My "golden rule" is pretty much a no-brainer. But my silver rule can seem paradoxical - why not plant California natives in California!? This rule doesn’t apply to gardeners such as Ms Town Mouse, who live in the middle of the suburbs. Only to those of us gardening in the WUI - the wild land-urban interface — and even for us, it’s perhaps controversial.
Not everyone agrees with this silver rule, but I want to keep my local wild plants as they are. Local = unique. Unique = irreplaceable.
I'm not always clear about what will and won’t cross. Monkeyflowers, iris, ceanothus, manzanita, dudleya – anything that you can buy nice cultivars and selections of – they’ll probably cross with indigenous natives.
Propagated local wild bush monkeyflower (Mimulus aurantiacus) |
Cultivar Mimulus aurantiacus 'Trish', along with seaside daisy, Erigeron glaucus |
Local wild bush monkeyflower plants- with a brick-red 'Trish' cross nestled among them. |
Some people, for example, think we should plant more Southern California natives in the wild lands farther north, to prepare for global warming. Or introduce natives of the same species as the local indigenous ones, but from other areas, again, to introduce more genes into the pool, and make them more adaptable to changing climate conditions.
There's middle positions too - some people don't care about monkeyflower crosses, but do care about dudleya crosses, for example - I'm not entirely sure of the reasoning.
I’m trying to follow up on these questions about introducing nursery natives in a wilderness area, and will get back to you. For my purposes, I'll be identifying and (sadly) removing my pretty garden cultivars that can - from my viewpoint - taint the local populations.
Note: whenever I write in this vein, I become uncomfortable with the "eugenic" tone of the writing. Be assured - I'm only talking about plants here - not people!
There's middle positions too - some people don't care about monkeyflower crosses, but do care about dudleya crosses, for example - I'm not entirely sure of the reasoning.
I’m trying to follow up on these questions about introducing nursery natives in a wilderness area, and will get back to you. For my purposes, I'll be identifying and (sadly) removing my pretty garden cultivars that can - from my viewpoint - taint the local populations.
Note: whenever I write in this vein, I become uncomfortable with the "eugenic" tone of the writing. Be assured - I'm only talking about plants here - not people!
Comments
Love your blog and I agree that planting hybrid natives next to wild areas is risky. Would like to point out though that your picture of Mimulus 'Eleanor' in this mornings blog is more likely to be the hybrid 'Trish'. Could be wrong as there are many hybrid reds out there. 'Eleanor' has a pale yellow/peach colored flower. Someone probably mixed the tags up at the nursery.
Thanks again for the blog. I enjoy it a lot.
Jeff
I can see your concern with hybrids possibly tainting the local pool but not so much with cultivars since they are usually just selections grown for specific traits (size, color, hardiness, etc.). Any crosses that result from a cultivar will generally just revert back to the species.
Maybe we can find out more from the good people up there next time we go.