[RWG] "Native plant" definitions ?

[Wayne Tyson]

All:

It is characteristic of authoritarian cultural hierarchies to insist 
upon "definitive" definitions. But reality consists of change and variation.

Let's face it--there is one ecosystem, Earth.  And maybe "the 
universe," whatever that is.  But as a "practical matter" we want 
complex systems to behave in predictable ways--our ways.  Such is the 
arrogance of Homo sap.

"Native" is a kind of irony.  The word comes from the Latin, 
"nativus," meaning "born."  As an individual, I am a "native" 
Californian because I was born in California.  But I grew up in 
Texas, where my father was "native," whose grandmother was "native" 
to North Carolina, whose mother was born there too, but was a 
"native" Cherokee, whose ancestors came to North America via the 
Bering Strait, no doubt with a string of individuals "native" to 
numerous places in between.  At one time in the history of this chain 
of invasion, each individual who stayed in the same place in which 
she was born was "native" to that place.  But when they moved into 
new habitats they became alien invaders.  I am "native" to the entity 
called the State of California, but my father was an alien, as were, 
at one time or another, all of his ancestors, save, perhaps, in some 
philosophical sense, some hominid in Africa, from which my species 
dispersed.  I can only be fairly certain that I am native to the 
earth, and not necessarily alien to the rest of existence, in some 
obscure philosophical sense.

With most plants, their ability to move from one habitat to another 
is limited.  This does not, however, keep them from 
"trying."  Propagules disperse by wind, by wing, by foot, hitching a 
"ride" in feathers, guts, and by determined horticulturists.  When 
they find a habitat congenial to their growth and reproduction, they 
"put down roots."  Do they become "native" when their progeny 
continue to reproduce and expand their populations in the new habitat 
where they did not exist before?  This is an epistemological question 
which must be "begged" in some way that fits, or is at least 
expedient to, our chosen context.

Our context is history-dependent.  Therefore, a "native" plant is one 
that we know preceded us--its lineage, in the habitat at issue, is 
pre-historic.  Easy, eh?  No?

Respectfully submitted,
WT


At 08:41 AM 6/28/2006, Craig Dremann wrote:
>Dear Emily, Greg and All,
>
>Thanks for your email.
>
>When I posted the question about the "native plant" definition issue, I
>did not realize how important it was, that the US Forest Service has
>opened a public comment period in order to set a new definition of
>"native plant", for the entire Forest Service.
>
>All interested parties are supposed to post their comment(s) according
>to the directions in the Federal Register Notice. The proposed
>policy is posted:
>http://www.fs.fed.us/rangelands/whoweare/documents/FSM2070_Final_2_062905.pdf
>
>There's always an exception to a rule, regarding defining "native plant"
>as those plants which are original members of an ecosystem, or as Gregg
>quoted from the NPS definition of an "EXOTIC" as "those species that
>occupy...park lands directly or indirectly as the result of deliberate
>or accidental human activities."
>
>Also, the NPS definition of "Native" as plants "...evolving in concert
>with each other" could also include ALL naturalized exotics over time,
>because once naturalized, they too are evolving along with the ecosystem
>that they are now firmly attached to.
>
>Unfortunately the NPS definition of EXOTIC ignores the thousands of
>years of Native American moving plants around and humans naturalizing
>them at different locations within North America.
>
>The Juglans californica in California, the original historic ecosystem
>was the Santa Barbara area.  Many thousands of years ago, the California
>Indians took seeds and planted them all over central and northern
>California at their village sites along stream banks.
>
>Walnut Creek in Contra Costa County in the San Francisco Bay Area is an
>example of such an ancient village site.  Anywhere you see California
>walnuts growing along a creek, a California Indian village once thrived.
>
>Over time, and in isolation from the original genetic material in
>Southern California, the northern California material evolved into a
>separate botanically recognized subspecies, var. Hindsii.
>
>Also in California many sedges and perennial grasses used for basketry,
>plus the semi-domesticated sunflowers were moved and planted around
>village sites.  Driving through California, for example up and down I-5
>in the Central Valley, a botanist can spot an ancient village site
>easier than an archeologist and at 70 miles an hour, because that's
>where the wild sunflowers are still growing today in mass.
>
>Many years ago, I asked a California Valley Yokuts Indian about a
>particular large stand of sunflowers along I-5, and was that an ancient
>village site?  She gave me a shocked look and didn't say anything for a
>while, but later she whispered that area was the secret location of the
>tribe's ancient sweat lodge that they still use, and nobody was supposed
>to know about it--but the sunflowers still pointed the way, after 200
>years.
>
>Plus there's the form of Indian Rice grass (Orysopsis hymenoides) that
>was selected and intentionally spread by humans.  It differs from the
>original wild form, in that when the seeds are ripe, the seeds do not
>disperse, which is a human-selected trait within the grass family.
>
>Over the many thousands of years of intentionally planting and
>naturalization, the non-shattering form has become the dominant form of
>Indian Ricegrass across the West, and the original naturally-evolved
>ripe-seed-shattering form, can barely be found anywhere (I did a survey
>in 1997).
>
>And then in Canada, the Great Lakes, and Europe, there's the paradox of
>the Sweetgrass (Hierochloe odorata) occurring in both northern Europe
>and North America, and it is a plant which rarely produces viable seed.
>The grasses evolved after Europe and North America split, so how did the
>same vegetatively reproduced species get on two continents?
>
>Did someone bring it to Europe from North America or did someone bring
>it to North America from Europe?  So where is it "native" to?
>
>Does it mean that we should give all plants naturalized into and around
>North America by humans before 1492, a pass?
>
>Sincerely,  Craig Dremann (650) 325-7333
>
>_______________________________________________
>PCA's Restoration Working Group mailing list
>RWG at lists.plantconservation.org
>http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/rwg_lists.plantconservation.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/rwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20060629/b087e93d/attachment.html>