Book Review: The Gardener’s Guide to Prairie Plants

Book Review: The Gardener’s Guide to Prairie Plants

by | Jun 19, 2023 | Inspiration

Book Review: The Gardener’s Guide to Prairie Plants

Written by Neil Diboll & Hillary Cox

Reviewed by Laurel Bennett

Neil Diboll, a well-known prairie ecologist associated with Prairie Nursery (also a member of the Prairie Sands Chapter of The Prairie Enthusiasts) and Hillary Cox, a botanist, horticulturist, and garden designer, have teamed up to write The Gardener’s Guide to Prairie Plants.  

 

This 638-page book was originally intended as a field guide for identifying selected prairie species at all life stages. They certainly succeeded at that, providing extensive documentation on 145 prairie plants (18 grasses, 1 sedge and 133 forbs). But it is much more. Chapters range from “History and Ecology of the Prairie” to “The Prairie Food Web” but focus on establishing prairie gardens and ‘prairie meadows’, as the authors’ refer to a larger prairie planting, including propagating your own plants. Chapter 11 provides twelve different seed mixes for various combinations of soil types and prairie functions (butterflies, pollinators, deer resistant). Chapter 12 is stuffed with thirty more tables, covering many different parameters on prairie plants (color, height, bloom time, etc.) and some you might not even think to consider (root type, aggressiveness, groundcovers, specimen plants).  

The text is necessarily short on each topic but comprehensive in its coverage of the tallgrass biome. It is ideal for the beginner interested in planting and maintaining a prairie garden or ‘prairie meadow’ but even an experienced practitioner can pick up some good pointers.  

Surprisingly, the tables are not individually listed in the Table of Contents which would have been helpful. I also would have appreciated a few more references, so the reader could pursue topics in greater depth. 

There are a number of books and blogs on propagating prairie plants, on gardening with native plants, on establishing prairies and even a few on identification of seedling prairie plants. This book stands out for its breadth of coverage. 

You can find this book on Prairie Nursery’s website.

Find other interesting reads in our blog post: Our Winter Reading List

Change & Persistence Among Prairie Grasses

Change & Persistence Among Prairie Grasses

by | Jun 16, 2023 | Identification & Education

Change & Persistence Among Prairie Grasses

Story and Photos by Dan Carter

There are many misconceptions about prairies that cloud restoration, reconstruction, and management. Prominent among these is the tallgrass prairie “big four,” a concept that situates big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), and little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) atop the dominant hierarchy of plants on tallgrass prairie. The “big four” has far-reaching influence on grassland management, scientific study, and seed mix design. It’s Tallgrass prairie after all!  

The “big four” are indeed co-dominant in many places where prairie vegetation occurs today. But, except for little bluestem, they were not historically the most dominant grasses on much of the prairie landscape, nor are they most dominant on many of the best remaining old-growth prairies.  

John Curtis (1959)1 described the composition of the least disturbed old-growth prairies in Wisconsin. Big bluestem was present on all studied mesic prairies, but porcupine grass (Hesperostipa spartea), Leiberg’s panic grass (Dichanthelium leibergii), and prairie dropseed (Sporobolus heterolepis) were the most frequent grasses. Frequencies from Curtis are the percentage of square meter quadrats a species occurs within for a given community type — basically how likely the species is to be at your feet if you are  walking in the prairie. porcupine grass was twice as frequent on mesic prairie as big bluestem! Big bluestem was the fifth most frequent grass on dry prairies behind little bluestem, side-oats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula), long-stalked panic-grass (Dichanthelium perlongum), and prairie dropseed; and third most frequent on dry-mesic prairie behind little bluestem and side oats grama. Only on wet-mesic prairie was big bluestem the most frequent among the grasses. Still, on wet-mesic prairie little bluestem’s frequency was about three quarters that of big bluestem. Prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata) and Canada blue-joint grass (Calamagrostis canadensis) were the species most often present (frequency data lacking) on wet prairie.  

In Iowa, The only grasses noted by Ada Hayden (1919)2 among the “principal” species of prairie remaining on the gently rolling uplands (mesic) immediately north of Ames, Iowa were porcupine grass and prairie dropseed. Later, Brotherson (1969)3, Kennedy (1969)4, and Glenn-Lewin (1976)5 studied composition on three old growth prairies in northern and western Iowa and found prairie dropseed, Leiberg’s panic grass, and porcupine grass to be the most common on uplands at the respective sites.  

In the Red River Valley of NW Minnesota, Dziadyk and Clambey (1980)6 described old growth prairie communities dominated by blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) and porcupine grass on dry ground, prairie dropseed followed by little bluestem on gentle slopes, little bluestem followed by prairie dropseed on moderately well-drained level areas, and big bluestem and slim-stem reed-grass (Calamagrostis stricta) together on low prairie over poorly drained soils.  

Weaver’s and Clements’ (1938)7 concept of “true prairie,” which they extend to a region stretching from Illinois to Nebraska and northwest Minnesota to Oklahoma, is co-dominated by mid grasses—Porcupine grass, prairie dropseed, rough dropseed (Sporobolus compositus), little bluestem, side-oats grama, and needlegrass (Hesperostipa comata, in the west). Weaver worked extensively on prairies in the western part of the tallgrass prairie during the first half of the 20th century, including early study of fire effects at the Agricultural Experiment Station just north of Manhattan, Kansas. There, little bluestem and Junegrass (Koeleria macrantha) were initially the top two grasses (big bluestem was third). Composition shifted toward big bluestem with annual late spring burning but not late fall burning or earlier spring burning8,9. Indeed, late spring burning in the western and southwestern tallgrass prairie region to promote big bluestem for cattle pasture is part of why prairie composition changed there during the 20th century. Weaver and Clements observed these changes occurring and attributed them to the grazing and burning practices of the time, saying that the result was “that their [the mid grasses’] tallgrass competitors, notably Andropogon, gradually moved up the slopes and today appear to be essential members of the prairie relicts” (page 458).  

Why did European land use sometimes drive compositional change towards the tall grasses like big bluestem?  

Late spring burning favors the growth form of long rhizomatous, warm-season grasses. Their growing points remain below the soil surface until very late spring or early summer, so growth of their active shoots can continue uninterrupted despite damage to aboveground foliage with late spring burns. The growing points of most bunchgrasses (e.g., porcupine grass, prairie dropseed, Leiberg’s panic grass, little bluestem, Junegrass, etc.) rise above the soil surface and become vulnerable to fire shortly after they initiate growth. If these are burned off, the bunchgrasses must activate reserve buds to replace the lost shoots. That alone puts them at a disadvantage, but their reserves of buds tend to be small compared to long-rhizomatous big bluestem and Indiangrass10, so their regenerative capacity is sooner exhausted (meristem-limited) in response to removal of active shoots. The cool-season bunchgrasses are hit especially hard by late spring burning because of their early growth, but even little bluestem, a warm-season species, can be harmed by later spring burns due its difference in growth form. Prairie dropseed, another warm-season grass, is harmed because it initiates growth nearly as early as the cool-season species despite its warm-season physiology. On most upland old growth prairie, late spring burning favors a subset of native grasses that was not historically so abundant.  

The effect of fire exclusion on composition can be similar to those of frequent late spring burning. Species with elongating rhizomes are better able to emerge through excessive accumulations of thatch. Hensel (1923)11 observed this 100 years ago in the Kansas Flint Hills. Little bluestem increased with annual early spring burning, but big bluestem replaced little bluestem atop the dominance hierarchy when fire was excluded. Weaver and Rowland (1952)12 also observed this in eastern Nebraska in the absence of burning, haying, or grazing: 

“Consequences of the effects of the mulch upon the environment were production of a nearly pure, but somewhat thinner than normal, stand of Andropogon [big bluestem]. The understory of upland prairie had all but disappeared. The usual mid grasses of upland were few or none. Only a few taller forbs remained.”—Page 19 

Burning in the presence of excessive litter accumulation, which often occurs on prairies that are occasionally burned (as opposed to frequentyly)kill or weaken little bluestem13 and other bunchgrasses (e.g., needlelegrass)14. Their buds are at or just above the soil surface and vulnerable to increased fire duration when excessive litter has built up. This is not the case for the deeply buried buds along the rhizomes of big bluestem or Indiangrass. Interestingly, excessive litter may interact with fire to affect prairie bunchgrasses and certain invertebrates (skippers: Hesperia ottoe and H. Dakotae)15 in similar ways, with responses contingent on the amount of litter accumulation!  

Native bunchgrasses decrease for many of the same reasons in response to confined grazing. Porcupine grass is very palatable and emerges before most other prairie grasses, so it disappears quickly upon pasturage16. The long-rhizomatous prairie grasses also decrease in response to grazing16, but they persist and recover relatively well during rest periods because they have greater reserves of belowground buds available for recovery and their elongating rhizomes help them colonize openings where vegetation has been thinned by disturbance. The position of buds on these long-rhizomatous grasses an inch or two beneath the soil surface also protects their regenerative capacity from mechanical disturbance 10,17. Weaver recognized the importance of rhizomatous habit for recovery from disturbance, but not bud depth or number. Nonetheless, where grazing was too intense and prolonged, most prairie grasses were replaced by long-rhizomatous, cool-season species like Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), except on the driest sites1,2,16. 

The work of Weaver, Curtis, Hayden, and others adds important context to our interpretation of more contemporary studies of prairie. They help us discern between research and management outcomes from altered grasslands that no longer retain old growth composition, and prairies that still do. Porcupine grass, little bluestem, prairie dropseed, side-oats grama, and/or Leiberg’s panic grass are usually among the prominent grass species on the best remaining old growth, upland prairies. All of those species differ from big bluestem in their ecologies in ways that have implications for management. Except side-oats grama, many of those differences stem from growth form, cool-season physiology, or both. Earlier work on composition also highlights the amazing persistence of well-stewarded and less historically exploited old-growth prairies in the face of unprecedented change. Upland old-growth prairies that retain much of their composition have typically experienced: 

  • fewer periods of excessive litter accumulation. 
  • fewer late spring burns and more burns between fall and early spring—the more frequent the better9,18,19. True prairie composition was and is an expression of dormant season fire.  
  • minimal fenced grazing. Free-roaming deer, elk, bison, and their predators/hunters are separate issues.  
  • less fragmentation19, but consider that small, less exploited prairies that are well-stewarded retain more of their historical botanical composition than landscape grasslands in the western tallgrass region. Little prairies are more vulnerable to neglect, which argues for their protection and care.  

While the confluence of these conditions is tragically rare, the persistence of what remains is reason to keep hope. True prairie in the Midwest has been home to members of east-west and north-south expanding and contracting flora, fauna, and cultures for millennia. Even an island of old-growth prairie carries with it immeasurable ecological memory. We can kindle that and facilitate its recovery through stewardship and by building connections among prairie places and prairie people…especially if we can get our hands on more porcupine grass and Leiberg’s panic-grass! 

References:

1 Curtis, J. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin University of Wisconsin Press. Madison, WI. 

2 Hayden, A. 1919. Notes on the floristic features of a prairie province in central Iowa. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 25: 369-389. 

3 Brotherson, J. 1969. Species composition, distribution, and phytosociology of Kalsow Prairie, a mesic tall-grass prairie in Iowa. Dissertation, Iowa State University.  

4 Kennedy, R. 1969. An analysis of tall-grass prairie vegetation relative to slope position, Sheeder Prairie. M.S. Thesis, Iowa State University.  

5 Glenn-Lewin, D. 1976. The vegetation of Stinson Prairie, Kossuth County, Iowa. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 83: 88-93. 

6 Dziadyk, B. and G. Clambey. 1980. Floristic composition of western Minnesota tallgrass prairie. Proceedings of the Seventh North American Prairie Conference: 45-54. 

7 Weaver, J., and F. Clements. 1938. Plant ecology. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. New York and London. 

8 Weaver, J., and A. Aldous. 1935. Role of fire in pasture management. Ecology 16:651–654. 

9 Towne, G., and C. Owensby. 1984. Long-term effects of annual burning at different dates in ungrazed Kansas tallgrass prairie. Journal of Range Management 37: 392-397. 

10 10 Ott, J., Klimešová, J., and D. Hartnett. 2019, The ecology and significance of below-ground bud banks in plants. Annals of Botany 123: 1099-1118. 

11 Hensel, R. 1923. Recent studies of the effect of burning on grassland vegetation. Ecology 4: 183-188. 

12 Weaver, J. and N. Rowland. Effects of excessive natural mulch on development, yield, and structure of native grassland. Botanical Gazette 114: 1-19. 

13 Gagnon, P., K. Harms, K., Platt, W., Passmore, H., and J. Myers. 2012. Small-scale variation in fuel loads differently affects two co-dominant bunchgrasses in a species-rich pine savanna. PLoS ONE 7: e29674. 

14 Haile, K. 2011. Fuel load and heat effects on northern mixed prairie and four prominent rangeland graminoids. Thesis, Montana State University-Bozeman. 

15 Dana R. 1991. Conservation management of the prairie skippers Hesperia dacotae and Hesperia ottoe. Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 594, University of Minnesota. 

16 Weaver, J. 1954. North American prairie. Johnsen Publishing Company. Lincoln, NE. 

17 Klimešová J, and L. Klimeš. 2007. Bud banks and their role in vegetative regeneration – a literature review and proposal for simple classification and assessment. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 8: 115–129. 

18 Bowles, M. and M. Jones. 2013 Repeated burning of eastern tallgrass prairie increases richness and diversity, stabilizing late successional vegetation. Ecological Applications 23: 464-478.   

19 Alstad, A., Damschen, E., Givnish, T., Harrington, J., Leach, M. and D. Rogers. The pace of plant community change is accelerating in remnant prairies. Science Advances. 2: e1500975  

This article appeared in the Summer 2023 edition of the Prairie Promoter, a publication of news, art and writing from The Prairie Enthusiasts community. Explore the full collection and learn how to submit your work here. 

Read more about Dan Carter’s work through our blog post: 2020 Landowner Services Update

Public Notice: We’re Applying to Renew Our Land Trust Accreditation

Public Notice: We’re Applying to Renew Our Land Trust Accreditation

by | Feb 1, 2023 | News

The land trust accreditation program recognizes land conservation organizations that meet national quality standards for protecting important natural places and working lands forever. The Prairie Enthusiasts is pleased to announce it is applying for renewal of accreditation. A public comment period is now open.

The Land Trust Accreditation Commission, an independent program of the Land Trust Alliance, conducts an extensive review of each applicant’s policies and programs.

The Commission invites public input and accepts signed, written comments on pending applications. Comments must relate to how The Prairie Enthusiasts complies with national quality standards. These standards address the ethical and technical operation of a land trust. For the full list of standards see http://www.landtrustaccreditation.org/help-and-resources/indicator-practices.

To learn more about the accreditation program and to submit a comment, visit www.landtrustaccreditation.org, or email your comment to info@landtrustaccreditation.org. Comments may also be mailed to the Land Trust Accreditation Commission, Attn: Public Comments, 36 Phila Street, Suite 2, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866.

Comments on The Prairie Enthusiasts application will be most useful by February 10th.

The Potential of Pastures and Oak Woods

The Potential of Pastures and Oak Woods

by | Oct 4, 2022 | Management Methods

If you have an old field that you would like to plant to prairie or a stand of oak you would like to restore, don’t rush into it. Understand the history of the land and take time to observe and learn whether anything important remains. Very often degraded lands still harbor irreplaceable elements of biodiversity, and these have their own stories to tell about what a place was and could be. The tools we use in restoration can encourage these elements or extinguish them. By recognizing and preserving remnant populations of native species and their genes, we can counteract biotic homogenization[i], and sometimes we can reduce project complexity and expense in the process.

Many landowners with prairie planting projects in old fields or retired pastures already have important elements of the biodiversity they are trying to restore, many of which are commercially unavailable. Occasionally remnant populations of rare plants persist. Even areas that were formerly cultivated often support good prairie, savanna, and oak woodland species that have recolonized from the edges, or perhaps a neighboring oak savanna that has since become forest. In many cases as many desirable native species remain as would be required for a seed mix planted under a cost-share program! I have included a table with upland species often encountered in old fields and pastures; there are many more. It is not uncommon to encounter five to fifteen of these species in an old field and ten to twenty of them in a retired pasture.

In cases where there are some good things present, start by managing these areas as though they were still prairie. Selectively control encroaching woody vegetation and any patches of broad-leaved herbaceous weeds. Burn for a couple consecutive years during the dormant season to encourage anything good that might be suppressed by the thatch. See what happens and go from there, which will usually mean integrating inter-seeding, a lot of burning, and patience.

Many landowners with wooded ground have land that was once oak woodland, oak savanna, or oak barrens. Oak woodlands are conservation-worthy and rare, but they are sometimes mistaken for forests or inappropriately treated as savannas[i] or barrens. It is far more common to encounter structurally intact ground layer vegetation in heretofore unrestored woodlands than open savannas. In oak woodlands, good cover of Pennsylvania sedge or dry-spiked sedge often remains, and species that tend to favor dappled light vs. deep shade or full sun—poke milkweed, pale vetchling, yellow pimpernel, broad-leaved panic-grass, bearded shorthusk, purple Joe-pye weed, Carolina vetch, etcetera—are often still present. Even where oak woodlands have become shadier, that change has usually been more gradual and less in degree than in savannas. This has allowed more of the woodland vegetation to hang on.  Where a low sedgy or grassy ground layer remains, restoration might only involve modest brush work, removal non-oak understory hardwoods, non-oak overstory thinning/girdling, restoration of fire, and modest inter-seeding of missing species over time. Savanna restoration is critically important where true opportunities still exist, but good opportunities to restore oak woodland seem to be more common than savanna.

If you have an open area of cool-season grass or a stand of oak, I encourage you to take a closer look. You might discover there is more opportunity, or a different opportunity, than you initially thought. If you are looking for cost-share, go shopping for assistance that helps to build on what remains. Doing so should result in projects that conserve more community, species, and genetic diversity on the landscape.

Rich Henderson’s presentation “Converting Pasture to Prairie” on YouTube is an excellent resource.

______

i- Biotic homogenization is the process by which spatially separate ecological communities become more similar over time as the result of extinctions and invasions (or introductions).

ii- I use ‘savanna’ here in place of ‘oak opening’ for relatively open communities with mostly widely spaced, open-grown oak trees with prairie vegetation in-between.

______

Species Common Name and Notes
Andropogon gerardii Big bluestem
Antenneria spp. Pussytoes
Aristida spp. Three-awn grasses
Asclepias amplexicaulis Clasping-leaf milkweed, sandy sites
Asclepias syriaca Common milkweed
Asclepias tuberosa Butterfly milkweed, sandy sites
Asclepias verticillata Whorled milkweed
Besseya bullii Kittentails, P
Bouteloua spp. Gramma grasses, P
Carex brevior Great Plains oval sedge
Carex gravida Heavy sedge
Carex normalis Greater straw sedge
Carex umbellata Parasol sedge
Cirsium discolor Prairie thistle
Crocanthemum spp. Frostweeds, sandy sites
Desmodium canadense Showy tick-trefoil
Desmodium illinoense Illinois tick-trefoil
Dichanthelium spp. Rosette panic-grasses
Erigeron pulchellus Robin’s plantain
Fragaria virginiana Virginia wild strawberry
Gentiana alba Cream gentian
Lathyrus venosus Veiny Pea, P
Lechea spp. Pinweeds, sandy sites
Lespedeza capitata Round-headed bushclover
Lithospermum caroliniense Hairy puccoon, sandy sites
Lobelia spicata Pale-spiked lobelia, P
Lysimachia lanceolata Lance-leaved loosestrife, sandy sites
Monarda fistulosa Bergamot
Oenothera perennis Small sundrops, P
Packera paupercula Balsam ragwort, P
Penstemon gracilis Lilac beardtongue, sandy sites
Primula meadia Midland shooting star, P
Pycnanthemum virginianum Mountain mint
Ranunculus fascicularis Early buttercup, P
Ratibida pinnata Yellow coneflower
Rudbeckia hirta Black-eyed Susan
Schizachyrium scoparium Little bluestem
Solidago juncea Early goldenrod
Solidago nemoralis Old field goldenrod
Solidago rigida Stiff goldenrod
Solidago speciosa Showy goldenrod
Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass
Symphyotrichum oolentangiense Sky-blue aster, P
Tradescantia ohiensis Ohio spiderwort
Verbena stricta Hoary vervain
Viola sagittata Arrow-leaved violet

‘P’ used for species more often found in pastures than old fields

[i] I use ‘savanna’ here in place of ‘oak opening’ for relatively open communities with mostly widely spaced, open-grown oak trees with prairie vegetation in-between.

What Guides You on Your Journey?

by | Jul 19, 2022 | Inspiration

Updated 12/5/2024

 

By Scott Fulton

For thousands of years, the people who lived here shared a common set of values across diverse cultures, languages, and lifeways: a deep sense of relationship with the land and its living things, respect for all the members of that community, a desire for reciprocity and balance, and responsibility to future generations. Their active care, through fire and other means, built and maintained over time a beautifully open and richly diverse landscape where everyone could thrive.

Those who colonized here from elsewhere in the world beginning in the 1600’s clearly did not share those same values, at least with respect to the land. They tended to view land and its many resources as property to be used as its owners saw fit. They worked hard to make the land productive, and we have all benefited in our current lifestyles from their centuries of labor.

However, by the mid-Twentieth Century, some visionaries began to see that there was something deeply wrong with this attitude about our relationship with the land. Aldo Leopold, in his Sand County Almanac, described the natural communities he loved beginning to disappear and laid out a set of values he called the “land ethic” as a way forward. John Curtis, in his Vegetation of Wisconsin, scientifically documented those communities down to their species composition, giving us important tools to identify and perhaps restore them. Rachel Carson, in her Silent Spring, made clear in a heart-rending way how our modern technologies could subtly but certainly destroy the animals and plants we most cherish.

Almost 50 years ago, inspired by those visionaries and others, a few small groups of young men and women began to seek out the last remnants of the prairies and oak savannas that had once dominated much of our Upper Midwest landscape. Where they could, they began to cut away the encroaching brush and trees, plant rare seeds collected from other remnants, and, most importantly, rekindle the use of prescribed fire. No one paid them to do this – it was a labor of love to restore these tiny but exquisite islands of “biodiversity” (a term then recently coined).

Over time these local groups grew and had some success. Eventually, they came to understand it was not enough to just restore and manage these treasured remnants – they also had to be permanently protected and cared for by future generations. That required more financial, legal, and organizational resources than any one local group had. They also were learning fast, both from the infant science of restoration ecology and from their own hands-on experiences. They realized that by coming together regionally they could share both resources and knowledge to make what they were doing sustainable. However, they also knew that their dedicated communities of land stewards are intensely rooted in place. Thus, The Prairie Enthusiasts, with its structure of local volunteer chapters, was born.

Today that seed that was planted two generations ago has grown into an organization with 11 chapters in three states, almost 50 preserves protected through ownership or conservation easement, over $12 million in assets, and a volunteer membership of well over a thousand, served by a growing professional support staff. Many of our first generation of pioneering leaders have passed away or are retiring from the field, and even our second-generation leaders (myself included) are beginning to think about handing off the torch. Despite all this impressive history and growth, all of us in The Prairie Enthusiasts believe that our work in the world is only just beginning and will become even more important as time goes on.

At this critical point in our history, as we consider once more how to sustain ourselves into the future, the Board of Directors, under the leadership of Executive Director Debra Behrens, undertook to develop a set of core values for The Prairie Enthusiasts. The goal was to articulate what most essentially defines who we really are as an organization, what we cherish, how we behave, and how we make decisions together. Even though they have been mostly unstated, our core values have guided us on our journey so far. By making them clear to all, they can help inspire and guide those who will continue this journey after us.

As developed and approved by the Board, these are the core values of The Prairie Enthusiasts:

  • Reverence for the Land
    All that we are, and everything we do is deeply rooted in our love and respect for the Land – the communities of soils, water, plants, animals, and other living things, of which we are a part.
  • Long View
    The origins of the land are ancient. We are stewards of the present – the legacy entrusted to our care. Our actions shape what is possible for future generations.
  • Working Together
    We are responsible for caring for the land. Everyone has a unique ability to contribute. By working together, we form bonds that make our community stronger than ourselves.
  • Sharing Knowledge
    We honor wisdom and experience, science, and the arts. We are seekers and teachers, sharing what we have learned and encouraging others to build on it.

I, for one, am very proud to be part of an organization based on these core values. Let me know what you think at sfulton@theprairieenthusiasts.org.

 

This article appeared in the Spring 2022 edition of the Prairie Promoter, a publication of news, art and writing from the Prairie Enthusiasts community. Explore the full collection and learn how to submit your work here.