[PCA] TV: David Mizejewski on the Today Show

Lisa Tasker lisatasker at earthlink.net
Wed Sep 29 12:06:25 CDT 2004


OOPS!  Here is the attachment.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Tasker [mailto:lisatasker at earthlink.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 11:04 AM
To: 'Sara Tangren'; 'Ed Guerrant'
Cc: 'native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org'
Subject: RE: [PCA] TV: David Mizejewski on the Today Show

 

Sara,

 

In case you have not already come across this document put out by the
Colorado Native Plant Society, here is our attempt at addressing what is
"native".  You can find this document on the website as well www.conps.org
<http://www.conps.org/>  .  I thought this would be of interest.

 

Also, I would like to suggest you contact Dr. Yan Linhart at the University
of Colorado as he has done studies documenting genetic "pollution" from
planting non-local natives planted near their true native counterparts along
a roadside in Rocky Mountain National Park and other studies.  I am going to
be lazy and let you look on the U of C website under the EPO biology
department for his contact info.  A second contact could be Randy Kratz, the
botanist with the Forest Service for the Rocky Mountain Region as he is
involved with a document addressing genetic issues with regards to
revegetating with native plants (coming out of California).  I believe you
can find more info on this at this link
http://www.blm.gov/nhp/efoia/ca/Public/IMs/1997/CAIM97-005-P.html 

 

I am also very intrigued with this discussion and always curious to see
where it takes people.  I know the seed industry and the horticultural
industry in our area (the majority) are very distressed about all the talk
about ecotypes and many lively discussions have ensued between ecologists
and individuals making a living from selling seeds and plants.

 

I would be very interested to see where your hunt for more information takes
you.  I am out of time for the moment, but really wanted to make this
connection.

 

Thanks Sara,

Lisa Tasker

Wearing the hat of the Co-committee chair for the Colorado Native Plant
Society's Horticulture and Restoration Committee.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org
[mailto:native-plants-bounces at lists.plantconservation.org] On Behalf Of Sara
Tangren
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 4:59 PM
To: Ed Guerrant
Cc: native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: Re: [PCA] TV: David Mizejewski on the Today Show

 

Dear Colleagues,

I am volunteering on a committee in the Chesapeake Watershed that is
presently writing guidelines for conservation landscaping. I would
appreciate your input between now and October 19th, at which time I will
make my final recommendations to the committee.

People are going to garden. So many people are asking the question is there
any environmental benefit to gardening with natives? But the question we
really need to ask is would it be better for people to garden with natives
than with aliens? Here in the DC metro area the garden aliens have escaped
into the parks and along the roadsides and now even back into the
furthermost recesses of our farm lands, woods and wetlands. Everywhere we
look we see old garden favorites and fewer and fewer natives. Each year the
situation is noticeably worse. Where the damage is not directly due to
garden escapes, it is due to diseases or insects that were imported with
alien garden plants. Now we are facing the very real threat of losing the
entire Eastern Deciduous Forest to sudden oak death. It seems to me that
this hemorraghing could be slowed if people were gardening with real, local,
native plants. Then at least garden escapes would not be the harbingers of
new invasions.

I do not understand the argument that if we garden with natives, then 20
years from now some botanist will not be able to tell if a native plant
population is a garden escape or naturally occurring population. If we don't
turn this invasive plant situation around fast, our hypothetical botanist
will have a hard time finding a native plant population at all. Perhaps
because I live in the DC-Baltimore-Annapolis metro area, I see this as a
three alarm fire. It's past time to sound the alarm.

One of the questions we face on the committee is in the definition of native
plant. To me the definition that seems most defendable is a plant that
occurred within the local region at the time the Europeans began to explore
the Western hemisphere. To me this is practical because it precedes species
introductions by European settlers, and it dates back to the first written
botanical records. Does anyone have an argument for or against this
definition? If you argue that the date should be the arrival of humans
(Native Americans) as they immigrated from the west, or the previous ice
age, how do you propose we make determinations of what is and isn't native
based on that date, given that there are no records? Why do you feel that
date is more appropriate, or is it just that it is not less appropriate than
the date of the first European explorers? If anyone has a reference for a
thought out discussion on this topic, please pass it on.

Another question is whether or not a cultivar obtained from a native species
is to be considered a native plant. My thoughts are that while a few
cultivars are really direct clones of wild species, most cultivars have been
"improved" in some way that separates them from the original species. In
either case, the cultivars are clones and do not have the same genetic
diversity that wild plants do. I would prefer to see gardeners start working
with direct descendants of local ecotype stock, so that even our gardens
contain some genetic diversity. The issue and the usual objection I
encounter is that local ecotype material is not commercially available.
Anybody got any thoughts or references on the cultivar topic?

And this brings me to the next question, which is whether we should garden
with native species that are locally rare. I think not. I particularly hate
to see folks gardening with cultivars of species that are rare in our area.
Some plants that are rare to our area are so beautiful and so compelling
that they are hard to resist. Examples are red turtlehead, false blue indigo
and wild lupine. I think most of you will agree that we should not garden
with locally rare species, but I could use a reference or two of refereed
research articles that have documented damage to the genetic composition of
wild populations as a result of such activities. So pass them along if you
have them...

Thanks for your time.

Sara

Sara Tangren, Ph.D.
Chesapeake Native Nursery 
Mailing Address Only: 326 Boyd Ave. #2, Takoma Park, MD 20912
Phone 301 580 6237
Fax 301 270 4534
On Jul 19, 2004, at 6:29 PM, Ed Guerrant wrote:

Hi All,
        Great conversation!  The devil (or angel?) is, of course, in the
details.  
        I'd like to take a step back and think about what it means for
something to have 'conservation' value.  The various points of view
represented so far might not be as far apart as it seems they might be.  I
see in this discussion at least two different conservation values being
expressed.  One is more biological/ecological, and has to do with whether
the particular native plants in home gardens must directly (and positively)
contribute to the genetic continuity of the species in question: if it
doesn't reduce the extinction risk and/or enhance 'genetic connectedness' of
wild populations, it's not conservation.  Another 'conservation value' is
more social, and thus contributes what is perhaps a more indirect (but not
necessarily any less real or valuable) benefit to the genetic continuity of
the species in question. Gardening with natives helps (in my opinion) a
wider public begin to see value in native species that is not found in non
native species or horticultural varieties.  Ultimately, our success in
conserving wild species (and by extension the habitats on which they
ultimately depend) rests very much on the degree to which our society values
native species.  If we as a society feel that it is important to conserve
biodiversity, I think we have a fighting chance.  If society at large
doesn't value biodiversity, then there is precious little we as
conservationists can do to significantly slow the loss now underway.
        The gardening with natives phenomenon is potentially of great value
in getting more folks interested in conserving wild diversity, thus moving
society to allocate more resources toward that end.  Nevertheless, and
getting back to details, gardening with natives in inappropriate ways (what
are they, and who gets to make the call?) can have serious negative impacts
on the genetic integrity of wild populations.

Cheers, Ed


At 05:29 PM 7/16/2004 -0400, Bruce Sorrie wrote:

Grinches all - I completely agree with Robert, and have thought the same way
for many years.  Although backyard gardeners may make a small difference
with local wildlife populations (mostly suburban bird species, which are
common), I doubt that gardeners can significantly impact "wilder" species.
Additionally, there are particularly knotty problems with planting native
flora in backyards, as Robert has pointed to - how is a 22nd century
botanist to know that a woodlot population is naturally-occurring or
originally planted in a nearby yard? 
    To those who suggest that planting additional pops of plants or captive
breeding of animals is a remedy for declining flora and fauna, I say think
carefully before you act.  Don't misconstrue my message - I applaud efforts
to prevent the extinction of species and of disjunct and peripheral
populations.  No one can say that we'd be better off without them in the
gene pool.  But backyard gardening and wildlife plantings are not comparable
to preserving genetic diversity of threatened species. 
    My biggest knock against the practice is the notion that "wildlife
garden" plants and animals have equal value, or nearly equal value, as truly
wild ones.  As any zoo animal or potted plant knows, to be a real member of
a species you must live in natural habitat.   

Bruce A. Sorrie
North Carolina



Robert Dana wrote:



Call me a grinch, but I'm having a hard time understanding why
anyone
thinks that gardening has much to do with conservation. Most gardens
will last only so long as people keep them going--without continuing
maintenance they will quickly be taken over by the numerous exotic
"weeds" that are so comfortable in human-dominated landscapes.
In their
often naive enthusiasm (abetted by commercial vendors) folks are
planting "natives" helter skelter, even well outside their
natural
ranges. This creates problems for us trying to conserve the plants 
where
they naturally occur as it becomes more difficult to deal with the
challenge of demonstrating that the  occurrence is really natural
and
not a garden escape (or an intentional planting). There is also the
specious challenge that since we can plant things why worry about
conserving natural habitats anyway. People rarely have any idea what a
tiny fraction of the species richness of n
atural communities is present
in gardens (or "restorations"). In my view, the whole wildlife
gardening
business just diverts energy from what we really need to be doing for
conservation. 

I'll be interested to see whether these issues get any discussion in
the book.

Oh, good luck, Dave!

Robert

*************************************************************
Robert Dana, Ph.D.
MN DNR
Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program
500 Lafayette Rd, Box 25
St. Paul, MN 55155
651 297-2367
Email:
robert.dana at dnr.state.mn.us
*************************************************************




Plant Conservation
<plant at plantconservation.org>
7/16/04 10:40:07



AM >>>
Just FYI.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 11:39:55 -0400
From: David Mizejewski <mizejewski at nwf.org>
To: David Mizejewski <Mizejewski at nwf.org>
Subject: Today Show this weekend

Dear Friends and Colleagues - I wanted to let you know that I'm going
to
be making my debut on national television this weekend.  I'll be
appearing on the weekend edition of the Today Show this Sunday (7/18)
between 8:30-9 a.m. to promote my book and National Wildlife
Federation's Backyard Wildlife Habitat program.

The book is called "Attracting Birds, Butterflies and Other Backyard
Wildlife."  It's all about sustainable gardening, native plants, and
of
course all of the cool critters (not just birds and butterflies) that

can share your yard.  Check it out on NWF's bookstore at the URL below
(it's also available at Amazon and Barnes and Noble).

https://m1.buysub.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=107
01&storeId=10701&productId=14713&langId=-1&parentCategoryId=10067&topCategor
yId=10066


Wish me luck!

Dave


******************************************
Backyard Wildlife Habitat Program
******************************************
David Mizejewski
National Wildlife Federation
11100 Wildlife Center Drive
Reston, VA 20190
(703) 438-6499
fax 703-438-6468
www.nwf.org/backyardwildlifehabitat 



___
____________________________________________
native-plants mailing list
native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org 
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plan
tconservation.org

_______________________________________________
native-plants mailing list
native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plan
tconservation.org





-- 






Bruce A. Sorrie
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
3076 Niagara-Carthage Rd.
Whispering Pines,  NC  28327
910-949-2625
bsorrie at earthlink.net







_______________________________________________
native-plants mailing list
native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plan
tconservation.org

Ed Guerrant PhD, Conservation Director, The Berry Botanic Garden, 
11505 SW Summerville Ave., Portland, OR 97219-8309. 
phone (503) 636-4112 x 29, FAX (503) 636-7496, e-mail
ed.guerrant at berrybot.org
Visit our website at: www.berrybot.org
_______________________________________________
native-plants mailing list
native-plants at lists.plantconservation.org
http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/native-plants_lists.plan
tconservation.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20040929/0a447556/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: native plant def.PDF
Type: application/pdf
Size: 26666 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/native-plants_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20040929/0a447556/attachment.pdf>


More information about the native-plants mailing list