Norm,
Thank you for the input.
When we entered the property, the state biologist and I spent about 10 minutes discussing what I have and what I wanted to do. In a nutshell, I told him I wanted to turn the 44 ac I own into an eco-friendly nature preserve that would attract and support as much wildlife and bio-diversity as possible. Naturally, they would have rather seen a wetland instead of a pond, but conceded that having a pond was by no means a negative in the big picture. We did not, however, have any areas developed specifically with prairie grasses. In fact, the entire region is fertile farmground. What isn't farmed is either timber or the small towns that dot the area. We have one of those timber patches. I presume his advice was based on my own little eco-project melded in with the needs of the entire region. He kept coming back, as you noted, to the "edge habitat" that we so sorely lacked. He also was very interested in some area of the pond being preserved as a shallow wetland. We had plans of doing this anyway. I was somewhat surprised by his inference that the heavy timber was not such a huge provider of this diversity that we seek. He shared a story: similar region, he visited a proud new owner of about 100 acres of thick, mature hardwood timber that wanted the same as us...wildlife and bio-diversity. He said he had a hard time telling him that the first step is to cut down a bunch of his prizes to allow the daylighting necessary to grow weeds, grasses, bushes, and shrubs...didn't go over well.
We truly hope this comes together for a second very good reason. I may not only have someone else plant these areas, but it might get paid for with tax dollars...and only a 5 year commitment. Lastly, this is exactly the "look" we wanted for this property. It matches my vision of the final product very well.
