I have asked three people with whom I hold in great esteem for their views on Wild Leeks/Ramps if they would be willing to answer similar questions about sustainability and distribution of this very popular wild food. While I do not agree with everything each of these individuals say, and have probably angered two of them for my outspoken views on this subject I cannot in good conscience only represent views that I agree with here on this platform. In my opinion it is my job to proudly represent the views of the people with whom I disagree the most so that their opinions are not obscured. I hope that you, the reader, will make up your mind on the subject based on the information you get here, and perhaps it will prod you into studying the subject more yourself.
I will be releasing my own article on Allium tricoccum next week as this week has been very hectic. I started my week in North Carolina filming for an episode of Foraging the Fifty, then promptly found out that an offer I had put in on a house had been accepted and so I had to race back to northern Michigan to sign documents, order inspections etc. etc. I had planned on finding a cozy spot to write while in the beautiful mountains of North Carolina and releasing this all as one, but sometimes life doesn’t work as you’d like it to.
Without further ado, here are the responses from Sam Thayer, Arthur Haines, and Jim Mcdonald. I hope you enjoy them, and keep an eye out for my full article next week.
Sam Thayer
What represents the biggest threat to the sustainable harvest of ramps?
In an ecological sense, the biggest threat to ramps is invasive shrubs that leaf out early and /or are allelopathic, especially buckthorn, but to a lesser extent tatarian / Morrow's honeysuckle. Within native communities, conversion of deciduous forests to conifers has major negative impact on ramps. Ramps don't survive under conifer canopies. Oak leaf litter also greatly hampers their reproduction, so that when stands become more dominated by oak (in the context of mesic forests this is mostly northern red oak), it also favors other spring flora. The best tree canopies for ramps are a mixture of maple, elm, basswood, yellow birch, buckeye, butternut, yellow birch, ash, and bitternut hickory. Change in forest composition away from these trees tends to increase herb competition and reduce the rates of ramp reproduction.
In terms of harvesting, the biggest problem is when people are willing to harvest individual, isolated plants. There are 3 circumstances in which one sees these isolated plants: 1) ramps are newly colonizing an area, and few have yet established. 2) Ramps have been heavily harvested in the recent past, leaving just a few behind. 3) Ramps are struggling in an area, most likely from unfavorable soil or competition.
In all 3 cases, ramps should not be harvested. Not bulbs, not leaves. Ramps should only be harvested where they are in dense populations--either in clumps, or with small spaces between bulbs. Harvesters should never leave more than a handspread between plants. If they are more distant than this when the harvester arrives, nothing should be taken.
The most likely place for this kind of overharvest is in urban parks or woodlots where numerous visitors take "just a few" isolated plants.
How long have you been doing your ramp research, and what is the general feedback that you have received when showing people the conclusions that you have reached?
I started my research plots in 2007 and have been monitoring them ever since and adding new research plots every few years. When I show my data to people they are often quite surprised, because of how strongly it contradicts the idea that ramps have a very low reproductive rate. At the same time the research is simple and basic, easy to explain, and easy to understand--and the results are strong and conclusive. It has been hard for people to poke holes in. The most common response I have received is, "Thanks for doing this. It corroborates what I've observed." Much less frequently I get responses like, "You're an evil, nature-killing bastard! How dare you suggest that ancient food plants can be sustainably harvested."
In my experience, ramps seem to spread much more slowly in clay soils rather than a soil type that is more loose, can you speak to the results you’ve seen in ramp growth and expansion based on soil type?
They seem to do best in glacial till or sandy loam, okay in loamy sand or silty clay. The large ramp (Allium tricoccum) seems to do better in looser soils, and small or narrow-leaf ramp (Allium burdickii) seems to do better in more clay-heavy soils. These two form hybrid swarms over much of their range, which greatly complicates things. Interestingly, I used to live and own woods on the Lake Superior Red Clay. I had no ramps on my property, and assumed they didn't like or couldn't survive on clay. Then I started finding incredibly thick ramp patches right along Lake Superior on the very same heavy clay. I realized that 2 things favored ramps along the Lake. 1) The heavy winds cause disproportionate mortality on conifers, favoring deciduous trees. 2) The lake effect delays leaf out and reduces snowfall, both favoring spring ephemerals. I now believe that the same soils inland lacked ramps only because of long-term historical dominance of conifers, and not from any quality of soil. This was a big lesson for me, a reminder of the complex interplay of habitat factors. Interestingly, the ramps I have found along Lake Superior are concentrated under deciduous shrubs, not trees--primarily mountain maple, chokecherry, and red elderberry.
As far as I can tell, Allium tricoccum is only listed as endangered in one state (Alabama), and listed as threatened in 2 other states. There are approximately 26-29 states that have populations of this species, so why is it often regarded among foragers, herbalists and outdoorsmen as being endangered despite it not having this label in more than 90% of its native range?
Every plant or animal is rare on the periphery of its range. No matter how common a plant is in its strongholds, there is some outlying, unusual, tenuous location where it is also found, to the surprise of ecologists. The fact that it is rare and protected on the periphery is not relevant to its abundance in the heart of its range, but nti-foragers find this protected status at the periphery of the range very convenient for their arguments. Ironically, ramps are one of our few native Allium species that is not dependent on fire, and thus, its habitat has been expanding for the last 150 years in most of eastern North America. And with reforestation in the last century in most states with good ramp populations, the species has probably been increasing in abundance overall.
Often it seems to me that one flawed study about sustainability of a particular species can lead to people citing that flawed study well beyond the point at which that study has been debunked. Can you speak to the nature of group think when it comes to things like the sustainable harvest of beloved wild foods?
So much of science is politics. The often-quoted study by Nault and Gagnon was designed to show slow or zero reproduction in ramps. This is obvious to any ecologically astute reader who carefully examines the study. Applying the basic tenets of population ecology, the study design makes it impossible for ramps to show their reproductive potential. The authors wanted ramp harvest to be viewed as unsustainable. And it has worked very well on an uncritical, gullible public that has largely internalized a set of anti-foraging, anti-ecological values.
In your opinion which is the more important means of propagation for ramps; division or seed? What have you learned in your controlled study?
When examined over the short term, bulb division seems to be the most important reproductive strategy. However, long-term data skew the other way. On my largest research plot, I think it was year 9 at which the number of individual bulbs established by seed exceeded those produced by bulb division from the individual founder bulbs. Bulb division has a high success rate. Seed has a low success rate, but if a seed gets established away from the original bulb, it can then begin a new colony and expand the footprint of the ramp patch. In short, the two strategies work in tandem and are both very important.
What grows more; a ramp patch that is harvested lightly, or a ramp patch that is not harvested at all?
Harvest should always be done so as to maintain the integrity of the colony in its present footprint; responsible harvest, by definition, accomplishes that. What is clear from my research (and fully expected by the precepts of population biology, and corroborated by research on numerous other plant species) is that sexual reproduction is density-dependent. Ramps at lower density produce a lot more seed. Not just per plant, but per unit of area. Responsible harvest cannot really improve the ramp population within the existing footprint of the colony--but it definitely increases the seed production, and therefore, it increases the rate of spread of the colony, both beyond its adjacent borders, and through occasional establishment of colonies elsewhere through animal or flood-aided seed dispersal.
One leaf or whole plant?
Both strategies can be done sustainably. However, continued harvest of a single leaf will reduce seed production. One important thing to note is that soil disturbance, such as occurs through digging, has an extraordinary benefit on seed germination. (We have observed this disturbance benefit very clearly, and again, this is to be expected based upon research with other seeds, as well as common knowledge--but I am working on implementing a study designed specifically to test this hypothesis.) Due to this, and the increased seed production in thinned colonies, I would say that in general, modest harvest of whole plants, including bulbs, is more beneficial to the ramp population.
Finally, if you have any further thoughts to add to this feel free to share them. I will be sharing this far and wide.
Not at this time, but I'll be thinking.
Arthur Haines
What represents the biggest threat to the sustainable harvest of ramps?
I would offer that there are two important threats to wild leeks in my part of the world. These threats are (1) habitat alteration/fragmentation/loss from (a) silviculture/forestry practices in the uplands and (b) forest clearing for agriculture in the river corridors and (2) market collectors. The latter are seeking short-term economic gain at the expense of populations of species like wild keeps, ostrich fern fiddleheads, etc. I have interviewed folks that were selling leeks who admitted that the wild leeks were less common and smaller than when they began harvesting (and the harvesting had occurred for less than decade). It is important to note these market foragers were interacting with relatively small populations (hundreds of individuals—not tens of thousands as do occur in the region in a few locations).
How long have you been studying Allium tricoccum and its life cycle, and what is the general feedback that you have received when showing people the conclusions that you have reached?
About thirty years at this point. I try to present my suggestions with good will and they are generally received in that way. I don’t have anyone that has ever tried to argue that the method of collection I propose is going to harm the populations. I can show them where white-tailed deer browse the leaves in the early spring and the plants survive this herbivory just fine. Therefore, removing a leaf from the 2 or 3 leaves produced by the plant is certainly not lethal to the plant.
In my experience, ramps seem to spread much more slowly in clay soils rather than a soil type that is more loose, can you speak to the results you’ve seen in ramp growth and expansion based on soil type?
Wild leeks grow in two types of soil in my part of the world. One of these is rich fluvial deposits of mid-sized to major rivers where there is often very little restriction to plant growth (such as stones, rock outcrops, etc.). The other soil type is rich, mesic, colluvial deposits on hills and other slopes that often have shallow soils mixed with stones, boulders, and/or outcrops. Both of these soil types are relatively loose (compared with clays) and don’t seem to restrict growth much (unless there are physical obstructions such as stones or trees, the former of which can be common in the upland settings).
As far as I can tell, Allium tricoccum is only listed as endangered in one state (Alabama), and listed as threatened in 2 other states. There are approximately 26-29 states that have populations of this species, so why is it often regarded among foragers, herbalists and outdoorsmen as being endangered despite it not having this label in more than 90% of its native range?
This is simply myths promulgated by people who don’t understand plant conservation rankings and the official listing process that each state or province uses to gauge the abundance (or rarity) of each species of plant that grows in the region. In my part of the world, red wakerobin (Trillium erectum) is often regarded as endangered, even though people find it commonly in the correct habitat. If it were endangered, few people would ever encounter it. (For the record, Trillium erectum is quite secure in Maine). In the state I live, wild leeks are provided a state rank of S3, meaning there are between 21-100 occurrences. In this case, the species often occurs in small colonies of fewer than 25 individuals, so it is still considered rare and noteworthy when found, even though it is not a conservation target (though recent taxonomic study may change that).
Often it seems to me that one flawed study about sustainability of a particular species can lead to people citing that flawed study well beyond the point at which that study has been debunked. Can you speak to the nature of group think when it comes to things like the sustainable harvest of beloved wild foods?
All studies are flawed. Some are helpful. There is generally no way in which any study can account for all the variables that exist or may exist in the future. The study you reference has shortcomings, but I’m not aware of anyone who has repeated the study and changed the assumptions to identify what the outcomes would be. Again, if we came from unbroken lineages who could explain harvest through the lens of TEK, it would be very useful to those of us who are cultural orphans.
Everyone’s idea of sustainable harvest practices is totally different (I’ve asked quite a few people), and it is doubtful they can all be correct simultaneously. What I like to ask people who note such studies are flawed is what study are they relying on. Generally, they note their personal experiences—which are valuable but also anecdotal and without any rigorous study design or controls to compare against (and there is certainly little to no statistical analysis to take care of personal biases). I find that most everyone is convinced they are doing it “the right way” and will defend their practices by stating that the wild leeks are as abundant or more abundant now than before—but there have been no demographic studies to verify their statements nor have the harvests occurred long enough to truly understand the generational effects of such harvests. They are just statements. Not a single scientific journal would accept such statements as evidence of anything (i.e., it would not pass a peer-review process), which I mention only to point out that they are without the necessary design structure to validate anything (and that includes my statements). It would be much more meaningful if such statements were coming from someone who had a cultural lineage of harvest on the various populations for many generations (i.e., something that constituted TEK). In my part of the world, unfortunately, such opportunities are essentially absent.
In your opinion which is the more important means of propagation for ramps; division or seed? Why?
Most of my propagation has been done by seed. We often return to the colonies that we harvest from in the late summer and gather seeds for planting both within the population and at the fringes (note: I am not starting new populations, but trying to assist with seeds reaching the appropriate substate and germination). There are many examples of seeds that study has shown germinate at much higher frequencies if planted rather than if they simply fall from the fruit (in this case a capsule). The larger populations of wild leeks that I harvest from are much more often found on terraces of the river floodplain and many of those rivers are contaminated (to some degree) with dioxins and other lipophilic toxins from paper mills. These toxins become concentrated in the bulbs but are nearly absent from the foliage. Therefore, we tend not to gather bulbs from these locations for both safety and protection of the plants. In the upland sites that have very clean soils, I’m typically planting seed there as well (not because I think it is the best way or the only way, it is just what has come to be our method here in Maine).
What grows more; a ramp patch that is harvested lightly, or a ramp patch that is not harvested at all?
I definitely feel that light harvest (which people will debate what constitutes light harvest) can be very useful for a variety of reason. Disturbance (again, light harvest) is capable of loosening soil, passively weeding other plants that can compete for space, and help seeds get into the soil (and not sit on top of the duff created primarily by the leaves falling from the canopy trees). But, I also feel that such harvests should be part of lifelong practice, not just something someone does one time when they encounter a patch they’ve never seen and expect that they did their due diligence. To understand our benefits (or harms), we need to interact with these colonies for extended periods of time.
One leaf or whole plant? Why?
There are several reasons why I generally suggest one leaf. One of these actually centers on safety (which I mentioned previously), given that many moderate-sized and major rivers are polluted with various lipophilic toxins (Dioxins, PCBs, etc.). These accumulate in the underground storage organs and are poorly translocated to the aerial portions of the plant. Consuming the leaves provides a safe way to enjoy these species without getting dosages of environmental pollutants. The second one I’ll mention here is to protect small populations of plants that are not carefully stewarded. Very few people in our Culture of Progress are actually considering coming generations of people not yet born in their decisions (let alone the other-than-human persons we share the world with). Gradually building populations through transplanting of bulbs and seeding to create harvestable populations 15 years from now is a pursuit few are willing to engage in. In some areas, especially in larger upland populations, I gather whole plants, but this is usually done after I have gathered up seeds from persisting capsules so I can re-plant as I harvest bulbs. This strategy often works for smaller harvests given that some seeds remain on the plants over the winter. Larger harvests spring harvests involve (for me) gathering seeds in the late summer of the previous year and storing those for planting in the spring. The seeds of Allium species lose substantial germination ability each year (compared with many other plants) and require drying prior to storage (but it isn’t too much work to accomplish).
Finally, if you have any further thoughts to add to this feel free to share them. I will be sharing this far and wide.
Recent taxonomic study demonstrates there are four species of wild leek, not just two. These four species differ in some aspects of morphology (both vegetative and reproductive), ecology, phenology, and distribution. They have not been studied in most parts of their range, but modeling suggest they may be found outside of the regions where study occurred. We currently have no idea of their abundance (or rarity) in each state and province where they grow. Currently, in states where wild leek is listed as secure (i.e., least concern) there are actually more species that the biologists there are completely unaware of. It is likely that one or more of these will be state-listed as conservation targets in various states given what we believe we know currently. Treating all leeks as one species is an issue for the understanding and conservation of these species where they turn out to be rare. Getting foragers to learn these four species and share their experiences with the distribution and population numbers will be extremely useful. I am currently organizing such study in New England to identify which species are present and get some handle on their local population numbers.
I would add as a final thought that foragers can discuss (or argue) about the future of these plants, but it would be nice for us to possibly step out of this control ideology and understand that wild leek species have as much right to life and existence as the humans who are deciding their fate. How many foragers enter the colonies of wild leeks and actually just sit and observe the interactions, track those interactions, and realize there are more species relying on these plants than just humans? How many foragers are making sure that their lives are not impacting the pollinators of these species? We just tend to focus on ourselves and what our ideas are for harvest, but there is little to no discussion of the other species that collaborate with wild leeks (which I am completely convinced humans can be a collaborator and not just a harvester). There is one thing that I know about you (Clay) is that you are trying to have such a life (might I state one that practices a form of animism). For that, I’m thankful.
Jim McDonald
What represents the biggest threat to the sustainable harvest of ramps?
I think the biggest threat to ramps (and many other plants) is wildcrafters and foragers who think in terms of a plant being "sustainable" or "unsustainable" to harvest without factoring in where they are. Practices that are sustainable in one location may not be sustainable in another location, and may even be detrimental. It is also the case that what is detrimental in one area might be advantageous in another. This can be true in different states, in different parts of the state, or in different stands in a smaller geographical area within a state or county. I think it is imperative to hammer in the importance of this concept all the time, over and over and over, because people who are learning will often hear an oversimplified version of a plant's sustainability without any nuanced information that helps them assess this issue where they're at.
In my experience, ramps seem to spread much more slowly in clay soils rather than a soil type that is more loose, can you speak to the results you’ve seen in ramp growth and expansion based on soil type?
I have not seen ramps growing in clay soil in my part of the state.
About 10 years ago I transplanted about 45 Allium tricoccum plants into my rich, moist but well draining soil under oak, maple and black cherry, and last year there were about 60 plants. They are not being crowded out or encroached upon by other plants. This is a totally different result than Sam Thayer reports his experience being (in a post last year he stated "Melissa and I transplanted 85 bulbs in 2007. At last count they had expanded to more than 3,200."). It's certainly not the case that Sam is right and I'm not, or vice verse; it's that we live in different places and the plants are responding differently. We can't make the assumption that what works in one place works in all places (I'll also add I'm a bit envious of Sam's results!).
Although Michigan Flora doesn't list Allium tricoccum as growing in Oakland or Macomb counties, I've found them in both. BONAP lists A. tricoccum as being "present and not rare" in both Oakland and Macomb counties, but I'd consider them rather rare, at least now; I know many people in these counties who have never seen them. I've found ramps growing north and south of me, in similar habitats to those I have here, though they're certainly not a dominant ground cover like I've seen them farther north and west of me (though I have seen them be a dominant ground cover under a similar canopy and in similar soil). I've also seen A. burdickii in Oakland County.
As far as I can tell, Allium tricoccum is only listed as endangered in one state (Alabama), and listed as threatened in 2 other states. There are approximately 26-29 states that have populations of this species, so why is it often regarded among foragers, herbalists and outdoorsmen as being endangered despite it not having this label in more than 90% of its native range?
I think the biggest reason ramps (and other plants, such as Monotropa species) are called "threatened" and "endangered" when they are not legally threatened or endangered is because of a lack of discernment/understanding between the common/informal and legal uses of those terms. This, in turn, has created a lot of misinformation that has spread widely.
Herbalist/wildcrafter/botanist Howie Brounstein discusses the difference between the terms rare, threatened, endangered and sensitive as they related to plants here, and I think it's important info for people to listen to/learn, because it relates perfectly to the question you asked and understanding these terms and principles would help to curtail some of this misinformation: https://www.facebook.com/howie.brounstein/videos/10154638611423196 (start at 3:33).
Often it seems to me that one flawed study about sustainability of a particular species can lead to people citing that flawed study well beyond the point at which that study has been debunked. Can you speak to the nature of group think when it comes to things like the sustainable harvest of beloved wild foods?
As an herbalist who has looked at a LOT of studies over almost three decades, I can say that most people are not taught and have not learned how to interpret studies, and I see studies misinterpreted in every direction they can be (not to mention that a lot of people only scan and don't fully read studies, or read the abstract which often doesn't really say what they full study says). It's also the case that people simply don't look at enough studies to make an informed conclusion on a given topic. I've repeatedly seen people who disagree with a conclusion find one poorly designed study and use it to refute that study's conclusion, while ignoring other well done studies that come to the same conclusion. To me misinterpretation of studies is less an issue of "group think" and more an issue of people trying to do something that they haven't invested the time to learn to do well.
In your opinion which is the more important means of propagation for ramps; division or seed?
I have experience with transplanting bulbs, and I think every bulb I have transplanted has grown and is still growing.
What grows more; a ramp patch that is harvested lightly, or a ramp patch that is not harvested at all?
I feel that the answer to this question depends on location; what might work best in one area might not work well, or may damage plant populations in another.
One leaf or whole plant? And Why.
As with the answer to the previous question, this one fails to consider location and the state of plant populations in a given area. In my area, one leaf.
I have absolutely seen dramatic damage to ramp populations in my area from the gathering of whole plants. I have absolutely been told by students and local foragers in my area that they learned that people who say to gather one leaf or not to gather ramps are "pick shaming" and not to be listened to (or to be argued with). Often these people have learned this information from foragers who live in areas that can tolerate, or thrive with, collection, but haven't been told clearly that this depends on the nature of ramp populations where one is, and doesn't apply to all ramps everywhere. I have absolutely heard people justify harvesting ramps in a way I feel isn't sustainable by saying "But (insert name of foraging teacher/writer) says it's fine." If I explain why I disagree, they may ask if I think (insert name of foraging teacher/writer) is wrong, but it's most often the case that what applies for (insert name of foraging teacher/writer) where they're at just doesn't apply where the person wants to harvest.
Finally, if you have any further thoughts to add to this feel free to share them. I will be sharing this far and wide.
Going back to hammer in a point I made earlier:
We simply cannot define plants as being sustainable to gather or not without reference to place. Sustainability is not static. I think it's important to consider sustainability as a forethought and not as an afterthought (which is generally how our culture views issues of sustainability). I think it's imperative that people who teach wildcrafting/foraging stress this topic, because we may reach people who live in places where what we do where we are may not be appropriate for them to do where they are.
Thank you for taking the time to read this! Please share this far and wide to hopefully encourage respectful, loving debate about this interesting and difficult topic.
LOVE: "I cannot in good conscience only represent views that I agree with here on this platform. In my opinion it is my job to proudly represent the views of the people with whom I disagree the most so that their opinions are not obscured. I hope that you, the reader, will make up your mind on the subject based on the information you get here, and perhaps it will prod you into studying the subject more yourself."
I had a conversation with an newly minted retiree who worked until a month or two ago as engineer. We have some different views, but he's a pretty open-minded, intelligent guy. Obviously, he's an engineer. I mentioned how intelligent scientists have been arguing about core scientific ideas...since science... He said, "The thing that gets me is when those people they put on TV say that something is a fact. If it's a fact, it isn't science...except maybe gravity."
"I think the biggest threat to ramps (and many other plants) is wildcrafters and foragers who think in terms of a plant being "sustainable" or "unsustainable" to harvest without factoring in where they are." I like this bit...relevant to foraging it would be good if an area indexed its edible invasives, banned chemicals, healed the area with mycelium etc and then had people be the competitor that checks the invasives, since so many are medicinal.
Ramps (A tricoccum) do not appear to grow in Arizona yet. There are several other Allium spp both wild/native and feral that DO. Those spp, like domesticated Euro originated alliums (both garlic and onions), prefer open soil (so not often clay-y) that is selenium rich and are associated with VAM mycorrhiza in the zygo group Glomus. I wonder if any of those features characterize range/density limiting factors for ramps. Mark Lewis, manujib@yahoo.com
Great job putting this together man!
LOVE: "I cannot in good conscience only represent views that I agree with here on this platform. In my opinion it is my job to proudly represent the views of the people with whom I disagree the most so that their opinions are not obscured. I hope that you, the reader, will make up your mind on the subject based on the information you get here, and perhaps it will prod you into studying the subject more yourself."
I had a conversation with an newly minted retiree who worked until a month or two ago as engineer. We have some different views, but he's a pretty open-minded, intelligent guy. Obviously, he's an engineer. I mentioned how intelligent scientists have been arguing about core scientific ideas...since science... He said, "The thing that gets me is when those people they put on TV say that something is a fact. If it's a fact, it isn't science...except maybe gravity."
Awesome. This is such a valuable document. Thanks Clay.
"I think the biggest threat to ramps (and many other plants) is wildcrafters and foragers who think in terms of a plant being "sustainable" or "unsustainable" to harvest without factoring in where they are." I like this bit...relevant to foraging it would be good if an area indexed its edible invasives, banned chemicals, healed the area with mycelium etc and then had people be the competitor that checks the invasives, since so many are medicinal.
Ramps (A tricoccum) do not appear to grow in Arizona yet. There are several other Allium spp both wild/native and feral that DO. Those spp, like domesticated Euro originated alliums (both garlic and onions), prefer open soil (so not often clay-y) that is selenium rich and are associated with VAM mycorrhiza in the zygo group Glomus. I wonder if any of those features characterize range/density limiting factors for ramps. Mark Lewis, manujib@yahoo.com