-8610-5177, University of Wisconsin–Madison, corresponding author), Eric G Booth (0000-0003-2191-6627, University of Wisconsin–Madison), Rebecca Lave (0000-0001-5335-9058, Indiana University), Sydney Widell (0009-0001-0246-4998, University of Wisconsin–Madison), Emma Lundberg (0000-0001-7034-0850, United States Fish and Wildlife Service), Ben Seller, Ben Sellers (University of Wisconsin–Madison), Paige Stork (University of Wisconsin–Madison) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 479-497 |
| Publication date | 2024-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Environment and Planning E Nature and Space (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2514-8486 • E-ISSN: 2514-8494 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/25148486231210408 |
| OpenAlex | W4388230963 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 20 |
Stream restoration has become an increasingly important focus in southwestern Wisconsin's Driftless Area, an unglaciated, hilly pocket of the Upper Mississippi River Basin rich in groundwater-driven coldwater streams, recreationally important trout species, and agricultural communities. Climate change is driving a major increase in precipitation and flooding across this rural and often under-resourced region, effects complicated by the ongoing legacies of white settlement and the changes it wrought to area streams, including the burial of floodplains in sediment displaced off area hillslopes. As managers work to consider how to "restore" Driftless streams, riparian vegetation-grass versus trees-has become a central and surprisingly controversial node. Current stream restoration practice typically includes the removal of riparian trees, though that practice has come under increasing criticism. Grounded in more than 5 years of qualitative and biophysical fieldwork in the region, we build from interviews gathered with 18 Driftless Area stream restoration managers from 2018 to 2020 to point to the ways that managers leverage arguments about erosion, flooding, habitat, and angler access, among other things, in service of grass and trees. Indexing the surface flows and underflows of this restoration debate, we introduce the rhetorical concept of the proxy debate to argue that debates about grass versus trees are tethered to competing perspectives on scale, temporality, and dynamism, surficial distractions from much deeper anxieties about what a stream is and should be. We turn to the ways that these distractions serve to further distance the stream restoration enterprise from acknowledging the ongoing human and hydrologic legacies of settler colonialism, and we close by suggesting that careful attention to rhetorical power-both to what arguments say and do, and to what they elide-offers a tentative first step toward restoring lands and relations by questioning what is taken for granted and what lies beneath
Environmental resource management · Floodplain · Geography · Habitat · Large woody debris · Riparian zone · Stream restoration · STREAMS · Environmental Science · Fire effects on ecosystems · Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes · Rangeland and Wildlife Management · Ecology · Geology
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2025 (2) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |