food forests in shrub-steppe?

I have a question for David Jacke: What do you think about building food forests in a region where the native ecosystem is shrub-steppe, or steppe-prairie, in other words, not a forest ecosystem? Should ones permacultural designs follow a temperate forest model, or should they be instead an analog of the native (non-forest) system, mixing native edibles and well-adapted non-native edibles? ( I am not talking about restoration, which is a separate question.) Suvia Judd in North Idaho

Deb,

I know this is an old topic. I'm just wondering if you ever got a reply on this or have explored this question further.

On a related note, I'm interested in learning if others have explored a Mark Shepard style system but in the Palouse or the Palouse transition region (e.g. around Troy or Deary). I've been learning some on my own with my primary references being Dave Jacke's two books, Restoration agriculture, and information from the Pitkin Forest Nursery. Thank you,

Mike

It's something I keep thinking about. Here in the Palouse we can easily do Mark Shepard -type systems, using native tree and shrub species and their analogs. We have been planning a similar system ourselves (been delayed by land tenure issues but hopefully this spring...). Also someone who is taking my PDC which starts tomorrow is very inspired by Mark Shepard and wants to do a similar system on their farm in Deary. The Palouse was/is naturally a savannah (to the best of our knowledge), so it fits pretty well.

When you get out to the Columbia Basin (in the shrub-steppe, as opposed to the ag-steppe which is what I call the current Palouse wheat monoculture), it seems less clear. There really aren't a lot of trees except along waterways, and most of our perennial systems are tree based. Sagebrush can act as a nurse plant for some tree species, as it is a very efficient hydraulic pump, and earthworks can be put in place for water harvesting, but we are still trying to do the thing that humans always do of trying to superimpose our (usually European) desired ecologies on native ecosystems that are already functioning well and producing plenty of food only we are just ignorant of what it is. So it seems to me that the place to start is to learn about what the native shrub steppe has to offer, and then go from there. Curious about what other people think of this.

Thank you for the reply and the information. (you must be well organized to reply to a random e-mail prior to a PDC)

I was thinking a Shepard type system would work well in the Palouse but I'm pretty low on the learning curve so between not being able to find someone who was already doing it and the current agricultural practices leaving less evidence of Savanna I was uncertain. I hope to take a PDC in the near future. Your hypothesis on how to start working with the shrub-steppe makes sense to me, hopefully some more experienced folks will chime in.

Best Wishes,

Mike

Hi Deb,

I met you at the NAPC in August, and find your advice here very helpful! I am embarking on our shrub-steppe land planning here in North Central Washington and there is a great deal of sagebrush, scattered underneath Ponderosa pine, Aspen and other larger shrubs. The land has been grazed for the last 100 years, which I am guessing has selected for the current trees, shrubs and forages. I must certainly begin learning more about these sages, but I thought I heard somewhere that sagebrush had some allelopathic effect ? Is this true? You mention that it is a good nurse plant for some trees, I would be interested to learn which species (after your PDC is long over of course!)
I will stay tuned to this topic and as I gain any little experience, I will certainly share it here.

Thanks,

Barbara Greene

Barbara Greene wrote:I must certainly begin learning more about these sages, but I thought I heard somewhere that sagebrush had some allelopathic effect ? Is this true? You mention that it is a good nurse plant for some trees, I would be interested to learn which species (after your PDC is long over of course!)

I had never heard of this effect, personally, and it isn't mentioned in the USDA NRCS's plant fact sheet for the species. However, I googled "artemisia tridentata allelopathy" and came up with this article, which seems to show you're correct. For what it's worth, however, I've been a wildland firefighter for ten years now and have probably spent at least a good 30% of my career tromping through sagebrush fields. In my experience there's usually a lot more growing directly underneath the sagebrush canopy than in the areas between the plants. I would say try it and see what works. Perhaps grow the stuff up a bit in pots first and then transplant next to the Artemisia rather than starting it from seed within the effective range of the chemicals.

Interestingly, the Forest Service's Fire Effects Information System entry for sagebrush mentions it being high in phosphorus. Perhaps water isn't the only thing it's mining with that taproot... Might be a good chop and drop species. Save some for the sage grouse, though!

That's really interesting. The reference about sagebrush as a nurse plant that sticks in my mind was one which was about growing pinyon pines. It said they needed to have a sagebrush as a nurse plant to get established. As a general rule conifers like to germinate and have their baby years in mineral soil, so maybe one of the reasons pinyons like to grow next to a sagebrush is that the allelopathy that prevents those grasses from growing ensures them a mineral soil spot to get going in.

Hi, a bit late to comment, but I am looking into incorporating a small portion of my yard to a "food forest" type system. Most of my garden area will be native flora, but I am also adding in native shrubs that have berries as we have many local to the area. I am only using a few Dwarf non-native fruit trees because they provide food, and aren't so big that they will break my house in our high winds or consume an immense amount of water. We have a lot of native grasses and ground covers that natives have histprically used, and I am now looking into local fungi to incorporate. Having trouble pinpointing which puff balls are native to the shrub stepp of Washington if anyone can chime in and help me out. 👋

Hello Elyse and welcome to Permies. This is a perennial forum - so threads never go out of date. That said, you may be best asking your question in the our fungi forum.
My suggestion for what it's worth is to try and find an area close to you with healthy vegetation with shrubs and so on and take a cupful of soil from just below the surface. Hopefully this will be full of good local fungi that will thrive with you. Obviously taking soil ought to be done with owners permission yada yada, so be respectful. If you want to be sure of an edible fungi, then you may have to find a more specific source.

Not everyone is going to agree with me on this.

I'm in a shrub steppe sagebrush region where most of the sagebrush has been (tragically) stripped out. Rabbitbrush has moved in much of its place, which is fine with me, but trees are rare and hard to come by, as far as nature goes on its own. I have had some people tell me that food foresting in this area is a bad idea, partly because the region is naturally treeless, and partly because it's so dry (12 inches precipitation per year, and most of it is snow that melts before the first trees/bushes come out of dormancy), and that it would drain the water supply.

From what I have read of history, both recent and ancient, this area is mainly what it is because humans (both European and Native American) have flattened it, tearing out all trees for agriculture. I have now lived on my 5-acre land for 8 years, and I'm slowly turning it into a food forest. It's taking FAR longer than I could have possibly anticipated, but I'm determined to do it. This is agricultural land, and I'm determined to claim it. We complain that people are destroying natural habitats, that we should preserve them as they are in order to save what little there is left. For some places, this is probably true, but for places like this, I completely disagree. I believe the natural lands such as this have been utterly decimated for over 1000 years, and the native plants and lands as they are now are simply the last few survivors of the devastation. We're past the point of no return. The land can't be preserved. It can only be claimed and fixed. I think it will take more than passive ignoring to restore the earth to a truly abundant state, and that will take an incredible level of design. Obviously there are many nuances to how this needs to be done, but if I can sum it up in a simple sentence, it's this: WE HAVE TO PLANT MORE TREES.

And unlike some feel, I don't think these need to be mostly pioneer and trailblazer species. We need food trees, and we need to learn how to eat and prepare food trees. The only chance we have on making big ag into something sustainable is to develop systems for doing large, biodiverse food forests. I simply can't see another way through. It's got to be big, and it's got to be now. We need to repopulate deserts, prairies, and every other biome with trees. And again, food trees.

In desert/shrub steppe, that's hard to do, but our choices are narrowing quickly. It's not the whole solution to everything, but I think it will have to be a major part of ANY other thing we do.

We need to stop trying to only reclaim and preserve the forests and prairies. It's time to buckle down, design, and create them. Is that mankind interfering with nature? You bet it is. But instead of interfering ignorantly, as we've pretty much always done before, this time it's GOT to be with education, research, and (as much as possible) accurate information about ecosystems, the environment, and how forests work.

So I guess what I'm saying is, in answer to the question, "Should I plant a food forest here?" my response is, "Oh yes, absolutely without question you should."