journal of the california native plant society · volume 37:4/38:1, october 2009/january 2010...

F R E M O N T I AV O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

$10.00 (Free to Members)

VOL. 37, NO. 4 AND VOL. 38, NO. 1 • OCTOBER 2009 AND JANUARY 2010

FREMONTIA

BACK FROM THE BRINK:A SECOND CHANCE ATDISCOVERY ANDCONSERVATION OF THEFRANCISCAN MANZANITA

AND OTHER ARTICLES

BACK FROM THE BRINK:A SECOND CHANCE ATDISCOVERY ANDCONSERVATION OF THEFRANCISCAN MANZANITA

AND OTHER ARTICLES

F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

STAFF (SACRAMENTO)Executive Director . . . . . Tara HansenFinance & Administration Manager .

Cari PorterMembership & Development Coor-

dinator . . . . . . Stacey FlowerdewConservation Program Director . . . . .

Greg SubaRare Plant Botanist . . . . Aaron SimsVegetation Program Director . . . Julie

EvensVegetation Ecologists . Jennifer Buck,

Kendra SikesEducation Program Director . . . Josie

CrawfordAdministrative Assistant . . . . . Marcy

Millett

STAFF (AT LARGE)Fremontia Editor . . . . . . . Bob HassCNPS Bulletin Editor . . . . . Bob HassLegislative Consultant .Vern GoehringEast Bay Conservation Analyst . . . . .

Lech NaumovichWebsite Coordinator . . Mark Naftzger

PROGRAM ADVISORSRare Plant Program Senior Advisor . . .

Jim AndreVegetation Program Senior Advisor . .

Todd Keeler-WolfHorticulture Committee Co-Chairs . . .

Tara Hansen, Brett HallCNPS Press Co-Directors . . . . . Holly

Forbes, Dore BrownPoster Program . . . Bertha McKinley,

Wilma Follette

BOARD OF DIRECTORSBrett Hall (President); Carol Witham(Vice President); Brad Jenkins (Trea-surer); Sarah Jayne (Secretary); AtLarge: Lauren Brown, Laura Camp,Ellen Dean, Jane Hicks, Arvind Kumar,Brian LeNeve, Vince Scheidt, AlisonShilling

MATERIALS FOR PUBLICATIONCNPS members and others are wel-come to contribute materials for publi-cation in Fremontia. See the inside backcover for submission instructions.

CHAPTER COUNCILKevin Bryant (Chair); Larry Levine(Vice Chair); Marty Foltyn (Secretary);Board of Directors Representatives:Lauren Brown, Brian LeNeve

Alta Peak (Tulare) . . . . Joan StewartBristlecone (Inyo-Mono) . . . . . . . . .

Steve McLaughlinChannel Islands . . . . David MagneyDorothy King Young (Mendocino/

Sonoma Coast) . . . . . Lori HubbartEast Bay . . . . . . . . . . Delia TaylorEl Dorado . . . . . . . Cindy PodsiadloKern County . . . . . . Laura StocktonLos Angeles/Santa Monica Mtns . . . .

Betsey LandisMarin County . . Carolyn LongstrethMilo Baker (Sonoma County) . . . . .

Liz ParsonsMojave Desert . . . . . . Tim ThomasMonterey Bay . . . . Rosemary FosterMount Lassen . . . . . . . Catie BishopNapa Valley . . . . . . . . . . John PittNorth Coast . . . . . . . Larry LevineNorth San Joaquin . . . . Alan MillerOrange County . . . . . Nancy HeulerRedbud (Grass Valley/Auburn) . . . .

Brad CarterRiverside/San Bernardino counties . .

Katie BarrowsSacramento Valley . . . Hazel GordonSan Diego . . . . . . . . Marty FoltynSan Gabriel Mtns . . . Gabi McLeanSan Luis Obispo . . . Lauren BrownSanhedrin (Ukiah) . . . . . . . . Geri

Hulse-StephensSanta Clara Valley . . . Kevin BryantSanta Cruz County . . . . Brett HallSequoia (Fresno) . . . . Paul MitchellShasta . . . . . Susan Libonati-BarnesSierra Foothills (Tuolumne, Cala- veras, Mariposa) . . Robert W. BrownSouth Coast (Palos Verdes) . . . . . .

Barbara Sattler, David SundstromTahoe . . . . . . . . . . Michael HoganWillis L. Jepson (Solano) . . . . . . . .

Mary Frances Kelly PohYerba Buena (San Francisco) . . . . .

Linda J. Shaffer

Staff and board listings are as of October 2010.Printed by Premier Graphics: www.premiergraphics.biz

The California Native Plant Society(CNPS) is a statewide nonprofit organi-zation dedicated to increasing theunderstanding and appreciation ofCalifornia’s native plants, and to pre-serving them and their natural habitatsfor future generations.

CNPS carries out its mission throughscience, conservation advocacy, educa-tion, and horticulture at the local, state,and federal levels. It monitors rare andendangered plants and habitats; acts tosave endangered areas through public-ity, persuasion, and on occasion, legalaction; provides expert testimony togovernment bodies; supports the estab-lishment of native plant preserves; spon-sors workdays to remove invasive plants;and offers a range of educational activi-ties including speaker programs, fieldtrips, native plant sales, horticulturalworkshops, and demonstration gardens.

Since its founding in 1965, the tradi-tional strength of CNPS has been itsdedicated volunteers. CNPS activitiesare organized at the local chapter levelwhere members’ varied interests influ-ence what is done. Volunteers from the33 CNPS chapters annually contributein excess of 97,000 hours (equivalentto 46.5 full-time employees).

CNPS membership is open to all.Members receive the quarterly journal,Fremontia, the quarterly statewide Bul-letin, and newsletters from their localCNPS chapter.

VOL. 37, NO. 4, OCTOBER 2009 AND

VOL 38, NO. 1 JANUARY 2010

F R E M O N T I A

Copyright © 2009 & 2010

California Native Plant Society

Disclaimer:

The views expressed by authors publishedin this journal do not necessarily reflectestablished policy or procedure of CNPS,and their publication in this journal shouldnot be interpreted as an organizationalendorsement—in part or in whole—of theirideas, statements, or opinions.

CALIFORNIA NATIVEPLANT SOCIETY

Dedicated to the Preservation ofthe California Native Flora

Bob Hass, Editor

Beth Hansen-Winter, Designer

Brad Jenkins, Jake Sigg, and

Carol Witham, Proofreaders

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

MEMBERSHIPMembership form located on inside back cover;

dues include subscriptions to Fremontia and the CNPS Bulletin

Mariposa Lily . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,500Benefactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $600Patron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300Plant Lover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100

Family or Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75International or Library . . . . . . . $75Individual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45Student/Retired/Limited Income . $25

CNPS, 2707 K Street, Suite 1; Sacramento, CA 95816-5113Phone: (916) 447-CNPS (2677) Fax: (916) 447-2727

Web site: www.cnps.org Email: [email protected]

10+ Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,5007-10 Employees . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000

4-6 Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5001-3 Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . $150

CORPORATE/ORGANIZATIONAL

ISSUE DATE : OCTOBER 2009 AND JANUARY 2010. PUBL ICAT ION DATE : D E C E M B E R 2010

F R E M O N T I A 1V O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

CONTENTS

THE COVER: The Franciscan manzanita (Arctostaphylos franciscana) mother plant in transit to a safer area. The plant wasrediscovered in 2009 growing near the Golden Gate Bridge. Photograph courtesy of the California Department of Transportation,J. Huseby, photographer.

BACK FROM THE BRINK: A SECOND CHANCE AT DISCOVERY AND CONSERVATION OFTHE FRANCISCAN MANZANITA by Daniel Gluesenkamp, Michael Chassé, Mark Frey, V. ThomasParker, Michael C. Vasey, and Betty Young ................................................................................................... 3The Franciscan manzanita (Arctostaphylos franciscana) was thought to be extinct in the wild for the past 60years. A series of remarkable events led to the recent rediscovery of this species, which was imminentlythreatened by highway renovations. This is the story of a race against time to save the last wild Franciscanmanzanita and to provide for the species’ long-term recovery.

ALKALINE RAIN POOLS: REMNANTS OF A VANISHING LANDSCAPE by Robert E. Preston .... 18The rapid conversion of most of the Central Valley to cropland or non-native grassland occurred so rapidlythat we know very little about the native vegetation. One little-known wetland type found in remnants ofalkaline habitat in the San Joaquin Valley is the alkaline rain pool, home to some of our rarest Atriplexspecies.

THE ART AND SCIENCE OF CALIFORNIA NATIVE GARDEN DESIGN by Rob Moore ................. 24With every native garden we create, we have a unique opportunity—that of returning a sense of regionalidentity to a suburban setting that has forgotten the natural beauty of our state and its flora.

NATIVE PLANT RESTORATION AT PIEDRAS BLANCAS LIGHT STATION OUTSTANDINGNATURAL AREA by Russ Lewis and Carole Adams .................................................................................. 34A small restoration miracle has occurred at the Piedras Blancas Light Station Outstanding Natural Area.Today the area is nearly free of non-native vegetation and supports a healthy assemblage of native plantspecies.

CONSERVATION AND COMMUNITY AMONG THE SANTA ROSA PLAIN VERNAL POOLSby Michelle Jensen and Nancy C. Emery ...................................................................................................... 40The Santa Rosa Plain of Sonoma County is home to many vernal pool plant species, including threeendangered endemics. This article briefly explores the history and flora of the Plain, threats to its vernal poolhabitat, and efforts to protect sensitive plant species.

WALKING IN ALICE EASTWOOD’S FOOTSTEPS: ERIASTRUM SPARSIFLORUM IN KINGSCANYON by Sarah J. De Groot ................................................................................................................. 44It had been 70 years since the few-flowered woolly-star (Eriastrum sparsiflorum) was collected in KingsCanyon. Could it still be found there?

MARTHA WALKER CALIFORNIA NATIVE HABITAT GARDEN: CELEBRATING 25 YEARSby Kathleen Chasey and Leah Hawks .......................................................................................................... 47Today the former Napa State Hospital dump site is a thriving California native habitat garden thanks todedicated volunteers.

TWO VIEWS OF CNPS FELLOW CAROL WITHAM by Eva S. Butler and Diana Hickson ................ 52

BART O’BRIEN HONORED BY CNPS by Brett Hall .............................................................................. 54

BARBARA M. PITSCHEL: 1939–2010 by Suzanne Harmon ................................................................. 55

HARLAN KESSEL: 1928–2010 by Phyllis M. Faber .............................................................................. 56

2 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

TelosRareBulbs

Telos Rare BulbsP.O. Box 1067

Ferndale, CA 95536

www.telosrarebulbs.com

The most complete offering ofbulbs native to the western USA

available anywhere, our stockis propagated at the nursery, with

seed and plants from legitimatesources only.


BACK FROM THE BRINK:A SECOND CHANCE AT DISCOVERY AND

CONSERVATION OF THE FRANCISCAN MANZANITAby Daniel Gluesenkamp, Michael Chassé, Mark Frey,

V. Thomas Parker, Michael C. Vasey, and Betty Young

this singular morning. Within viewof the Golden Gate Bridge and withthe lights of downtown San Fran-cisco visible in the distance, we stoodin the pouring rain and periodic hailand looked toward a single plantgrowing in the middle of a trafficisland.

On an average day this stretch ofhighway is kept warm by the tires of100,000 vehicles speeding on andoff the Golden Gate Bridge. On anextraordinary morning the highway

is closed, the asphalt lies cool andwet in unaccustomed silence, and afew lucky biologists watch as thelone plant is lifted from its birth-place and loaded onto the back of a75-ton truck.

The plant in question is presum-ably the last wild Franciscan man-zanita (Arctostaphylos franciscanaEastwood), thought to have beenextinct until rediscovered in late2009 and months later dug from itsparent soil in an attempt to save it.

n a rainy Saturday morn-ing in late January2010, shortly after 3:00a.m., a team began to

assemble along a stretch of highwayin the Presidio of San Francisco.Floodlights created small pools oflight and illuminated large construc-tion equipment in the cold darknessof early morning. Camera flashesreflected off safety vests and hardhats, as participants and witnessesstepped out of the darkness to record

The Franciscan manzanita (Arctostaphylos franciscana) is readied for the drive to its new, safer location. Photograph courtesy of theCalifornia Department of Transportation, J. Huseby photographer.

O


waste stretching from the “break-ers” (the ocean) to the bay. Whilethere is a grain of truth to this per-ception—about half of San Franciscois covered by dunes dating from thePleistocene Era to more recent beachdeposits—the myth of “Sand Fran-cisco” obscures a more complex,rich, and unique natural history. Onecan find pieces of this puzzle in earlylandscape paintings and maps, writ-ings by skilled pioneer naturalists,historical photos, geological surveys,and in the remnant fragments of an-cient San Francisco that persist tothe present day.

We now understand that the 46square mile tip of the San Franciscopeninsula contained a diversity ofhabitat types. These low-growingwind-sculpted habitats collectivelycomprised the distinctive Franciscanfloristic region, the smallest floristicregion in California (Roof 2000).One particular geologic feature con-tributed to San Francisco’s charac-teristic local flora: a band of shearedrocks, including serpentinite (ametamorphic rock type composedalmost exclusively of serpentine

minerals, usually with a characteris-tic light to dark green color), com-monly found from Hunters Pointnorthwest to Fort Point. These ser-pentine hilltops functioned as an ar-chipelago of edaphic “islands” whosesoil supported unique serpentinegrassland and maritime chaparralcommunities. Franciscan communi-ties were comprised of hundreds ofplant species, many of which arenow rare and endangered, and theycontained several unique species ofmanzanita.

A few of these rocky hills werespared long enough for naturaliststo study and describe them, and thusthey provided some of the only cluesto the vanished habitats of San Fran-cisco. Hans Herman Behr, one ofthe city’s first formally trained bota-nists, witnessed the transformationof San Francisco’s natural landscapein the years immediately after theGold Rush. Behr (1891) gives us thefirst detailed description of SanFrancisco’s manzanitas in his remi-niscences of the 1850s:

. . . somewhere about the site of theProtestant Orphan Asylum [near thecurrent U.S. Mint], there grew the tallform of Manzanita still found so abun-dantly on the slopes of Tamalpais.The prostrate species . . . once abun-dant, still survives in a few localities,principally Laurel Hill Cemetery, butwill probably disappear shortly.

Behr’s description of both abun-dance and extirpation in the samesentence provides a striking illustra-tion of the rapid devastation beingvisited upon San Francisco’s floraand fauna at the time. The prostratemanzanita mentioned in Behr’s writ-ing may be an early account of Fran-ciscan manzanita (Arctostaphylosfranciscana). However, the rudimen-tary understanding of Arctostaphy-los taxonomy at the time, and thelack of voucher specimens, makes itunlikely that we will ever fully un-derstand the rich diversity of man-zanita that existed in San Franciscoprior to widespread habitat loss.

To some, this may seem like a lot offuss over one roadside shrub. But topeople who are aware of the com-plex and poignant history of bio-diversity in San Francisco, the sepa-ration of this plant from its homeground was the culmination of acentury-old story. It is a story of lossand salvation, of serendipity andcooperation.

At the same time, a new storynow unfolds, a story that provides aglimpse into a potentially differentfuture for wild nature in urban ar-eas. This is the story of the discov-ery and conservation of the last wildFranciscan manzanita.

SAN FRANCISCO’S LONGHISTORY OF DIVERSITY

The San Francisco Bay area isrecognized as a global biodiversityhotspot, and its varied flora is one ofthe best documented of any majormetropolitan region (Daniel andFontaine 2006). Yet the dominantnarrative of San Francisco’s naturalhistory has been that of a great sand

The last wild Franciscan manzanita in its original location along Doyle Drive in thePresidio of San Francisco. Photograph by V.T. Parker.


Even so, from such early writ-ings and records it is evident thatold San Francisco hosted a uniquemaritime chaparral and a diversityof manzanitas, with at least six taxathought to have occurred in SanFrancisco’s wild areas. Early botani-cal records also describe a diversityof Arctostaphylos growth forms in-cluding low-growing prostrate man-zanitas which root from their stems,tall arborescent manzanitas withlarge woody burls, and even man-zanitas that only grew on sanddunes.

FRANCISCANMANZANITA: LOSSAND SALVATION

Legendary botanist Alice East-wood is central to the history of San

TOP: Hedging bets against extinction:Harvesting rooted branch layers and soilseedbank for propagation at botanicalgardens. Photograph by D. Gluesenkamp.• MIDDLE LEFT: Propagation of cuttings ofFranciscan manzanita at the Presidio Nur-sery. Photograph by M. Laskowski. • MIDDLE

RIGHT: Presidio nursery staff process seedscollected from the last wild Franciscanmanzanita. Photograph by B. Young. •BOTTOM: V. Thomas Parker collects buds toprovide pollen that will be used todetermine if the found species is diploidor tetraploid. Photograph by M.C. Vasey.


Francisco’s endemic manzanitas.Famed for many legendary exploitsduring her long and illustrious ca-reer at the California Academy ofSciences, Eastwood had all the BayArea stagecoach schedules memo-rized and had sworn off romanticattachments lest they interfere withher pursuit of new plant species.

Alice Eastwood was also an ex-pert in the genus Arctostaphylos anddescribed numerous new species(Wells 1991), including the pros-trate manzanita in Laurel Hill whichshe collected in 1895 and in 1905named as Franciscan manzanita(Arctostaphylos franciscana). Hertype specimen (the original speci-men from which a description of anew species is made), CAS 295, wasalmost destroyed in the 1906 SanFrancisco earthquake, but Eastwoodherself made a valiant effort to saveit and many other type specimens.

Shaken awake by the 1906 earth-quake, Eastwood ran to the Califor-nia Academy of Sciences and hero-ically rescued the pressed plants

from the ensuing fire. The personalcollection she had spent her life as-sembling was abandoned to theflames, but the irreplaceable typespecimens she saved are still in thecollection today.

In the years following Eastwood’sdiscovery of A. franciscana, this pros-trate manzanita was collected or ob-served at two other San Franciscolocales: in a corner of the MasonicCemetery on Lone Mountain andon the windswept slopes of Mount

Davidson (Roof 1976). Decadeslater, taxonomic sleuthing retro-spectively revealed another endemicmanzanita that had occupied thesesame rocky hills: the then unde-scribed Raven’s manzanita (Arcto-staphylos montana ssp. ravenii).

In the 1930s, however, the pres-sures of real estate development ledto the clearing of maritime chaparralfrom Lone Mountain and MountDavidson, and by 1937, Laurel HillCemetery’s serpentine quarry pro-

Work crews secure the ten-ton mass of manzanita before lifting it by crane to the back ofa flatbed truck. Photograph by M. Chassé.

The root ball tightly wrapped in burlapand wire to prevent cracking. A tent had tobe assembled over the mother plant to keepthe soil from getting too wet in the heavyrains. To make sure the tent did not blowaway, one of the tree contractor’s staff spentthe night at the site under the tent, in thepouring rain, with the traffic of Highway 1roaring a few feet away. Photograph by S.Estelle.


vided the last refuge for SanFrancisco’s own manzanitas.Eastwood participated in the cam-paign to save the old cemetery onLaurel Hill as a memorial park to thecity’s pioneers and, in the process, topreserve one of the last fragments ofopen space in San Francisco. How-ever, in 1938, after 50 years ofstruggle for historic preservation, SanFrancisco voters elected to destroythe last San Francisco cemeteries(Shelton 2008). The following year,Eastwood posed for a professionalportrait by the manzanitas of LaurelHill Cemetery in what seems to beher farewell to the species.

Fortunately, Alice Eastwood wasnot alone in her love of San Fran-cisco’s endemic plants and her de-termination to save them from theforces of progress. Thanks to theefforts of other heroic botanists andhorticulturalists, a small numberof living plants were dug out andbrought to botanic gardens prior tothe bulldozers scraping away the lastof San Francisco’s manzanitas. Oneplant was saved by pioneer nativeplant horticulturalist Lester Rown-tree, who admits that she “garneredit ghoulishly, in a gunnysack.” Shecrept into Laurel Hill Cemetery inthe dead of night with her shovel,exhumed a manzanita plant fromamong the tombstones, bagged it,and sped off to her home in Carmelwith the plant in the trunk of hercar.

Other plants were saved by JamesRoof, California botanist and for-mer director of the Regional ParksBotanic Garden in Tilden Park, whosalvaged Arctostaphylos franciscanaplants uprooted by bulldozers andcarefully nurtured these plants inthe park. Decades later Roof invitedAlice Eastwood, then in her nine-ties, to visit the botanic garden atTilden Park, where she was shownthe survivors of a species she hadthought extinct. In her surprise shesat down and wept. “Tumbling overthe stones, it looks exactly as it usedto at Laurel Hill.”

By the end of the 1940s, the lastknown wild Arctostaphylos francis-cana had been replaced by build-ings, roads, and tennis courts. Atthe same time that Franciscan man-zanita was being driven from LaurelHill Cemetery, bulldozers were atwork in another part of town. Theconstruction of Doyle Drive in thelate 1930s scraped through thePresidio’s serpentine headlands, frag-menting the wildflower-studded“mesa” first described by the Span-ish colonists upon their arrival inthe area.

Yet, ironically, these destructiveforces likely provided for the renewalof a dying species by stimulatingdormant seed. As cars passed by ontheir way to the recently completedGolden Gate Bridge, a manzanitaemerged unnoticed along the top ofa serpentine roadcut. Here it grewon a remarkably small patch of ser-pentine land completely surroundedby highway ramps. Australian teatree (Leptospermum laevigatum) andother ornamental woody vegetationeventually obscured their low-grow-ing neighbor sufficiently to evadethe detection of contemporary bota-nists, who had found a number ofrare species in nearby fragments ofserpentine prairie but saw onlyweeds and danger as they lookedacross to the highway “island.”

For the last six decades, Arcto-staphylos franciscana was believedextinct in the wild. During thesemany years, the original Laurel Hillplants were expertly cared for byhorticulturalists at botanical gardensand native plant nurseries. The seedof an idea to reintroduce the Francis-can manzanita back to the wild wasjust beginning to re-emerge whenan amazing discovery occurred inthe Presidio of San Francisco.

REDISCOVERY OF SANFRANCISCO’S MANZANITA

In spring 2009 work began on aproject to replace Doyle Drive, the

main southern approach to theGolden Gate Bridge. The 1.3 billiondollar project involved demolishingthe seismically unsafe Doyle Driveoverpass and replacing it with a park-way, all within the historic San Fran-cisco Presidio. In preparation for re-moving vegetation from the projectsite, contractors salvaged over 4,000native plants and collected thou-sands of the known native plant seed

from the construction corridor.Shortly thereafter, crews began re-moving the robust and primarilyweedy vegetation that dominated thehighway roadside south of theGolden Gate Bridge.

A low evergreen shrub obscuredby this weedy vegetation lay unde-tected, facing the fate of being lostforever under a pile of wood chips.According to contractors, a Califor-nia Highway Patrol car was parkeddirectly adjacent to the shrub on theday the chipping of woody debrisoccurred. Not wanting to blow woodchips in the direction of a CHP of-ficer, the contractors turned theirchipper in the other direction andthe shrub was spared.

On October 16, Daniel Gluesen-kamp was driving home across thebridge and passed through the re-cently denuded Doyle Drive projectcorridor. For the first time in de-

The “rediscoverer” of the thought-to-be-extinct Franciscan manzanita, biologist DanGluesenkamp. Photograph by A. Setty.


cades the screen of English ivy(Hedera helix), acacia, tea tree(Leptospermum laevigatum), andcotoneaster had been lifted from the

area. Gluesenkamp, a partner in theBay Area Early Detection Network(BAEDN), was scanning the exposedroadside for red alert invasive plants

when he noticed a plant that lookedlike a manzanita. The plant was lo-cated on a small traffic island imme-diately past a high-speed freeway

ABOUT ARCTOSTAPHYLOS

96 species and subspecies through-out the state, but some species arefound as far north as British Colum-bia, east to Colorado, and south toMexico. Bearberry manzanita, alsocalled kinnikinnick manzanita (Arc-tostaphylos uva-ursi), is extremelywidespread, not only present in Cali-fornia and the West, but also foundnorth to Alaska and east throughCanada and the northern UnitedStates, and throughout northernparts of Europe and Asia.

Manzanitas are a wonderfullycomplicated group. Manzanitas ex-ist as two genetic types: diploids

(with one set of chromosomes fromeach parent) and tetraploids (withtwo sets of chromosomes from eachparent). Reproduction is difficult be-tween such genetic types. Addition-ally, based on recent genetic data,two evolutionary lineages make upthe genus. Hybridization seems tobe easy among diploid species withinlineages and we only find them oc-curring in different habitats. Manza-nitas from the two different lineages,however, often are found together inthe wild yet show little hybridiza-tion (Boykin et al. 2005). Tetraploidsdo not usually occur with other tetra-

ranciscan manzanita (Arctosta-phylos franciscana) is a mem-

ber of a genus that is quintessen-tially Californian. A terminallineage of the subfamily Arbutoi-deae of the Ericaceae (rhododen-dron and blueberry family), Arc-tostaphylos is a richly diversegroup of woody shrubs. Fossilsof manzanitas appear in themiddle Miocene in western NorthAmerica, a little over 15 millionyears before present, and a rapidproliferation of species appearsto have occurred in the last 1.5million years. California harbors

Manzanita chaparral often contains manzanita species found near each other that do not hybridize or crossbreed. This is because theycontain different numbers of chromosomes, which limits gene flow between populations. Illustrated is a maritime chaparral site atFt. Ord on the Monterey Bay. The site is dominated mostly by the more prostrate Sandmat manzanita (Arctostaphylos pumila, leftinset photo) mixed with the Woolyleaf manzanita (A. tomentosa, right inset photo). The Sandmat manzanita is diploid, while theWoolyleaf manzanita is a tetraploid. Photographs by V.T. Parker.

F


off-ramp so it was impossible to slowdown to confirm identification. Heimmediately retraced his steps bycar. On a second visit the plant still

looked like a manzanita, and on athird visit he slowed long enough totake a photo of this suspiciously wildmanzanita.

Thinking the plant might be therare endemic Raven’s manzanita, hecalled Lew Stringer, a biologist withthe Presidio Trust. The message lefton Lew’s answering machine wasgarbled with excitement and was cutoff before the story was completed.No matter. When Gluesenkampcalled again 15 minutes later, Lewhad already recruited his coworkerMark Frey and the two were soonen route to the site. They drove pastthe site twice, and then sprintedacross lanes of traffic to confirmGluesenkamp’s drive-by manzanitasighting.

On the east side of the utterlyinaccessible, teardrop-shaped island,six lanes of commuters sped homealong Highway 101; on the west sidea concrete retaining wall dropped 20feet to the Highway 1 onramp. Theisland, perhaps 20 feet across, wasmostly covered with wood chips.Two months earlier these chips hadbeen a large Monterey cypress and atangle of tea tree bushes. On thenorthern tip of the traffic island—the only portion of the site not cov-ered in wood chips—a low-lying car-pet of manzanita spread across anoutcrop of green serpentinite rock.

As luck would have it, NationalPark Service ecologist MichaelChassé, who works with Stringerand Frey and was currently workingon a master’s thesis focused on SanFrancisco’s endemic manzanitas, wassummoned to the location. After cau-tiously identifying the plant as Arc-tostaphylos franciscana, the groupquickly notified Arctostaphylos ex-perts Mike Vasey and Tom Parker atSan Francisco State University. Thetwo visited the site within days andconfirmed the initial identification.All agreed that this was San Fran-cisco’s most exciting plant discov-ery since Peter Raven rediscoveredhis namesake manzanita in thePresidio nearly 60 years before(Raven 1952).

Caltrans project managers werequickly informed. Their engineersconfirmed that the traffic island was

ploids but are frequently found withdiploids from one or both lineages.As a consequence, then, you can of-ten find two or three species of man-zanitas growing together in Califor-nia, and rarely, even more.

The greatest diversity of manza-nitas occurs along the central Cali-fornia coast. This is a result of theiradaptation to a diverse array of to-pography, soil types, and climaticregimes. The San Francisco Bay Arealies within this region of high diver-sity. Summer fog is a factor thatcharacterizes both the Presidio andthe immediate California coastline.Fog is a major influence on the sur-vival and diversity of manzanitas,and most Arctostaphylos species arefound within maritime chaparral,as coastal forest edge species, or aspart of closed-cone conifer wood-lands and forests.

For example, 15 Arctostaphylosspecies are found in the Santa CruzMountains that run through theSan Francisco peninsula into theMonterey Bay area. Only 4 are foundoutside the Santa Cruz Mountains,while 11 of these are restricted tosome limited portion of this range.Similar to A. franciscana being re-stricted to serpentine in San Fran-cisco at the north end of this range,Kings Mountain manzanita (A. re-gismontana) is only found aroundKing’s Mountain, Ben Lomond man-zanita (A. glutinosa) and the Ohlonemanzanita (A. ohloneana) are bothrestricted to Monterey shale outcropson Ben Lomond Mountain, and theBonny Doon manzanita (A. silvicola)is only found on sandy soils in theBonny Doon area.

Wildfire has been an importantselective force on manzanitas as il-lustrated by their adaptations to fire(Parker 2007). One group of man-

zanitas has swollen woody burlscontaining dormant buds thatpermit resprouting after fire,while another group are unableto resprout after fire or cuttingand are therefore killed by fire.Both groups of manzanitas pro-duce seeds in a dormant statethat will not generally germi-nate unless stimulated by chemi-cals from wildfire smoke. Be-cause the seeds remain dormantuntil after wildfire, manzanitascreate what are called persistentsoil seed banks in which seedbuild up slowly in density. Whilepopulations of the first groupare sometimes also killed by fire,germination from their seedbanks reestablishes those popu-lations.

Arctostaphylos species arefound almost invariably on nu-trient-poor soils. The relationshipof Arctostaphylos with poor soilscorrelates with a highly diversemycorrhizal fungal communityassociated with the root systemsof these plants. The fungi are ableto provide critical nutrients tothe plants. Conifers and otherectomycorrhizal trees share theability to form mycorrhizae witha large percentage of the fungalspecies associated with Arctosta-phylos; consequently, manzani-tas and conifers are often foundtogether. Conifers eventuallysuppress the manzanitas, butwildfires stimulate the seed banksof manzanitas and they reestab-lish dominance; slowly, conifersreinvade the site. Thus, wildfirecreates an alternating vegetationpattern of chaparral followed byforest followed by chaparralthroughout the distribution ofthis genus (Horton et al. 1999).

1 0 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

scheduled for demolition as partof the highway repair project,but agreed to protect the unex-pected discovery until planscould be made for the plant’spreservation. Within two weeksafter discovery, a meeting washeld with managers and plantexperts from the Presidio Trust,the National Park Service,Caltrans, U.S. Fish and Wild-life Service, California Depart-ment of Fish and Game, GoldenGate National Parks Conser-vancy, and San Francisco StateUniversity. All involved sprunginto action, including CalTransDistrict 4 Environmental ManagerDavid Yam. With the clock tickingon a billion dollar constructionproject, and with CalTrans takingthe organizational lead, the agenciesselected a team of biologists to de-velop a plan for saving the rediscov-ered Franciscan manzanita.

CONSERVATION OF THEFRANCISCAN MANZANITA

The chance to save a presumedextinct species doesn’t come alongoften in one’s career, so agency rep-resentatives quickly set to the task

of developing a conservationstrategy. At the first meetingthe group identified represen-tatives from each agency tocollaboratively draft a conser-vation action plan. The planfocused on actions to take be-tween the discovery of the plantand the start of construction inthe discovery area. The planevaluated three alternativetreatments for the motherplant: 1) preserving it on thesite, 2) moving it to a botanicalgarden, or 3) moving it to amanaged natural area in thePresidio.

While on-site preservationwould be the most desirable optionunder ordinary circumstances, therewere several factors that weighedagainst this alternative. First, theremnant shrub was already trauma-tized by the sudden removal of itsprotective cover of surrounding veg-

TOP: Precious cargo: The ten-ton bundle of soil, rock, andmanzanita is carefully placed into its secret new home. •BOTTOM: The Franciscan manzanita in its new location awayfrom highway construction. Photographs by S. Estelle.

F R E M O N T I A 1 1V O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

etation and direct exposure to theelements and the exhaust gases ofthousands of vehicles passing by iteach day. Second, the remnant patchthat it occupied was so small andisolated that it would be almost im-possible to restore a viable popula-tion of other A. franciscana individu-als around it, and so the speciescould not realistically recover in thatlocation. Finally, it was determinedto be infeasible to build the DoyleDrive project around the plant, givenimportant constraints demonstratedby Caltrans.

The second option, that of mov-ing the plant to a botanical garden,would have meant returning theplant to an “extinct in the wild”status, at least until reintroducedpopulations could someday be es-tablished. In addition, moving itto a botanical garden would havecompromised the ability to generateviable seed for future propagation(since botanical gardens would con-tain other manzanita species and besubject to hybridization). Therefore,the plan chosen as the preferredalternative was moving the plant toa managed natural area, assumingthat an appropriate site could belocated for transplanting. Remark-ably, Chassé had already started ananalysis of potentially appropriaterestoration sites as part of his mas-ter’s project. A long list of criteriawas developed and used to evaluatepotential sites. The top ranked siteswere further investigated with fieldvisits and soil test pits. Ultimately,the chosen site closely matched thediscovery site in geology, soil tex-ture, slope, and aspect.

The effort to move an entiremanzanita is an inherently riskyoperation. Consequently, the teamtook steps to ensure the parentplant’s genetic material would besaved even in the unlikely event of adisaster before, during, or after themove. We carefully salvaged otherportions of the plant: 1) stem cut-tings, 2) branches that had naturallyrooted around the mother plant,

3) seeds collected off of the motherplant, 4) seed-containing soil fromaround the plant, and 5) microbe-containing soil from around theplant.

The most reliable means of pre-serving clones of the single remain-ing plant (mother plant) was to ob-tain stem cuttings for subsequentrooting. These were obtained fromNovember 2009 to January 2010.Stem fragments for propagation weredistributed to East Bay RegionalParks Botanical Garden at Tilden,UC Botanical Garden at Berkeley,UC Santa Cruz Arboretum, SanFrancisco Botanical Garden at Stry-bing Arboretum, CalFlora Nursery,and to the Golden Gate NationalRecreation Area Presidio Nursery.This was both a pooling of incred-ible manzanita propagation talentas well as a way of distributing riskamong many facilities. Each nurs-ery used its most successful manza-nita rooting technique to encouragestems to root and develop into clonesof the parent plant, and some root-ing has already begun.

Because of its mounding habit,this species of manzanita also canform roots at leaf nodes where theycome in contact with the ground.These “rooted layers” were distrib-uted to East Bay Regional ParksBotanical Garden at Tilden, UCBotanical Garden at Berkeley, SanFrancisco Botanical Garden atStrybing Arboretum, and the PresidioNursery. Approximately 24 were wellrooted and potted up or planted intothese respective gardens.

Remarkably, although isolatedand alone, this lonely mother plantbore tiny apple-like fruits. To pre-serve this treasure trove of its ge-netic code, all ripe fruit was collectedfrom the plant, resulting in 1,346seeds. These have been put in long-term storage: half at UC BotanicalGarden at Berkeley and half atRancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden.

Soil seed banks are important toobligate seeding manzanitas such asA. franciscana. Like many obligate

seeding plants, while the fire maydestroy the parent plants, it alsosends a cue to the stored seeds inthe surrounding soil to begin germi-nating. In manzanitas, fire removesa plug in the seed coat which thenallows water to be absorbed into theseed. Often such seeds will not ger-minate without receiving this firecue, but scientists still have a lot tolearn about the conditions that pro-mote this germination.

To salvage seeds which had fallenfrom the plant in previous years, an18" wide by 4" deep ring of soil sur-rounding the plant was removed care-fully without disturbing the motherplant. The soil containing seed fromaround the mother plant will even-tually be treated to see if any seedscan be germinated. First, however,we will test experimental germina-tion techniques using seeds froma relative of Franciscan manzanita,Mt. Tamalpais manzanita (A. mon-tana ssp. montana) to perfect pre-germination treatments (such as fire,smoke, and cold stratification). Thenthose treatments will be used on seedsfrom the Franciscan manzanita soilseed bank. Once we know what tech-nique works best, seeds taken fromthe mother plant will be treated andsown. With luck the transplantedplant will set seed and we will haveplenty of seeds to work with.

Finally, additional soil was sal-vaged from the rooting zone of themother plant. Manzanitas form closerelationships with soil microorgan-isms, and these symbioses can becritical to plant survival and growth.Salvaged soil will be stored and usedto inoculate outplantings with myc-orrhizae and necessary microorgan-isms. Outplantings will occur overtime in suitable areas of the Presidio.In some cases plantings will includeadditional maritime chaparral spe-cies and perhaps even include theRaven’s manzanita. All planted man-zanitas will be carefully monitoredannually.

After completing this additionalsalvage operation to ensure that the


CONSERVINGMARITIME CHAPARRAL,INCLUDINGMANZANITA

exposures occur like islands in a ter-restrial ocean of more favorable en-vironments. Like all chaparral, thisvegetation depends on periodic wild-fires for regeneration and persistence.

Maritime chaparral was first de-scribed by Griffin (1978) and hassince been given legal protectionunder CEQA and the CaliforniaCoastal Act as an EnvironmentallySensitive Habitat Area (ESHA). Mari-time chaparral was originally con-ceptualized as occurring in only afew specialized places, like Monterey

Bay. However, it has since been rec-ognized to occur sporadically fromMendocino to San Diego Counties(Sawyer et al. 2009). The reason forits protected legal status is the re-markable number of local endemicspecies found in maritime chaparral.For example, in the flagship genusfor maritime chaparral, Arctostaphy-los, out of 96 California taxa, almost80% of its local endemics occur alongthe coastal fog zone (Vasey andParker unpublished data).

It is important to point out that

aritime chaparral is a dis-tinctive California shrub-

land dominated by hard, ever-green-leaved species that occurin summer fog-influenced habi-tats along the coast and in harsh,unproductive soils with poornutrient levels and/or reduced wa-ter holding capacity. These soil

A stand of maritime chaparral on a sandstone outcrop near China Grade in Santa Cruz County. A blooming Santa Cruz manzanita(Arctostaphylos andersonii) is in the foreground. Photograph by M.C. Vasey.

M


plant’s genetic material would bepreserved, it was time to begin prepa-ration to move the mother plant.Two weeks prior to the move, a holewas dug at the transplant site lo-cated within the 1,491 acre Presidioto receive the plant and soil. Simul-taneously, trenches were dug aroundthe mother plant to prepare it fortransport. Because of heavy rains inthe days leading up to the move, atent had to be assembled over themother plant. To make sure the tentdid not blow away, one of the treecontractor’s staff spent the night atthe site under the tent, in the pour-ing rain, with the traffic of Highway 1roaring a few feet away.

After the trenches had been dug,the root ball was tightly wrapped inburlap and wire, forming a mono-lith of tree and soil standing atopgreen serpentinite rock. A dozenthree-inch-diameter metal pipeswere driven two feet below the plantby Environmental Design Special-ists. These pipes served to perforatethe soil and separate the motherplant from the mother soil, and alsoprovided a lattice of support for theburlap-wrapped plant and soilmonolith. These pipes were boltedto I-beams on two sides, and a 75-ton crane was then moved into placenext to the plant. By 5:30 the fol-lowing morning the rains hadstopped and the skies had cleared.As the sun began to rise over theeastern hills, and accompanied by aCHP escort, a ten-ton truck slowlywound its way through silent citystreets to the manzanita’s new homein a much quieter and serene ser-pentine habitat in the Presidio. Withechoes of the noisy freeway nolonger audible, the birdsong of whitecrowned sparrows greeted its ar-rival, along with a team of technicalexperts.

Now began an equally challeng-ing operation: backing a big rig truckdown a narrow, muddy trail to asecond crane that had been posi-tioned at the recipient hole. The ten-ton plant-and-soil monolith was

while the conservation approach tosaving Arctostaphylos franciscana isan inspiration, it represents a lastresort as opposed to optimal conser-vation practice. In virtually everyplace but San Francisco, maritimechaparral stands still persist and themost important conservation activ-ity is protecting these stands fromhabitat loss by encroaching devel-opment. While ESHA regulationsprovide strong legal protection,ESHA is limited to a defined coastalzone which does not extend inlandfar enough to protect all maritimechaparral.

Since many local endemic mari-time chaparral species are not listedunder federal or state statutes, theyare vulnerable to development be-yond the coastal zone boundary. In-vasive species such as pampas grassand sea fig infiltrate the edges ofmaritime chaparral; however, theydo not present much of a problemin intact stands. But there is thethreat of cutting too many trails orclearings into chaparral, which al-lows these invasive species to be-come well established. Wildfiresopen chaparral and permit the ex-pansion of these invasives.

Certainly one of the greatestchallenges to conserving maritimechaparral is managing for fire re-gimes in the face of an expandingwildland-urban interface. Too muchfire can cause chaparral to trans-form to grasslands dominated bynon-native species, and too little firecan eventually cause chaparral tobe displaced by woodland and for-est. It has been recognized that thefire regime in maritime chaparral isless frequent than in interior chap-arral but research is still needed tounderstand this relationship. For-tunately, there is research takingplace on maritime chaparral re-sponse to prescribed fire at Fort Ordand elsewhere.

Yet, as maritime chaparral

stands are eroded by develop-ment and influenced by alteredfire regimes, it is probable thatconservation and managementof existing stands may not pro-vide sufficient protection. Thissituation is particularly true aspressures of changing climate—including the potential declineof the summer fog regime—un-folds (Johnstone and Dawson2010).

In this context, the extraor-dinary efforts being made to con-serve Arctostaphylos franciscanamay present valuable lessons forfuture conservation of maritimechaparral. First, we see how im-portant propagation of vulner-able species can be in venues suchas botanical gardens, and alsohow important artificial seedbanks might be as well. We needto collect a large selection ofgenotypes of vulnerable speciesfor future restored populations.Second, we are learning thattranslocation is not necessarilyimpossible and may, under cer-tain circumstances, be desirable.Third, habitat restoration forfoundation species such as man-zanitas has the potential for bring-ing back entire communities aswell as rare species.

We need more of these chap-arral restoration efforts and welldesigned research to see if thiscan be accomplished. Ultimately,while saving an individual shrubon the brink of extinction is aprofound experience, the true testof the success of this project willbe the restoration of one or moreviable populations of geneticallyvariable individuals in naturalhabitats. By bringing back theFranciscan manzanita from theedge of oblivion, we may be pio-neering a new approach to con-serving maritime chaparral in theface of global change.


slowly lowered into the hole whileeveryone present watched with amixture of excitement and anxiety.The crane was at capacity; it couldnot have moved any more weight ormoved that weight any farther. Af-ter a few crucial adjustments, theplant was in place. Biologists, con-tractors, and Caltrans staff cheered,and shook hands for a job well done.

After the extraordinary move, webegan the more mundane but criti-cal tasks of ongoing observation andstewardship. The plant was exam-ined daily for ten days, and has sincebeen on a weekly monitoring re-gime. Until fall 2010 the plant willbe protected from direct midday sun,dead branches will be pruned, weedswill be removed, and monitoring willcontinue to ensure the plant estab-lishes well in its new home.

While the last wild Franciscanmanzanita has now been success-fully moved and hopefully will havea long life ahead of it, a bigger ques-tion remains. What is the long-termfuture of this species (not this indi-vidual shrub), and what are the pros-pects for restoration of this speciesin the context of San Francisco’slong vanished maritime chaparralhabitat? True recovery will not beachieved until multiple genetic seed-lings are established in several re-stored communities. Fortunately,there are several distinct genotypes

of this species (plants with differinggenetic material) present in botani-cal gardens that can be propagatedand replanted in the wild so thatgenetically variable populations canbe restored. Work is underway tofulfill this vision. Appropriate resto-ration sites will need to be carefullyevaluated. Selected botanical gardenspecimens of Arctostaphylos francis-cana will be analyzed to confirmtheir direct ties to “wild” stock andto determine the number of uniqueplants in cultivation.

Chassé is currently looking intosuitable reintroduction sites andsources of propagation material forthe Franciscan manzanita through amaster’s thesis project at San Fran-cisco State University. This work willhelp us to develop a map of the mostsuitable reintroduction sites, and ablueprint for propagation that en-sures the widest possible geneticdiversity. The results will enable usto bring additional Franciscan man-zanita plants back from their bo-

TOP: The manzanita’s leaves, tiny and tough, with thick cuticles to reduce water loss.Photograph by V.T. Parker. • MIDDLE: The young inflorescence of the Franciscan manzanitais distinctive and helped to identify the discovered specimen as A. franciscana. Photographby V.T. Parker. • BOTTOM: Flower buds are needed to do a chromosome count. Photographby M.C. Vasey.


tanical garden diaspora and homeonce again to San Francisco’s ser-pentine habitats. In the process,other species associated with mari-time chaparral will also be restored.With hard work and a bit of luck,we hope to make it possible for SanFrancisco manzanita plants to ex-change pollen, bear seed, and pro-duce new, genetically wild manza-nita plants that will continue thelineage long after humans havemoved on to something else.

The Raven’s manzanita will alsobe planted at some of these sites,and other rare and distinctive SanFrancisco plants will be encouragedto establish and grow with them. Intime, a vanished community thatwas once part of San Francisco’s richnatural and cultural history may re-turn to enrich our experience andinspire us, much as it did the poetsand botanists of old.

CONCLUSIONS

We feel fortunate to have playedroles in this unexpected and seren-dipitous conservation success story.It has reminded us that amazing dis-coveries can still be made in Califor-nia, even in the most unlikely places,including our thoroughly botanizedand closely monitored parklands. SanFrancisco’s manzanitas have taughtus this lesson before. Consider youngPeter Raven’s 1952 discovery of anew manzanita species in thePresidio, the discovery of Rose’s man-zanita (Arctostaphylos crustacea ssp.rosei) in southern San Francisco, andthe 2008 discovery of Baker’s man-zanita (A. bakeri) in a San Franciscobackyard. Each of these plants is thedescendant of a thousand genera-tions of survivors, each able to passtheir DNA to the next generation.When we are fortunate enough tofind them, we need to assist theirrecovery as we are able.

This story also contains histori-cal parallels that effectively illustratehow conservation efforts have im-proved in the last century. We

thought we had driven this speciesextinct 70 years ago, when construc-tion equipment removed the lastwild Franciscan manzanitas fromtheir native ground so that humanscould build roads and pour con-crete for retaining walls. Back then,conservationists wrapped plants inburlap sacks and salvaged them fortranslocation to foreign soil in theEast Bay hills.

In contrast, today, when con-struction activities threatened thelast wild Franciscan manzanita for asecond time, translocation was onceagain the only hope for saving thespecies. However, this time it wasthe contractors who wrapped theplant in burlap, carefully moved itto a new site, and smiled with satis-faction at saving a species from ex-tinction. It is a hopeful sign whenconservationists and developers aremore likely to work together than tooppose one another’s efforts. In2010, it appears that such coopera-tion is driven by a weak frameworkof environmental regulations and themore straightforward and compel-ling framework of public support tosave nature.

The Franciscan manzanita ex-perience teaches us that people ofgood will can find a way to worktogether and make magic happenwhen they are open to each other’sperceptions of a problem and aremotivated to share their particularexpertise in order to solve it. Thereis a reverence for life deep within allof us. No one truly wants a speciesto go extinct. We need to continueto search for opportunities to bringback nature while engaging abroader segment of our society inthis mission. The collaborativemodel is the one we should strivefor in our conservation work.

Finally, the success of this con-servation story reminds us that thereis hope for saving the native plantsand the places that we love. Oneyear ago the Franciscan manzanitawas a poignant parable of senselessloss. Half a year ago it was a single

plant growing near a freeway. Nowwe have hundreds of clones, thou-sands of seeds, and plans to identifyadditional plants and bring themhome to restore a previously van-ished habitat. This achievement re-quired a lot of hard work and somemasterful coordination, all of whichhad to be accomplished within awoefully short time period, but inthe end we have saved a species.

Our land is still blessed with atremendous natural diversity. Re-markably, most of the unique andmarvelous species encountered byCalifornia’s first European visitorsstill survive in the Golden State. Ourdescendants are not likely to be ableto say the same unless we act quickly,for many of these species persist invery small populations and manyare declining. Other species are ex-tinct in the wild but viable geneticmaterial persists in botanical gar-dens, seed collections, even her-barium sheets. We need to act nowto save them.

Even as we save this Franciscanmanzanita, the Vine Hill manzanita,Mount Tamalpais manzanita, SanBruno Mountain manzanita, Oak-land manzanita, and too many oth-ers are threatened by development,biological invaders, and ill-conceivedfuel management actions. We needto identify the most sensitive spe-cies, map their locations, prioritizethem for rescue, and then act to savethem. If we are willing to make thisa priority and allocate adequate re-sources to this effort, we can pre-serve and restore our remaininghabitats for the future.

REFERENCES

Behr, H.H. 1891. Botanical reminis-cences. Zoe: A Biological Journal 2:2-6.

Boykin, L.M., M.C. Vasey, V.T. Parker,and R. Patterson. 2005. Two lineagesof Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae) identi-fied using the Internal TranscribedSpacer (ITS) region of the nucleargenome. Madroño 52(3):139-147.

Daniel, T.F. and M. Fontaine. 2006.


here is much we need to learnbefore we can successfully ger-

minate seed from the Franciscanmanzanita. There is a consensusthat manzanita seed should haveat least a nine-month period ofafter-ripening—dry storage offreshly harvested seeds at roomtemperature—before the seed istreated (Meyer 2008; Forbes2008, personal communication).The next steps to germination areunclear.

Steve Edwards, at East BayRegional Parks Botanic Gardenat Tilden (RPBG) notes that infire-adapted species such as man-zanitas, fire successfully scarifies(scratches or softens) the hardseedcoat so water can enter, orremoves the plug in the area ofthe seed coat where the rootemerges.

To pre-treat with fire, manza-nita seed can be mixed with sand,potting media, or soil and cov-ered with 1/4" additional mediain a fire-proof pan. This helps tospread the heat without havingspots that are too hot. Then, theseed and media is covered withpine needles or straw 4-6" deepand ignited.

Plant propagation expertshave not determined how long toallow the pine mulch to burn. Itis quite easy to kill the seed if thefire is too hot or if it is allowed toburn for too long a period. Onthe other hand, if the fire burnsfor too short a time or if the seedis buried too deeply under thepine needles, this may not pro-vide sufficient time to scarify theseedcoat adequately for water ab-sorption and root emergence.

Here at Golden Gate NationalParks, we use a small propanetorch and add pine needles orother dry native plant material to

keep the fire going about 30 sec-onds. We will be working on per-fecting these parameters.

There is also research showingthat it is not the high temperatureof fire that induces germination inmanzanita species (Kauffman andMartin 1991), but rather the chemi-cal compounds in smoke or charate(ashes/charcoal) from fire that maybe responsible for seed scarifica-tion in all fire-adapted species, in-cluding manzanitas (Keeley andFotheringham 1998; Tieu et al.2001; Shebitz et al. 2009).

In their propagation work, HollyForbes and John Domzalski at UCBerkeley Botanical Garden use atreatment of full strength liquidsmoke (yes, the stuff you put onyour steak) in water for four hours,followed by 30-day cold stratifica-tion to germinate seed from fire-adapted species. Tom Parker at SanFrancisco State University notes thathis experiments on manzanitas haveachieved a small percentage of ger-mination using hickory liquid smokeat 1:1000 dilution.

At Golden Gate National ParkNurseries, we will first be trying bothfire and smoke treatments withTamalpais manzanita (A. montana),which is a close relative of the Fran-ciscan manzanita and is abundant,before we use seed from the Fran-ciscan manzanita.

Presidio Nursery found thatsmoke treatment rather than fire in-duced germination in Raven’s man-zanita (Arctostaphylos montana ssp.ravenii); whereas, smoke plus heatdid not induce germination. We willbe experimenting both with drysmoke for different periods of time,using dried native plant material ina barbeque, and liquid smoke at dif-ferent concentrations and from dif-ferent sources.

All trials and standard pre-ger-

mination treatments for manzanitaspecies do require cold moist strati-fication after scarification. Stratifi-cation can be done by adding moistseed and perlite in a Ziploc™ typebag and then placing it in a refrig-erator set at a regular food storagetemperature for 30 days. This pro-vides winter-type chilling.

—Betty Young, Director,Golden Gate National Parks

Nurseries

REFERENCES

Forbes, H. Propagation records for Arc-tostaphylos franciscana from Univer-sity of California Botanical Gardenat Berkeley.

Kauffman, J.B., and R.E. Martin. 1991.Factors influencing the scarificationand germination of three montaneSierra Nevada shrubs. Northwest Sci-ence 65(4): 180-187.

Keeley, J.E., and S.C. Keeley. 1987. Roleof fire in the germination of chapar-

PROPAGATING FRANCISCAN MANZANITA FROM SEEDS

Seeds removed from the rediscovered Fran-ciscan manzanita before moving it to a newlocation. The seeds were put in a long-termcold storage seed bank. Photograph by B.Young.

T


ral herbs and suffrutescents. Mad-rono 34(3): 240-249.

Keeley, J.E., and C.J. Fotheringham.1998. Smoke-induced seed ger-mination in California chaparral.Ecology 79(7): 2320-2336.

Laskowski, M., K. Swenerton, andB. Schaefer. 2008. Germinationtrials of Arctostaphylos montanassp. ravenii. Golden Gate Na-tional Parks, unpublished.

Meyer, S.E. 2008. ArctostaphylosAdans. The Woody Plant SeedManual. USDA Agriculture Hand-book. 727: 266-269.

O’Brien, B. Propagation records forArctostaphylos franciscana fromRancho Santa Ana Botanical Gar-den.

Shebitz, D.J., K. Ewing, and J.Gutierrez. 2009. Preliminary ob-servations of using smoke-waterto increase low-elevation bear-grass. Native Plants Journal 10(1):13-20.

Tieu, A., K.W. Dixon, A. Meney, andK. Sivasithamparam. 2001. Theinteraction of heat and smoke inthe release of seed dormancy inseven species from southwesternWestern Australia. Annal of Bota-ny 88:259-265.

Rediscovering San Francisco’s nativeflora. Fremontia 34(4):4-10.

Griffin, J.R. 1978. Maritime chaparraland endemic shrubs of the MontereyBay region, California. Madroño25:65-112.

Horton, T.R., T. Bruns and V.T. Parker.1999. Ectomycorrhizal fungi in Arc-tostaphylos patches contribute to theestablishment of Pseudotsuga menzie-sii. Canadian Journal of Botany 77:93-102.

Johnstone, J.A. and T.E. Dawson. 2010.Climatic context and ecological im-plications of summer fog decline inthe coast redwood region. PNAS.www.pnas.og/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0915062107.

Parker, V.T. 2007. Diversity and evolu-tion of Arctostaphylos and Ceanothus.Fremontia 35(4):8-11.

———, M.C. Vasey, and J.E. Keeley.2007. Taxonomic revisions in thegenus Arctostaphylos (Ericaceae).Madroño 54(2):148-155.

Raven, P.H. 1952. Plant notes from SanFrancisco, California. Leaflets ofWestern Botany 6:208-211.

Roof, J.B. 1976. A fresh approach to thegenus Arctostaphylos in California.The Four Seasons 5(2):20-24.

———. 2000. The Franciscan Region:transcript of a lecture by James B.Roof, ca. 1975. The Four Seasons11(2):41-56.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, J.M.Evens. 2009. A manual of Californiavegetation (2nd Edition). CaliforniaNative Plant Society Press, Sacra-mento, California.

Shelton, T.V. 2008. Unmaking historicspaces: Urban progress and the SanFrancisco cemetery debate, 1895-1937. California History 85(3):26-47.

Wells, P.V. 1991. The naming of the man-zanitas. The Four Seasons 8:46-70.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The mother plant could neverhave been saved without the com-mitment of many experts who madeit a priority in their busy profes-sional lives. David Yam (CalTransDistrict 4 Environmental Manager)took the lead in organizing all theexperts and people involved, orga-nizing Conservation Plan produc-

tion, contracting for the move ofthe discovered plant, and ensuringpropagation and ongoing care andmonitoring. His amazing efforts wereinvaluable.

The following people providedimportant feedback on the Conser-vation Plan or assisted with propa-gation of cuttings, and we thankthem for their valuable input: Eliza-beth Warne and Chris Nagano atU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; MaryAnn Showers at California Depart-ment of Fish and Game; SteveEdwards and Joe Dahl at East BayRegional Parks Botanical Gardenin Tilden; Holly Forbes and JohnDomzalski of the UC Berkeley Bo-tanical Garden; Don Mahoney andTerry Seefelt at San Francisco Bo-tanical Garden at Strybing; Brett Halland Helen Engelsberg at UC SantaCruz Botanical Garden; and last butnot least, Phil Van Soelen from CalFlora Nursery.

Surprisingly, despite its excep-tionally rare status, the Franciscanmanzanita had never been protectedunder the Endangered Species Act.Long-term protection of the speciesis now more likely, thanks to a peti-tion submitted by Brent Plater of theWild Equity Institute, the Centerfor Biological Diversity, and the Cali-fornia Native Plant Society.

Daniel Gluesenkamp, Audubon CanyonRanch, PO Box 1195, Glen Ellen, CA95442, [email protected]; MichaelChassé, National Park Service, Fort Ma-son Bldg. 201, San Francisco, CA 94123,[email protected]; Mark Frey,Presidio Trust, 34 Graham St., San Fran-cisco, CA 94129, [email protected];V. Thomas Parker, Department of Biol-ogy, San Francisco State University, 1600Holloway Ave, San Francisco, CA 94132,[email protected]; Michael C. Vasey, De-partment of Biology, San Francisco StateUniversity, 1600 Holloway Ave, San Fran-cisco, CA 94132, [email protected]; BettyYoung, Golden Gate National Parks Con-servancy Nurseries, 201 Ft. Mason, 3rdfloor, San Francisco, CA 94123, [email protected]


ALKALINE RAIN POOLS:REMNANTS OF A VANISHING LANDSCAPE

by Robert E. Preston

cattered among the remnantsof alkali-influenced lands inCalifornia’s great CentralValley are small, seasonally-

inundated wetlands that have gener-ally gone unnoticed, despite the tre-mendous amount of attention thathas been focused on the study andconservation of vernal pools over thepast 30 years. These small wetlandsare “alkaline rain pools,” a term Icoined to differentiate them from al-kaline vernal pools (also known asnorthern claypan vernal pools (Hol-land 1986, Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf1995), which are superficially simi-lar but differ in their vegetation, soils,and hydrology. Alkaline rain pools,which are the rarest of California’svernal pool habitats, have not beendescribed in the botanical and eco-logical literature and appear to havebeen little studied. This article pro-vides an introduction to their char-acteristic soil, vegetation, and hy-drology, and it reviews their historicand current distribution.

ALKALINE SOILS

“Saline/alkaline soils” is oftenused as a general term for salt-richsoils, and the difference between thetwo soil types is based on their chem-istry. Alkaline soils have high levelsof sodium carbonate (soda ash, orwashing soda) and potassium car-bonate (potash, or pearl ash), whichare also known as alkali salts. Alka-line soils are basic, that is, they havea pH greater than 7 (a pH of 7 isneutral, and a pH lower than 7 isacidic). Saline soils have high levelsof neutral salts, such as chloridesand sulfates of sodium, calcium, andmagnesium, although alkaline soilsoften have high levels of neutral salts,as well.

The classical theory on whatcauses soil salinity or alkalinity sug-gests that, where a high water tableis present, evaporation at the soilsurface draws water and salts to thesurface. When the water evaporates,it leaves the salts behind at the soil

surface and over time the salts accu-mulate. Eventually, the level of al-kali or salt becomes high enoughthat it is difficult for plants to up-take essential nutrients, giving thema stunted or “burnt” look. Wheresalt levels are high enough to killseedlings, distinctive bare patchesof soil develop that are known assalt scalds or slickspots. Salt scaldsform where neutral salts accumu-late, and slickspots form where al-kali accumulates. Salt scalds andslickspots have similar effects onvegetation, and during the summerboth features are similar in appear-ance. However, their different soilchemistry gives them a very differ-ent nature during the rainy season.

Alkaline rain pools form in slick-spots, so-called because they do notlet water pass through and have ashiny appearance when wet (Isaak1934). In the topsoil, clay particlesnormally stick to each other andother soil particles, which leavespores through which water can per-colate. High alkali levels at the soilsurface in slickspots causes the clayparticles to disperse evenly, elimi-nating the soil pores and reducingpermeability to the point that waterponds on the soil surface. In con-trast, salt scalds do not pond waterbecause they are caused by accumu-lations of neutral salts, which donot disperse the clay particles, andgenerally appear spongy or powdery,not “slick.”

Of the 10 soil associations Hol-land (1978) characterized in theCentral Valley as supporting vernalpools, only three support alkalinerain pools. The Lewis-Fresno Group(Lewis, Fresno, El Peco, Dinuba soilseries) occurs on the lower ends ofold alluvial terraces and have weaklycemented hardpans. The Solano-

Aerial photograph of slickspot terrain in the San Joaquin Valley. Alkaline rain pools formin slickspots, so-called because they do not let water pass through and have a shinyappearance when wet.

S


C a p a y - W i l l o w sGroup (Solano, Pes-cadero, Willows soilseries) occurs in ba-sins and on basinrims and have clay-pans or occasional-ly have hardpans.The Chino Group(Chino, Traver soilseries) occurs in ba-sins and on basinrims and generallylacks claypans orhardpans.

VEGETATIONOF ALKALINERAIN POOLS

Very little isknown about thehistoric compositionor the ecology of thealkaline areas of thevalley floor. Histori-cal accounts have concluded thatmuch of the valley floor vegetationwas composed of annuals, with scat-tered shrubs occurring in xeric ar-eas (Wester 1981, Schiffman 2007,Minnich 2008). The first systematicsurveys of alkaline habitats weredone by Joseph Burtt Davy (1898).Burtt Davy recognized several plantcommunities on alkaline soilsaround lake basins in the San JoaquinValley, generally zoned accordingto moisture availability. Saltbushscrub occurred on the higher, morexeric sites on the valley margins,and valley sink scrub occurred inthe basins, usually where a high wa-ter table is (or was) present. At in-termediate sites he recognized threeplant communities characterized,respectively, by interior goldenbush(Isocoma acradenia), bush seepweed(Suaeda nigra), and alkali sacaton(Sporobolus airoides). Jepson (1925)did not differentiate between theplant communities that Burtt Davyhad described, and instead referredto them collectively as alkali flats.He noted that large areas of alkali

flats were still present in the CentralValley, especially along the west side.

At present, the overall vegeta-tion type in which alkaline rain poolsoccur is best characterized as Cali-fornia annual grassland, an herba-ceous plant community dominatedby non-native annual grasses (seeSawyer et al. 2009, p. 30, for a dis-cussion of the changing perspectiveon California grasslands). Neverthe-less, the presence of interior golden-bush, bush seepweed, alkali saca-ton, and other alkaline species markthe habitat as a remnant of one ofthe historic alkaline plant commu-nities. Within the annual grasslandmatrix, alkaline rain pools and saltscalds form a network within theuplands, with alkaline vernal poolsoccurring in swales. Although alka-line rain pools appear superficiallysimilar to alkaline vernal pools dur-ing the inundation phase, the veg-etation in these two wetlands is verydifferent.

The vegetation in alkaline rainpools is sparse, being concentratedon the pool margins and along soil

cracks. In contrast, vegetation invernal pools typically covers the en-tire pool bottom. Alkaline rain poolshave low species diversity and lackplant species characteristic of vernalpools. Instead, the vegetation of al-kaline rain pools mostly is composedof annual, alkali-tolerant wetlandspecies (some of which are alsoadapted to saline soils), similar tothe herbaceous understory of alka-line sink scrub. Because the vegeta-tion is often concentrated on therain pool margins, there often ap-pears to be a ring of flowers, similarto vernal pools. However, alkalinerain pools generally lack the color-ful floral display that vernal poolsare well known for. The unvegetatedportions of the pools are often cov-ered by a cryptogrammic crust, acommunity of mosses, liverworts,lichens, fungi, algae, and bacteriathat live on the soil surface. Cryp-togrammic crust in alkaline rainpools is likely to be composed pri-marily of a blue-green alga (cyano-bacteria) that is common in grass-lands, vernal pools, and alkaline

Shallowly ponded alkaline rain pool in the San Joaquin Valley. All photographs by the author.


sinks in southern and central Cali-fornia (Riefner and Pryor 1996).

In early spring, the dominantspecies in alkaline rain pools arealkali peppergrass (Lepidium dictyo-tum), San Joaquin goldfields (Las-thenia chrysantha), dwarf popcorn

flower (Plagiobothrys humistratus),and California alkali grass (Pucci-nellia simplex). Low barley (Hordeumdepressum), saltgrass (Distichlis spi-cata), and bush seepweed are alsocommon along the pool margins. Byearly summer, the earlier annuals

are replaced by commonspikeweed (Hemizoniapungens), large-floweredsand spurry (Spergulariamacrotheca var. leucan-tha), heartscale (Atriplexcordulata), lesser saltscale(Atriplex minuscula), andSan Joaquin brittlescale(Atriplex subtilis).

Vegetation cover inalkaline vernal pools ismuch higher and moreevenly distributed than inalkaline rain pools. Thecharacteristic vegetationof alkaline vernal poolsincludes many of thesame species found in al-kaline rain pools, but thespecies diversity is muchhigher. Typical vernalpool endemics present inalkaline vernal pools butabsent from alkaline rainpools include coyotethistle (Eryngium vaseyi,E. castrense, and E. aris-tulatum), downingia(Downingia spp.), pop-corn flowers (Plagioboth-rys stipitatus, P. bracte-atus, and P. leptocladus),woolly-heads (Psilocar-phus spp.), spike-prim-rose (Epilobium spp.), andvernal pool saltscale(Atriplex persistens).

HYDROLOGY OFALKALINE RAINPOOLS

Wetland hydrology ofalkaline rains pools issimilar to that of typicalvernal pools but has somesubstantial differences. As

in other vernal pool types, the prin-cipal water source is direct precipi-tation. Sometimes the pools are in-terconnected, so that water flowsbetween them when the pools arefull. Unlike vernal pools, however,all ponding (the accumulation of

TOP: Cryptogrammic crust, a community of microphytic organisms that live on the soil surface ofalkaline rain pools. • BOTTOM: Exoskeletons of aquatic crustaceans remain embedded in the dried poolbottoms. These tiny creatures reach maturity within two to three weeks, depositing cysts that survivethe summer drought to produce the next generation with the winter rains.


standing water) occurs at the soilsurface, and the soil immediatelybeneath the pools is dry. A claypanor a hardpan may be absent, or if arestricting layer is present, there isno hydrologic connection betweenthe water table perched above it andthe water ponded at the surface.

In vernal pools, the water tableperches above a restricting layer, sothat the soil beneath the surface isalso saturated. The water table regu-lates water levels in vernal pools,with water lost through evaporationand transpiration partially replacedby subsurface flow from the adja-cent uplands. This connection to thewater table allows vernal pools topond water for extended periods,typically from 4 to 12 weeks. Incontrast, the duration of ponding inalkaline rain pools ranges from afew days to more than two weeks,depending primarily on the pooldepth and the magnitude and fre-quency of rainfall events. The ma-jority of alkaline rain pools prob-ably do not pond until a substantialamount of rain has fallen, generallybetween 20 and 30 mm over a spanof several days, although lesseramounts would still be sufficient tosaturate the soil.

The duration of ponding directlyaffects the types of aquatic inverte-brates that will be found in alkalinerain pools. Insects, such as divingbeetles (Coleoptera) or backswim-mers (Notonecta spp.), can fly to thepools as soon as they have pondedand can escape when the pools drydown. In contrast, free-swimmingcrustaceans found in alkaline rainpools, such as seed shrimp (Ostra-coda) and Lindahl’s fairy shrimp(Branchinecta lindahli), need two ormore weeks of ponding to reachmaturity and will not persist in poolsthat pond for only short duration.The absence of aquatic crustaceansin many alkaline rain pools indi-cates that they normally pond forless than two weeks. In pools thatare inundated long enough to sup-port aquatic crustaceans, exoskel-

etons can be found embedded in thedesiccated mud on the pool bot-toms after the pools have drieddown.

DISTRIBUTION

The distribution of alkaline rainpools in California is presently un-known. They are known to occuron a conservation preserve at theWoodville Landfill in Tulare Countyand on lands recently purchased byMadera Irrigation District in MaderaCounty. They are potentially foundanywhere alkaline soils occur. Alka-line soils are generally located in oradjacent to the basins that occupythe middle reaches of the CentralValley. They range from Glenn andButte Counties in the SacramentoValley, to the southern end of theSan Joaquin Valley in Kern County,as well as a number of the adjacentsmall valleys, such as the CarrizoPlains, the Cholame Valley, and theLivermore Valley. Based on countysoil surveys prepared by the NaturalResources Conservation Service (for-merly the Soil Conservation Service),over two million acres of alkalinesoils were mapped in this region.

However, much of the land for-merly occupied by these basins hasbeen converted to agriculture. Manyof the soil surveys, especially theolder ones, provide detailed prescrip-tions for “reclaiming” alkaline soilsby adding soil amendments such asgypsum (calcium sulfate) or sulfur.Most of the remaining habitat wherealkaline soils can be found is lo-cated on state and federal lands. Thelargest areas of remaining alkalinehabitat are within the National Wild-life Refuges (NWR), including theSan Luis, Sacramento, and KernNWR complexes. Small areas ofhabitat are also preserved in Depart-ment of Fish and Game EcologicalReserves, including Alkali Sink andKerman.

The distribution of alkaline rainpools outside of California is alsopoorly known. There are extensive

areas of alkaline soils in the south-western United States, on the GreatPlains, and in other arid regionsaround the world. However, the eco-logical literature focuses primarilyon larger playas or on alkaline sinkscrub habitats (Brostoff et al. 2001),rather than on these smaller, moreephemeral pools.

CONSERVATION

The alkaline rain pool is a rarehabitat that has intrinsic conserva-tion and preservation value. How-ever, the conservation status of thisunusual wetland type presently re-mains unclear. Economic pressureto convert the last private parcels ofremaining alkaline habitat to vine-yards or dairies is a direct threat tothe conservation of alkaline rainpools. Regulatory mechanisms forprotecting vernal pools and otherseasonal wetlands have been weak-ened, and impacts on landscape-levelhydrologic processes that are neces-sary to maintain seasonal alkalinewetlands may make conservation ef-forts difficult.

The first step in conserving al-kaline rain pools is recognizing themas a distinct habitat. Some previoussurveys have mistaken them for al-kaline vernal pools or have not dif-ferentiated them from salt scalds.Alkaline rain pools pose problemsfor wetland experts attempting tomap them because their sparse veg-etation and unusual hydrology andsoil chemistry make it difficult toidentify their characteristic wetlandindicators. Under federal wetlandstandards, vegetation cover must beat least 5% for a feature to be con-sidered a wetland. The dominantplant species in alkaline rain poolsare hydrophytes, but the vegetationis sparse and often not much morethan 5% total cover.

Furthermore, wetland hydrologyis only present during the rainy sea-son (November-March). Duringyears of below normal rainfall orwhen rainfall events are separated


Alkaline rain pools are notknown to harbor state or federallylisted threatened or endangered spe-cies, unlike vernal pools, for whichthe presence of listed species pro-vides additional protection under thestate or federal endangered speciesacts. However, they provide habitatfor several CNPS List 1B Atriplexspecies that could be listed in theforeseeable future. On a broaderscale, alkaline rain pools may be partof the habitat of the San Joaquin kitfox, blunt-nose leopard lizard, orother listed species of the San JoaquinValley. In addition to the endangeredspecies acts, the California Environ-mental Quality Act may providesome protection to alkaline rainpools, since impacts of developmentprojects requiring approval of stateand local agencies would be subjectto analysis and mitigation.

A more pressing concern iswhether or not conserving alkalinerain pools may even be feasible, inthe long run. The historic hydro-logic processes of the Central Valleyhave been drastically altered, andfactors such as a shallow water table

or seasonal flooding may no longerplay a role in maintaining the alka-line habitats. Overdrafting of valleygroundwater tables, some of whichare now over 100 feet below thehistoric level, has eliminated theshallow water table that formerlyleached salts to the soil surface.Channelization or elimination of his-toric stream channels now preventsthe seasonal flooding that helpsmaintain seasonal alkaline wetlandsin other areas, such as in the SanJacinto Valley in Southern Califor-nia or along the margins of the GreatSalt Lake in Utah. The absence ofthese hydrologic processes also pre-cludes the restoration of historic ter-rain where alkaline soils occurred,so that it may not be feasible tocompensate for the loss of alkalinerain pools through habitat restora-tion or creation.

AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE

Much of the native vegetation inthe Central Valley, like that of theTulare Lake Basin, has been replacedby urban development and agricul-

Left to right: Heartscale (Atriplex cordulata), lesser saltscale (Atriplex minuscula), and San Joaquin brittlescale (Atriplex subtilis) aretypically found in alkaline rain pools during summer and early fall.

by several weeks of dry weather, thefederal standard of 14 days of con-tinuous inundation for a wetlandhabitat may not be met. During thesummer dry season, alkaline rainpools may be indistinguishable fromsalt scalds except for subtle clues,such as remnants of crustacean exo-skeletons. Alkaline rain pools aretruly on the dry end of the spectrumof wetland types.

Another difficulty in conservingalkaline rain pools is the uncertainstatus of mechanisms for regulatoryprotection. Until recently, placementof fill in vernal pools has been regu-lated by the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, but recent Supreme Courtrulings, including the SWANCC andRapanos decisions, have placed lim-its on the Corps’ regulation of wet-lands that are not tributary to oradjacent to traditional navigablewaters or their relatively permanenttributaries. At the state level, alka-line rain pools are waters of the Stateand are protected under the Porter-Cologne Act, under the jurisdictionof the Regional Water Quality Con-trol Boards.


ture. Remnants of the Valley’s his-toric habitats are scattered, such asthe relict dunelands at Arena Plains.Most studies done on these habitatshave been floristic, and not enoughdetailed ecological work has beendone on them. Burtt Davy’s pioneer-ing studies of alkaline habitat backin the 1890s were never finished, ashe moved on to work in other partsof the world.

Alkaline rain pools are a verysmall remnant that could easily belost if there is not an effort to identifytheir remaining occurrences and tounderstand the ecological processesthat formed them and that allow themto persist into the future. Hopefullywe can spread this information to theconservation community and the re-source management agencies beforethese and other remnants of the na-tive flora vanish forever.

REFERENCESBrostoff, W., R. Lichvar, and S. Sprecher.

2001. Delineating playas in the aridSouthwest: A literature review. U. S.Army Research and DevelopmentCenter, Cold Regions Research andEngineering Laboratory, Hanover,NH.

Burtt Davy, J. 1898. Natural vegetationof alkali lands. California Agricul-tural Experiment Station Report1895-97: 63-75.

Holland, R.F. 1978. The geographic andedaphic distribution of vernal poolsin the Great Central Valley, Califor-nia. California Native Plant SocietySpecial Publication No. 3, Berkeley,CA.

Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary de-scriptions of the terrestrial naturalcommunities of California. Califor-nia Department of Fish and Game,Sacramento, CA.

Isaak, P. 1934. The nature of slick soilin southwest Idaho. Soil Science 37:157-165.

Jepson. W.L. 1925. Manual of the flow-ering plants of California. AssociatedStudents Store, University of Califor-nia, Berkeley.

Kelley, W.P. 1951. Alkali soils: Theirformation, properties, and reclama-tion. Reinhold Publishing Corpora-tion, New York, NY.

Minnich, R.A. 2008. California’s fad-ing wildflowers: Lost legacy and bio-logical invasions. University of Cali-fornia Press, Berkeley.

Munn, L.C., and M.M. Boehm. 1983.Soil genesis in a Natrargid-Haplargidcomplex in northern Montana. SoilScience Society of America Journal 47:1186-1192.

Reid, D.A., R.C. Graham, R.J. Southard,and C. Amrhein. 1993. Slickspot soilgenesis in the Carrizo Plain, Califor-nia. Soil Science Society of AmericaJournal 57: 162-168.

Riefner, R.E., Jr., and D.R. Pryor. 1996.New locations and interpretation ofvernal pools in southern California.Phytologia 80: 296-327.

Sawyer, J.O., and T. Keeler-Wolf. 1995.A Manual of California Vegetation.California Native Plant Society, Sac-ramento, CA.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M.Evens. 2009. A Manual of CaliforniaVegetation, second edition. CaliforniaNative Plant Society Press, Sacra-mento, CA.

Schiffman, P.M. 2007. Species compo-sition at the time of first Europeansettlement. In California Grass-lands: Ecology and Management,ed. M.R. Stromberg, J.D. Corbin,and C.M. D’Antonio, pp. 52-56.Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress.

Wester, L. 1981. Composition of thenative grasslands in the San JoaquinValley, California. Madroño 28(4):231-241.

Robert E. Preston, ICF International, 630K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, [email protected]


THE ART AND SCIENCE OFCALIFORNIA NATIVE GARDEN DESIGN

by Rob Moore

esigning cutting-edge subur-ban landscapes utilizingCalifornia native plants ismore than a hip new slo-

gan. It is an idea whose time hascome! A style of landscaping for-merly relegated to the realm of the

niche market, the art and science ofdesigning native gardens is now rap-idly ascending to the forefront ofpublic consciousness, where it ispromising to take its logical andrightful place.

The idea of the California native

plant garden is not new. In 1891,Theodore Payne recognized the in-trinsic value of the designed nativegarden with its promise to conserveprecious natural resources, whileviewing a large display of Californianative plants at The Royal BotanicGardens at Kew in England. Thepremise of developed gardens andlandscapes being aligned with theecosystem they were to be imple-mented within made perfect senseto him.

CONSERVATION:THE WATER/HABITATCONNECTION

Today this premise is supportedwith more relevant data than everbefore. With dwindling water re-sources a stark reality and nativeplant communities such as ourcoastal sage scrub dangerously de-pleted, making the case for utilizingCalifornia native plants in suburbanlandscapes and gardens has becomeimperative.

Members of CNPS and forward-thinking home and business ownersare seeing evidence of this trendmore and more. Municipalities suchas the City of Los Angeles, San Di-ego, and others across the state arespending millions of dollars on pub-

The development of a small native plantgarden in a suburban development. TOP:Area before design and installation. •BOTTOM: A newly installed landscape withpath/swale combination. This design featuredoes double-duty: It collects run-off and alsoserves as an access path. Rolling topographycreates vertical interest and emulates ournative hills, valleys, and canyons. Noteadequate spacing between plants, and colorcoordination of hardscape materials andhome. All photographs by R. Moore.

D


licity campaigns urging homeownersto conserve water. Statewide, waterdistricts operating under severe fis-cal constraints are allocating pre-cious funds and resources for all-day public awareness events, suchas the Laguna Beach County WaterDistrict’s Smartscape Expo held thispast September.

Even policymakers in Sacra-mento are in agreement and havewritten and passed legislation ad-dressing the issue. Possibly the moststark evidence of this is the passageof AB 1881 (the Water EfficientLandscape Ordinance or WELO).Going into effect in early 2010, AB1881 mandates water conservationin landscape design, construction,and maintenance.

WELO stipulates that by Janu-

ABOVE: Dispelling the misconception that all native plants are slow growing, this garden illustrates how fast-growing species can fill into create a full, aesthetically pleasing landscape in as little as six months. • BELOW: The planting plan for the native plant garden (picturedabove) meets the client’s desire for an environmentally sensitive landscape.


ary 1, 2010 every county and city inCalifornia (including charter cities)is required to adopt either the StateDepartment of Water Resource’s newmodel ordinance, or a water effi-cient landscape ordinance that is atleast as effective as the DWR model.With these and numerous other ex-amples reflecting how our state hasbeen impacted, it is obvious that asea change is occurring.

NATIVE PLANTS ANDWILDLIFE

California native plants and ournative wildlife have a symbiotic re-lationship. Utilizing our native florain our residential gardens and com-mercial landscapes creates muchneeded habitat. It doesn’t take a de-

gree in statistics to realize that manyof our native animals’ breedinggrounds, sources of food and water,and protective cover have been pol-luted and destroyed by decades ofunchecked, rampant developmentand urban sprawl.

For instance, U.S. Fish and Wild-life Service statistics conclude thatup to 94% of native grasslands inSan Diego County have been devel-oped. Their data also previously re-vealed that by the early 1990s, ur-ban sprawl in California had reducedthe indigenous coastal sage scrubecosystem by more than 90%.

Coastal sage scrub is the habitatof the threatened California Gnat-catcher and Cactus Wren, but otherlesser-known bird species have beennegatively impacted as well. Some ofthese species include the Belding’s

Savannah Sparrow and the San Cle-mente Sage Sparrow. As if that weren’tenough, Towhees and other ground-foraging birds are also suffering fromthe added threat of feral cats.

California’s native flora andfauna go hand in hand. By choosingregionally appropriate plants for ourgardens and commercial landscapeswe are serving the needs of our na-tive animals and conserving preciouswater resources.

MISNOMERS ANDMISCONCEPTIONS

One of the main challenges we—as advocates of California’s nativeflora—have to overcome is the com-mon (and understandable) miscon-ceptions that have been perpetuated

Decomposed granite path, solar lighting, and native plants in containers (middle right), combine with a simple water feature (birdbath,middle left) and a subtle wildflower cover crop to create a native garden with a more “formal” feel.


by a mindset that exemplifies oursociety’s “import” mentality.

One prevailing untruth is thatnative plants are aesthetically unfitfor suburban gardens and land-scapes. Many folks—when offeredthe native alternative—think ofbrown hillsides covered in deadweeds left over from winter rains.The fact of the matter is that mostof the unattractive vegetation peoplesee in open areas is comprised ofinvasive species which were intro-duced by early European settlers.These interlopers have gained a foot-hold because naturally occurringecosystems have been disturbed byhuman development. Not only dothese introduced species give nativeplants a bad reputation aesthetically,but they are accelerating fire cyclesand causing native plant communi-ties to be choked out of existence.

Fortunately throughout our stateare select nurseries that propagatenative plant species specifically togrow—and flourish—in suburbanlandscapes, all the while doing sowith a fraction of the water requiredto sustain a garden stocked withthirsty, imported species. Many ofthese native varieties have eye-catch-ing flowers, a stronger fragrance, areadaptable to soil and microclimatevariations, and are perfectly suitedfor use in the suburban garden.

Additionally, state fire authori-ties such as the Orange County FireAuthority are coming to the realiza-tion that, with occasional irrigationduring summer months and properapplication of maintenance proce-dures, many native species and theircultivars can actually reduce the haz-ard of fire damage from seasonalflare-ups.

Another challenge to overcomeis the misnomer that California na-tive plants are fussy. Unfortunatelymany gardeners believe this to betrue and are hesitant to embrace theuse of these plants because of theentrenched belief that natives don’tperform well in ornamental land-scapes. Moreover, from a design per-

spective, many professionals believethat to successfully utilize nativeplants in garden design, one has tounlearn all they’ve been taught re-garding ornamental landscape design.

With this mind-set, and decadesof abundant and inexpensive waterresources, it’s no wonder that thegeneral public has been loath to em-brace the widespread use of our na-tive flora in their gardens and com-mercial landscapes. Fortunately,with more and more information tothe contrary becoming availablecombined with ongoing water re-straints, this outdated paradigm ischanging. It is shifting in favor ofthe inclusion of California’s nativeplants in place of the standard, im-ported nursery stock that has longenjoyed preferential status.

BENCHMARK:CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANTCOMMUNITIES

Designing a native garden re-quires a different mind-set. In orna-mental horticulture it is commonpractice to change the ecology of

the site to be developed in order tosuit the imported nursery stock. Forexample, after a site has been graded,top soil imported, and the holes dug,the soil to be used for backfill istypically amended to increase its fer-tility. Your standard fare of plantsare then introduced such as juni-pers, boxwood, Italian cypress, aza-leas, oleanders, and exotic flower-ing trees, usually with the intentof creating a lush, park-like oasissuch as one might see in maritimeEngland or Hawaii.

This “ideal” then requires copi-ous amounts of regular water, fertil-izer, and pesticides, all of which runoff incrementally with every subse-quent watering the landscape re-ceives. This toxic brew flows off-siteand down sidewalks, entering stormdrains and continuing on to polluteour natural watercourses before ar-riving at its final destination—theocean.

A California native garden re-quires few of the aforementionedpractices. Other than the removal ofturf grass, grading for run-off miti-gation, and removal of unwantedplant material, it is best to disturb

Native bunch grass California fescue (Festuca californica), Mendocino reed grass (Cala-magrostis foliosus), seaside daisy (Erigeron glauca ‘Bountiful’), salvia (Salvia spp.), coastsunflower (Encelia californica), and Montara sagebrush (Artemisia californica ‘Montara’)create a friendly, low-water-use California garden.


the existing site as little as possible.Look at the design process from adifferent perspective—that of emu-lating the natural ecosystem or plantcommunity that existed prior to thedevelopment of the home and neigh-borhood where the garden is to bedeveloped. Identifying this naturalecosystem is the first step in thatdevelopment process.

Good questions to ask include,“What plant community do I livein?” and “How do I go about identi-fying this community?” Generallyspeaking, most of the densely popu-lated areas in California (primarilythose in the southern part of thestate) are located in the coastal sagescrub plant community. Inland ar-eas in southern California such asRiverside and San Bernardino havetheir own version of this plant com-munity referred to as interior, orRiversidian sage scrub.

Of course this is a generaliza-tion. There are many other climatesto be considered such as northernoak woodland, northern juniperwoodland, central oak woodland,yellow pine forest, Douglas fir for-est, valley grassland, and GreatBasin sage, to name a few. It is at

least as important to fully under-stand microclimates within thesegeneral plant communities prior tochoosing a plant palette of Califor-nia natives. Look around the neigh-borhood where the garden is to bedesigned, and take note of areas thathaven’t been developed. Do standsof intact native plant groups stilloccur naturally? Note what plantsare growing there, and how theygrow together. Another clue is tolook for native plant volunteers pop-ping up in people’s ornamental land-scapes. These indicator plants offerclues as to what will easily grow inthat particular neighborhood.

If you live in an area where noundeveloped areas exist and wherenative plant volunteers are not obvi-ous, there are other resources avail-able. Las Pilitas Nursery has a web-site where you can enter your zipcode, locate the plant community,and find links to plants that occurnaturally in that specific region ofthe state. Tree of Life Nursery’swebsite is a valuable resource as well.In particular, their article “The Cali-fornia Garden” (located under Re-sources/Sage Advice) is an excellentsource from which to choose plants

based on California native plantcommunities.

COMBINING CREATIVITYAND ANALYSIS

Alluded to earlier was the factthat designing a native garden re-quires a different mind-set. Manygardeners and landscape profession-als who initially want to includeCalifornia natives in their gardensare disinclined to throw out all theinformation they’ve learned aboutornamental landscaping in order toembrace the use of native plants.

It’s true that creating a success-ful design utilizing California nativeplants requires a different approachto the design process. That beingsaid, there is still a place for thetraditional elements and principlesof ornamental landscape design andtheir logical application in the Cali-fornia native garden.

Merriam-Webster defines “gar-den design” as “the art and processof designing and creating plans forlayout and planting of gardens andlandscapes.” Most people think ofdesign as a creative endeavor andthey’re right to a degree. Garden de-sign is an art, but it is also a science.Much of the work entailed in theprocess of landscape design is donefrom an analytical frame of refer-ence. From the preliminary phasesof the Site Inventory and Site Analy-sis, to the research aspect of identi-fying the native plant community,then the development of a hardscape,and finally to the plant selection, allrequire the gathering of detailed andspecific information and applying itin an artful and practical way.

SITE INVENTORY ANDANALYSIS

The design process really beginswith the Site Inventory. Taking noteof what is present on the property isthe first step in the development of

Canyon gray sagebrush (Artemisia californica ‘Canyon Gray’) and margarita penstemon(Penstemon ‘Margarita BOP’) combine to provide contrast in the suburban landscape.


the landscape design. Consider viewsto be screened or enhanced as wellas views from inside the house.These are important and pragmaticdetails. The needs of children and/or pets will have to be taken intoaccount as well. Other importantitems to consider during the SiteInventory include utilities such asoverhead power lines and under-ground gas or power lines, plans forfuture additions or renovations, ex-isting hardscapes to be kept or re-moved, and existing plants to bekept and integrated, as well as thoseto be removed.

Seemingly innocuous thingssuch as the color and architecture ofthe house play an intrinsic role inthe artful design of a native land-scape. Rocks, paving stones, deco-rative gravel, or a creek bed are alltransitional elements. They help tobridge the gap between the hard,inorganic architecture of one’s houseand the organic, soft material andearth tones of the plants. Take thetime and methodically note in theSite Inventory all pertinent compo-nents of the property where the na-tive garden is going to be.

The next step in the process ofdesign is the Site Analysis. Duringthis phase it’s important to considerthe reasons for creating a native gar-den. Is it to attract specific wildlife orperhaps habitat restoration? Maybeit is something as pragmatic as sav-ing water or reducing time spent per-forming maintenance tasks. These areimportant things to consider duringthis phase of the design process. Ifchildren or pets will be using thespace, make safety and security con-siderations a priority. Outside enter-taining, sitting/viewing areas, solaroutdoor lighting, and access pathsare other things to be noted.

Gaining a clear understandingof what the motivation is for devel-oping a California native landscape,coupled with the intended use andhow one expects to interact with thefuture garden, is an important stepin the creation of a solid design.

THE ROLE OF HARDSCAPES

The hardscape is the physicalfoundation the new California na-tive landscape will be built on. It isevery bit as important as the plantsthat will be chosen. With nativelandscapes the hardscape is as muchaesthetic as functional, and is liter-ally intertwined with the plantsused. Elements like paths, mounds,swales, dry creek beds, rocks, boul-ders, and even snags and mulch allplay an intrinsic role in a functional,healthy, and aesthetically pleasingnative garden.

Unlike traditional nursery plantswhich are typically chosen basedsolely on their physical appearance,native plants should be approachedfrom a broader perspective. It is im-portant to think about how theseplants will work in tandem with theirhardscape counterparts. For ex-ample, consider what looks good tothe eye when out for a walk in na-

ture. Usually when one stumblesupon that “Kodak moment” it is acombination of elements workingtogether that create the image that ispleasing to the eye.

Most professionals agree thatwhen designing native gardens, it isimportant to evaluate the soil andits drainage. Analyze the way watermoves across the site. Surface-drain-age patterns fall into two categories:water collection and water disper-sion. Make note and address thisissue by shaping, i.e., grading thesite to retain water on-site.

Consider how water movesacross neighboring properties. If thatflow impacts your site, it will needto be addressed during the design ofthe hardscape. For instance, sup-pose a neighbor’s property includesturf grass that requires copiousamounts of regular water that over-flows onto your property. In thissituation, a dry creek bed or swalemight be built to channel this water

A dry creek bed distributes runoff from a downspout through this landscape comprisedof canyon gray sagebrush (Artemisia californica ‘Canyon Gray’), coast sunflower (Enceliacalifornica), salvia (Salvia ‘Aromas’), sunset manzanita (Arctostaphylos X hookeri ‘Sunset’),and California lilac (Ceanothus ‘Concha’).


into an area planted with riparianspecies. Not only will you enjoy thebenefits of your neighbor’s poor wa-tering habits; this design feature willmitigate runoff which would end upin local wetlands and waterways.

Irrigation issues need to be ad-

dressed. Is there an existing systemthat needs to be updated or retrofit-ted? Many native plant nursery pro-fessionals recommend hand water-ing and/or the use of manual sprin-klers. If an existing automated sys-tem is to be retrofitted, water con-

serving heads such as rotors, microspray, or in some instances drip lineshould be installed. Include a smartcontroller. Smart controllers are ir-rigation clocks that automaticallyadjust irrigation run times in re-sponse to environmental changes.

An example of a design based on a plant grouping as opposed to individual plant aesthetics. Note how existing, non-native species in thebackground create a complementary backdrop for this native garden in San Clemente. This client preferred using primarily cultivars ofnative species, which she felt were more pleasing aesthetically than the “pure” native species, so only the blue-eyed grass is a local native.(Some botanists hold that true native species provide more wildlife value than cultivars.) Species that make up this plant grouping include:salvia (Salvia clevelandii ‘Winifred Gilman’), wild rye (Leymus condensatus ‘Canyon Prince’), blue-eyed grass (Sisyrinchium bellum), lilacverbena (Verbena lilacina), island sage brush (Artemisia nesiotica), island snapdragon (Galvezia speciosa), blue fescue (Festuca glauca),California fuchsia (Epilobium canum ssp. latifolium ‘Everette’s Choice’), penstemon (Penstemon ‘Margarita BOP’), and seaside daisy(Erigeron glaucus).


These controllers use sensors andweather information to manage wa-tering times and frequency.

Consider paths, access routes,and traffic patterns around the homeand through the landscape, bothfrom an aesthetic and utilitarian per-spective. Paths created with surfacematerials such as decomposed gran-ite or crusher fines lend a more in-formal, natural style to the nativeplant garden. Add flagstone or pav-ers to create a more formal feel inthe landscape. Consider which ele-ments fit into your overall visionprior to choosing paving materials.

The soil excavated from pathscan be used to create interesting to-pography if the property being de-veloped is flat. By reusing soil that isexcavated during grading, diggingpaths, and/or creating swales, exist-ing materials are kept on-site, thusminimizing the environmental im-pact of the project.

With respect to aesthetics, theuse of mounded soil in the land-scape meets several beneficial de-sign criteria. First it creates verticalinterest and visual dynamics. It em-ploys the principle of focalization—forcing the viewer’s perception to afocal point in the landscape—whichevokes curiosity in the eye of theperson viewing the garden. For ex-ample, a manzanita artfully placedon top of an elevated peak sur-rounded with companion plantsfrom its plant community will cre-ate an instant focal point.

Contours peak the interest of theviewer, guiding the eye and invitingone to explore where the paths lead.

This design concept is often usedin Japanese-style gardens, most com-monly by creating meandering pathswhere the viewer’s site is limited pur-posefully to induce curiosity. Theuse of contoured land also followsthe theme of our naturally occurringnative landscapes. Soil can be shapedto simulate California’s rolling hills,mountains, canyons, and valleys, al-beit on a much smaller scale.

If the site’s soil makeup contains

poorly draining clay or compactedsoil, creating mounds also makes itpossible to include in the gardendesign plants that require betterdrainage.

INTERSECTION OFFUNCTIONALITY,AESTHETICS, AND HABITAT

The use of snags (a partially orcompletely dead tree) and/or deadwood is another aspect to contem-plate in the design of a functionaland aesthetic hardscape. Deadwoodin a natural environment exists inmany forms and serves an impor-tant purpose in a healthy ecosys-tem, as well as providing visual in-terest in the native plant garden.

Snags and deadwood offer criti-cal habitat for many species. Theyprovide food, shelter, and nestingplaces for birds and other garden-

friendly wildlife. Stumps and logscan double as focal points and ref-uges. They serve as an insulationblanket, cooling the ground whilesimultaneously offering ground-foraging birds like the threatenedCalifornia Towhee refuge from heatand domestic cats.

Beneficial insect eaters like alli-gator lizards, blue bellies (westernfence lizard), and side-blotched liz-ards, as well as important pollina-tors such as carpenter bees and theyellow-faced bumble bee will appre-ciate these elements as well. Cali-fornia’s native bees are excellentpollinators and are great for veg-etable gardens. It is believed thatthey are beneficial for improvingfruit set as well. Many gardenersknow that with increased pollina-tors comes an abundance of insect-pollinated fruit that is larger in sizeand greater in quantity.

Deadwood provides insect-eat-

Color, texture, and species variety combine to create a mosaic of California native plantbeauty in the suburban garden. Close-up of previous plant grouping garden design.


ing birds such as our endangeredWestern Blue Bird with added foodsources. It can also double as natu-ral garden sculpture and/or art. Tucka piece in between a rock and acouple of plants and leave a littleopen space around it through whichwildflowers can pop up in thespring. Deadwood also looks goodin a dry creek bed or pond. Locate apiece in the wild that is aestheti-cally appealing and place it accord-ing to taste. Also consider leavingexisting dead branches in place (pro-vided they don’t pose a hazard).

Water is another important ele-ment in a balanced hardscape. Pro-viding fresh water offers an impor-tant resource for garden-friendlyanimals that are a key componentin a healthy native garden. Clean,fresh water is often the hardest ne-cessity for birds to come by. Notonly will it keep the garden livelywith a variety of birds and otherbackyard critters, but it will alsoattract butterflies. Place rocks orstones in birdbaths to give butter-flies and birds a supportive landingarea. Include a water feature in thelandscape design such as a recircu-lated stream or pond created withrocks such as river cobble. Con-sider a fountain as well. The soundof running water will draw hum-mingbirds and goldfinches. Water,birds, and butterflies bring to thegarden the elements of sound, song,and motion, allowing the home-owner to experience a deeper con-nection with its natural inhabitants.

Along with the element of wa-ter, include rocks, boulders, andcobbles in your design plan. Theyare beneficial functionally as well asesthetically. Turn over a good-sizedgranite boulder in the middle of sum-mer and you’ll find many life formsliving there. Include a decent-sizedrock placed strategically within aplant grouping like one would wit-ness in nature. Doing so will pro-vide a lasting source of moisturethat will assist plants through thehottest months of the year.

THE ROLE OF PLANTS

When choosing plants to recre-ate a native plant community, youwill need to flip your perspective180 degrees. Often when choosingplants, gardeners tend to think ofindividual plant aesthetics as the

SOME CONSIDERATIONS IN PLANT SELECTION

➤ Will any people who are sensitive to bees and/or pollen use thegarden regularly?

➤ Do you want the garden to stand out or to blend in with neighbors’landscapes?

➤ Should the design be based on traditional principles due to home-owner restrictions on landscaping; is a more natural look desired,or can the two be combined?

➤ Do you want your garden to be filled with many types of plants, ordo you prefer an open feel that is better achieved by using fewerplants?

➤ As a rule of thumb, situate plants so that they won’t grow oversidewalks when their mature size is reached or obstruct views ex-iting driveways. Be aware of city ordinances regarding setbacks.

➤ Are there views or excessive noise sources you want to screen?

➤ Do you have a southwest corner where it might be advisable toplant a deciduous tree for summer cooling and winter heating?

➤ Are there specific flower colors you like best, or ones you dislike?

➤ Would you like to include in your design deciduous trees that sig-nal the change of seasons?

➤ Do you have any favorite flowers, plants, or trees that you defi-nitely would like to integrate into your design?

➤ Are there other landscapes in the area you like and would like toemulate in some way?

➤ Be sure to keep in mind microclimate considerations such as sun,shade, slope, wind patterns, and radiated heat.

➤ What kind of plants surround the property to be designed, andhow might they influence your overall landscape design?

➤ Would container plants help to accent areas that cannot be planted?

➤ Consider the addition of wildflowers as a cover crop or to provideadditional color and interest, particularly during the later winterand early spring.

➤ Group plants together that share similar needs (particularly waterand light).

primary determining factor. Insteadthink in terms of groupings of plantscombined with their hardscapecounterparts placed strategicallythroughout the landscape.

After referencing plant lists spe-cific to the microclimate and loca-tion of the site, choose a dozen or


two plant species that will make upthe preliminary plant list. For ex-ample, if you live in the coastal sagescrub community, consider usingspecies such as coastal sagebrush(Artemisia spp.), buckwheat (Erio-gonum spp.), wild lilac (Ceanothusspp.), and manzanita (Arctostaphy-los spp.). Other plants to considerare coyote brush (Baccharis pilu-laris), coast sunflower (Encelia cali-fornica), salvia (Salvia spp.), andmonkeyflower (Mimulus spp.). Uti-lize both evergreen and summerdeciduous plants together in thegrouping.

Set out plants as illustrated onthe landscape design plan before dig-ging the holes. This is the time tomake final adjustments with regardto placement. It is not uncommonthat plans may not accurately tran-scribe from paper to site due to un-foreseen materials that are pre-ex-isting both above and below ground.Additionally, quantities often aremiscalculated, hardscapes inaccu-rately installed, and some plants mayneed to be ommited to provide foradequate spacing.

Plan plant placement with ma-ture plant size in mind, i.e., care-fully consider both height and widththat plants will eventually achieve.Leave room between plant group-ings (about enough to walk through)for maintenance access. Beneficialpollinators such as our native beesrequire bare soil to create nest cells.Designing open space within thegarden will create habitat for them.Allowing some extra room also af-fords the added benefit of a wild-flower display in the spring.

When choosing plants, it is para-mount to match plant materials tothe existing soil conditions of thesite. There are copious sources ofinformation pertaining to nativeplants and their soil preferences.Whether the soil is clay, silt, sand,or any combination thereof, there isa California native that is suited tothat soil’s makeup.

Other things to consider are sen-

sitivity to allergies (specifically bees).If you are concerned about this, keepflowering plants away from tradi-tional focal point areas such as thefront entrance of the home, or alongpathways. Do you want the gardento stand out, or blend with neigh-bors’ landscapes? If you live in aneighborhood where homeowner re-strictions regarding landscaping ex-ist, the design may need to be basedon traditional design principles andelements, i.e., foundation plantingagainst the home, and a flat area pos-sibly substituting a lawn alternativefor grass. Do you want your gardento be filled with many plants, or doyou prefer an open feel that is betterachieved by using fewer plants?

Be mindful not to obstruct viewsexiting driveways. Check city ordi-nances regarding street setbacks.Especially if the home is on a cor-ner lot, be careful to choose plantsthat won’t grow over the edges ofsidewalks and driveways. Do youwant to screen views or excessivenoise in a particular part of the gar-den? Would a deciduous tree placedin the southwest corner providesummer cooling and allow winterheating? What flower colors do youprefer?

Are there other landscapes inthe area or in magazines that youmight want to emulate? Microcli-mate considerations such as sun,shade, slope, wind patterns, and ra-diated heat are critical factors whenchoosing plants. What kinds ofplants surround the site on neigh-boring properties? Keep in mind thatthese plants will be the backdrop toyour new garden.

California native plants workwell as container plants. Think bon-sai and design a naturalistic group-ing in a pot as an accent in areasthat cannot be planted. Wildflow-ers provide seasonal variation andcan serve double-duty as a covercrop in the newly planted land-scape. Consider their inclusion inthe plant palette. Remember, alwaysplant groupings of plants that share

similar watering needs so they canbe watered at the same time whenconnected to an automatic wateringsystem.

Whether the garden to be de-signed is comprised strictly of na-tive plants, or combined with exist-ing or compatible drought-tolerantexotic species, the design principlesremain the same. Combining na-tives with existing non-native plantsis a perfectly acceptable option whendesigning or upgrading your land-scape, so long as basic consider-ations such as irrigation, soil com-patibility, and microclimate are con-sidered. From an aesthetics perspec-tive, native and non-native plantscan coexist and create unlimitedcombinations of color, form, andtexture. Go totally native if yourgoal is habitat restoration and/orgardening to attract beneficial wild-life. At the end of the day, it all boilsdown to what brings you, the gar-dener, a greater sense of fulfillmentand joy.

Statistics clearly show that de-cades of unchecked, rampant devel-opment and urban sprawl have notonly impaired the quality of life forus and our loved ones, but also pol-luted and destroyed much of Cali-fornia’s natural habitat that providesfood, water, and protective cover fornative wildlife. It has become clearthat we as individuals need to takeaction.

The good news is we can! Bysimply changing our gardening prac-tices, we literally transition frombeing a part of the problem to be-coming an active part of the solu-tion. Invite change into your gardenby artfully designing a Californianative, wildlife-friendly garden. Indoing so, you will become intimatelyacquainted with the essence ofCalifornia’s unique, beautiful nativeflora.

Rob Moore, 215 E. Orangethorpe Avenue#233, Fullerton, CA 92835, [email protected], www.californianativelandscapedesign.com


NATIVE PLANT RESTORATION AT PIEDRAS BLANCASLIGHT STATION OUTSTANDING NATURAL AREA

by Russ Lewis and Carole Adams

he Piedras Blancas Light Sta-tion Outstanding NaturalArea is situated on PointPiedras Blancas, a prominent

headland located in San Luis ObispoCounty along the central coast ofCalifornia, north of San Simeon andworld-famous Hearst Castle. Nativevegetation on the 19-acre propertyis classified as a coastal scrub plantcommunity and is situated on a lowcoastal terrace overlooking the Pa-cific Ocean.

HISTORY

In the fall of 2001 the Bureau ofLand Management (BLM) assumedmanagement of the Piedras BlancasLight Station. Previously the site was

managed by the United States Light-house Service (1874-1939) and theUnited States Coast Guard (1939-2001). In 2008 the Piedras BlancasLight Station was designated by theUnited States Congress as an Out-standing Natural Area within theNational Landscape ConservationSystem.

The Coast Guard began plantingiceplant on the site in 1939. An aerialphotograph taken around 1946 (seeabove) shows iceplant growing inareas around the housing units andlighthouse. Beginning in the 1950suntil the mid-1970s, iceplant (Car-pobrotus edulis and Carpobrotus chi-lensis) was extensively planted byCoast Guard personnel, by labor pro-vided by the Boy Scouts of America,

or by labor contracted through locallandscaping companies. Presumablythe goal was to stabilize the soil inareas impacted by human (surfacedisturbing) activities where struc-tures and access roads had beenbuilt. According to Coast Guard per-sonnel who lived at the site around1950, there were two reasons whyiceplant was selected. One was forornamental purposes. It was a popu-lar, low maintenance flowering plantrequiring little water. The secondreason was that it was regarded as afire resistant plant. The plant grewso vigorously that by the 1970s mostof the 19-acre site was covered by anearly continuous carpet of iceplant.

When the BLM took over man-agement of the site in 2001, approxi-

Piedras Blancas Light Station, circa 1946. All photographs courtesy of the Piedras Blancas Light Station ONA.

T


mately 85% of the area wasoverrun with a thick carpet oficeplant growing up to thefoundations of buildings, cov-ering the sidewalk, drapingheavily over the tops of cliffs,and completely choking outthe remaining native vegeta-tion. Although iceplant domi-nated, there were more than40 other non-native speciesalso present to a lesser degree.Some of the most noxious non-native plants included NewZealand spinach (Tetragonia tetra-gonioides), Italian thistle (Carduuspycnocephalus), mustard (Brassicanigra and Brassica rapa), radish(Raphanus sativus), cut-leaf plantain(Plantago coronopus), oxalis (Oxalispes-caprae), and an assortment ofnon-native grasses.

Widely spaced patches of nativevegetation could still be found in afew small areas, consisting predomi-nantly of seaside woolly yarrow(Eriophyllum staechadifolium) andseaside daisy (Erigeron glaucus).

ARCHEOLOGICALCONSIDERATIONS

The BLM vegetative managementplan at Piedras Blancas Light Stationcalled for the removal of non-nativeiceplant and other exotics, and thereestablishment of native plants pre-viously found on the site, enablingit to return to a native plant ecosys-tem. Complicating that plan was thefact that the entire 19-acre site wasconsidered to contain valuable ar-cheological resources and was there-fore protected by state and federalcultural resource laws, as well asBLM’s own cultural resources poli-cies. Historically the site had beenused by Native Americans to gatherresources from land and sea. Theearliest documented use of the siteis around 3,300 years ago, althoughactual use may predate that figure.

Initially, critics questioned theremoving of iceplant because it was

believed it offered surface protec-tion for artifacts buried beneath thesoil. However, others pointed outthat native vegetation had beenpresent before iceplant was intro-duced and that native plants wouldcover the artifacts as well as iceplant.In contrast, it was known that theheavy biomass of iceplant causedsea bluffs to collapse, acceleratingcoastal erosion and threatening arti-facts within that area. So the plan torevegetate the area with native plantswas adopted and implemented.

In order to protect any ar-tifacts that might be present,BLM staff emphasized the im-portance of disturbing as littleof the soil profile as possible.It was discovered that it wasnot necessary to dig up iceplantroots since little regrowth oc-curs when broken off at thesurface. The eradication tech-niques for other non-nativespecies other than iceplant var-ied, depending on the specificplant being targeted. Since pro-

tecting archeological resources wasa foremost consideration duringinvasives removal, it became an im-portant facet of volunteer training.

Location map of 19-acre parcel that comprises the PiedrasBlancas restoration area.

RIGHT: Volunteers haul dried out iceplantby wheelbarrow and pack it into dumpstersfor removal. It takes about six to eightweeks for the iceplant to dry out oncepulled, but is considerably lighter to haulwhen dry. • BELOW: Volunteers hand pulliceplant away from native plants.


REMOVAL OF NON-NATIVE PLANTS

A revegetation program was de-veloped under the guidance of RussLewis, BLM ecologist who authored

the BLM Piedras Blancas VegetativeManagement Plan. Russ created amap that identified zones where thenative plants predominated, andwhere iceplant predominated. Ad-vice was sought from members of

the local community who had expe-rience in removing iceplant at otherlocations. The consensus was to be-gin eradication in areas where na-tive plants were still growing.

One purpose of the PiedrasBlancas vegetative management pro-gram is to promote the permanentreestablishment of native plants oncefound at Piedras Blancas Light Sta-tion. The intent is not to become aregimented botanical garden or ademonstration garden. The rationalobjective is the reestablishment of anative ecosystem, one that waspresent prior to the arrival of theEuropeans.

Several eradication techniqueswere considered. Small test areaswere covered with a plastic barrierfor an extended time to smother theiceplant, but this proved to be inef-ficient and the dead iceplant stillhad to be pulled out by hand. Re-moval of iceplant with hand toolswas found to be the most effectivetechnique in areas where there werenative plants present.

In 2002 a small group of volun-teers started hand pulling iceplant,New Zealand spinach, and cut-leafplantain. The work was labor-inten-sive; however, the beauty of the lightstation setting made it possible toattract dedicated volunteers. Thefirst zone to be cleared of iceplantwas at the western tip of the point,where several seaside poppy plants(Eschscholzia californica var. mar-itima) were struggling to grow withinthe iceplant. A few days after iceplanthad been removed, one of the poppyplants was in bloom. We were in-spired!

The BLM volunteer list grew toinclude over 40 individuals whoworked hard, motivated by the fan-tastic progress we were making. Or-ganized community groups also as-sisted, including members of the lo-cal California Native Plant Societyand Sierra Club, ecology studentsfrom Cuesta College, and manyother organizations. Work crewsprovided by the California State Di-

TOP: Piedras Blancas Light Station in 2001. Iceplant has overrun at least 85% of the area.BOTTOM: Same spot in 2007, now mostly restored with native vegetation.


vision of Forestry cleared severallarge areas of iceplant that had en-croached on the parking lot andother adjacent developed areas.

Basically, the work was a huge,long-term weeding job, with the defi-nition of a “weed” being any non-native plant species. The initial ar-eas cleared were scattered aroundthe site, depending on where thegreatest concentrations of nativeplants were trying to survive in com-petition with the iceplant. Slowlythese areas merged, resulting in con-tiguous zones where native plantsthrived.

Iceplant is very heavy due to itshigh water content. At first volun-teers loaded it into wheelbarrowsand moved it to a large pile to beremoved from the site. Soon welearned it was less effort to createsmaller piles near the areas wherewe were working and allow theiceplant to dry out before carting itin wheelbarrows to a centralizedlarge pile (which we affectionatelyreferred to as the “mother pile”).

Iceplant does not compost wellsince it is a succulent and has a highwater content. It dries out slowlyafter being pulled, and lessens involume and weight, but it is tena-cious, frequently resprouting withinthe pile. Also, the duff (accumula-tion of dead dried pieces underneaththe green growing plant) does notbreak down quickly. It was foundthat duff accumulations of only one-half inch prevented growth of na-tives, and in some places there wasover 12" of duff, so it was necessaryto remove it all, or leave only a verythin layer.

Where there were existing na-tive plants, non-native plants werepulled by hand, being careful notto disturb the ground. A scraispingtool called a hula hoe (or stirruphoe) was used in some areas wherearcheological artifacts might bepresent, because it does not pen-etrate the substrate. In areas wherethere was a solid monoculture oficeplant growing in dense accumu-

lations, and where no native plantswere present, the herbicide glyph-osate was used to kill the iceplantand allow it to dessicate before re-moval. A front-end loader was usedto pick up the dead iceplant, takingcare to disturb the soil as little aspossible.

The methods for disposing ofnon-native plants other than iceplantvaried. Plants in bloom, or thoseproducing seeds, were bagged anddisposed of to prevent seed disper-sion. Some non-native plants thatwere pulled before they posed a risk

of reproducing were left to decom-pose, unless they were at risk ofrerooting. A weeding guide was pre-pared for use by the volunteers thatlisted each non-native plant and pro-vided photographs, characteristics,and tips for removal. Work occurredunder the supervision of a projectleader.

Erosion was a concern, becausewhen volunteers cleared areas, thisexposed the sandy soil to high winds.For this reason, the clearing of ice-plant was first performed in smallincrements and carefully monitored

SUCCESS STORY: COMPACT COBWEBBY THISTLE

ne of the native plant successesat Piedras Blancas Light Station

involves a native plant species, com-pact cobwebby thistle (Cirsium occi-dentale var. compactum), a CNPS List1B.2 species (Rare, threatened, or en-dangered in California and elsewhere;fairly threatened in California). Whenthe BLM took over management ofPiedras Blancas in 2001, its botanistonly found one individual specimen ofthis special status species growing onsite. However, it became one of the firstnative plants to return to an area clearedof invasive non-native plants.

This thistle species is now reproducing abundantly and thrives incleared areas. In the spring of 2004 there were approximately 230compact cobwebby thistle plants counted; in the spring of both 2005and 2006 there were approximately 480 counted. In the spring of2010 there were about 1,200 seedlings. Due to competition andpredation by various rodents, their numbers are significantly reducedlater in the season. This thistle species is now reproducing freely andthriving in many cleared areas. Compact cobwebby thistle seeds wereevidently present on the site, in dormancy, beneath the iceplant andheavy duff. (Wind dispersal of its seeds is also occurring.) Observing

the success of this plant con-tinues to be a great motivationfor our volunteers.

Compact cobwebby thistle (Cirsiumoccidentale var. compactum), a rareendemic plant. In 2001 only oneknown specimen was found atPiedras Blancas. Thanks to restor-ation efforts, today it is reproducingfreely.

O


for wind erosion. Further monitor-ing of the restoration area has shownthat wind erosion has been minimaldue to the rapid onset of native plantsto form a ground cover.

REVEGETATION

Native plant restoration atPiedras Blancas is a two-part pro-cess: removal of non-native plantsand the encouragement of succes-sive native revegetation. Nature isallowed to take its course throughpassive revegetation, whereby na-tive plants sprout and spread ontheir own. The process of nativeplant recovery is enhanced by seed-ing, using seeds collected on site. Insome areas native plants have beentransplanted. The majority of the

native plants sprouted from seedsthat were buried under the iceplant,and were waiting for an opportu-nity to grow. Some seeds were un-doubtedly blown in by wind ortransported by wildlife or humans.Others were collected and simplyscattered on the surface after thefirst rainfall of the season. A benefitof sowing seeds by hand is that thereis no preparatory disturbance to thesoil. Transplants used were movedfrom previously cleared areas wherenative plants were found germinat-ing in profusion.

During the initial stages of therevegetation planning process, asearch of the literature and an in-ventory of the coastal headlandsnearest the lighthouse was under-taken by BLM personnel and volun-

teers. The search was conductedoutward along the coastal terrace,ranging from three miles northwardto Point Sierra Nevada and aboutfive miles southward to San SimeonPoint. A small pristine area north ofthe light station was discovered witha diverse variety of native plants.Seeds collected were later sown inrehabilitated areas at the light sta-tion. In some cases, seeds were ger-minated in planters in a small tem-porary nursery at the light station,and used only during the first sea-son of plant restoration. Later, vol-unteers planted the seedlings in theareas being rehabilitated, taking careto reintroduce them in the samehabitat in which they evolved.

Traditional gardening methodsare never used in our revegetation

Rocky knoll in 2002 (top) and then in 2006(bottom).

NATIVE PLANTS OF THE PIEDRAS BLANCAS

The predominant native plants found at Piedras Blancas include thefollowing:

seaside woolly yarrow (Eriophyllum staechadifolium)seaside daisy (Erigeron glaucus)cotton-batting plant (Gnaphalium stramineum)hedge-nettle (Stachys bullata)coast morning glory (Calystegia macrostegia ssp. cyclostegia)

Also found in good numbers are:

common (white) yarrow (Achillea millefolium)locoweed (Astragalus nuttalii var. nuttalii)prostrate deerweed (Lotus heermannii var. orbicularis)coastal bush (tree) lupine (Lupinus arboreus)beach evening primrose (Camissonia cheiranthifolia)California poppy/seaside poppy (Eschscholzia californica var. maritima)Pacific seaside plantain (Plantago maritima)sea pink/thrift (Armeria maritima)salt grass (Distichlis spicata)California buttercup (Ranunculus californicus var. cuneatus)white (‘Douglas’) nightshade (Solanumdouglasii)man-root/wild cucumber (Marah fabaceus)coast dudleya/sand lettuce (Dudleyacaespitosa)

A complete listing of all native plants foundat Piedras Blancas Light Station is postedat www.piedrasblancas.gov.

Four of the native plants that have made a come-back at Piedras Blancas include (front to back):California poppy/seaside poppy, cotton-battingplant, dudleya, and seaside daisy.


work. We do not feed, prune, orremove dead plant material fromnative plant areas.

Dead native plant material is al-lowed to decompose on site. We donot water, except temporarily as ameasure to help transplants becomesuccessfully established.

The results of the revegetationeffort were staggering. Native plantsquickly filled cleared areas withinone rainy season. Over 60 nativeplant species have subsequently beenidentified at Piedras Blancas LightStation. Most of them were barelysurviving near the encroaching ice-plant or they persisted in limitedpockets on the site. Detailed recordsfor the revegetation project havebeen compiled and are kept at thelight station by Carole Adams,project leader. A complete survey isperformed once a year during thespring.

MAINTENANCE

The success of the native plantrevegetation project at PiedrasBlancas is in large part due to theefforts of detail volunteer hand weed-ers. To only remove the iceplant andother non-native plants in one sweepis not enough. There must be con-tinual follow-up weeding or non-natives will quickly recolonize.

Surprisingly, despite its domi-nance, iceplant has not been theworst offender in terms of its persis-tence. Although we do need to keepa watchful eye out for iceplant seed-lings, oxalis, cut-leaf plantain, NewZealand spinach, and scarlet pim-pernel (Anagallis arvensis) are someof the non-native species that threat-en to recolonize large areas in rapidorder. Non-native vegetation pro-duces large quantities of viable seed,which are capable of germinatingmany years later if favorable condi-tions exist. Seeds that remain in thesoil for long periods of time are re-ferred to as a seed bank. One goal isto eliminate non-native seedlingsthrough continued site monitoring.

Another is to diminish andtotally deplete the non-nativeseed bank. This effort willtake time and perseverance.

SUMMARY OFPROGRESS

Most of the iceplant pres-ent when the BLM took overmanagement of the PiedrasBlancas Light Station in 2002has now been eradicated.Beginning with manual re-moval, and later utilizingchemical and mechanicalmethods, areas with densemonocultures of iceplantwere treated first. Later, thoseareas containing both iceplant andnative plants were successfullytreated. As of July 2010, over 25,000volunteer hours have been loggedin the revegetation effort.

The site is now a testimony to thepower of nature to heal itself, givenassistance by scores of dedicated vol-unteers. We have also observed anincrease in the number of native ani-mal species inhabiting the site.

LESSONS LEARNED

In the past eight years, dedicatedvolunteers using hand tools andother means of removal have en-dured to eliminate 90% of the ice-plant and other non-native plantsgrowing at Piedras Blancas. Whatwas once a matted spongy mono-culture of iceplant now supports adiverse assemblage of native plants.Hard work, dedication, and persis-tence has been the key to achievingthis long-range goal. Critical to thesuccess of the program was team-work and positive energy.

Sometimes it takes a herculeantask to reverse unintended mistakesfrom an earlier time. The surround-ing Piedras Blancas terrace is nowtaking on the appearance of a nativeecosystem. This project has been arewarding learning experience for

all the individuals involved, whohave shown incredible dedicationin helping restore the native flora ofwhat is officially—and now moreappropriately—called the PiedrasBlancas Light Station OutstandingNatural Area.

REFERENCES

Matthews, M.A. 1997. An IllustratedField Key to the Flowering Plants ofMonterey County. California NativePlant Society, Sacramento, CA.

Holland, L.V., and D.J. Keil. 1995. Cali-fornia Vegetation. Kendall/Hunt Pub-lishing, Dubuque, IA.

Invasive Plants of California’s Wildlands,ed. Bossard, C.C., J.M. Randall, andM.C. Hoshovsky. 2000. University ofCalifornia Press, Berkeley, CA.

Hickman, J.C., ed. The Jepson Manual:Higher Plants of California. 1993. Uni-versity of California Press, Berkeley,CA.

Piedras Blancas Light Station, Manage-ment Plan and Environmental Assess-ment. 2006. Bureau of Land Manage-ment, Bakersfield Office, 2006.

Lewis, R. Vegetative Management Plan,Piedras Blancas Light Station. 2003.

Russ Lewis, P.O. Box 867, Ocean Park,WA, 98640, cheriruss55@ centurytel.net;Carole Adams, Piedras Blancas Light Sta-tion, P.O. Box 129, San Simeon, CA 93452,PBLSlibrary@ gmail.com

Coastal bush lupine (Lupinus arboreus) now thrivesat Piedras Blancas Light Station.


CONSERVATION AND COMMUNITY AMONGTHE SANTA ROSA PLAIN VERNAL POOLS

by Michelle Jensen and Nancy C. Emery

estled within the rollinggrasslands of the SantaRosa Plain in SonomaCounty are shallow to-

pographic depressions where water,soil, and sunshine mingle. Each yearthe sprinkling of seasonal precipita-tion over a landscape lined with asoil hardpan cause vernal pool wet-lands to swell, triggering a remark-able cascade of biological events.

In response to the onset of rainin the late fall, terrestrial plant spe-cies begin to germinate while sala-manders, copepods (a group of smallcrustaceans), and fairy shrimp wake

from their hot weather dormancyamong the loamy soils. Months later,as the days warm signaling the on-set of spring, rapidly unfurling flo-ral displays entice native solitary beesand pollinators to produce futuregenerations before the water tablerecedes and the summer sun lapsthe last few molecules of standingwater into the sky.

Ephemeral vernal pool wetlandsare rare in the state of Californiaand the Santa Rosa Plain is one ofthe few coastal regions containingrelicts of this biodiverse ecosystem.It is theorized that northern hard-pan pools on the Plain were devel-oped through the scouring activityof creeks and rivers. This actionshaped the hummocky (ridge-like)uplands of Wright clay loam thatencircle shallow depressions, ormeander scars (abandoned portionsof a channel) where vernal pools arecommonly found (Norwick 1991).

The pools are botanically intrigu-ing in that they represent a diverseoasis of native annuals that areadapted to the harsh fluctuations offull inundation in winter and com-plete aridity in summer. Speciesfound amidst these “islands amongthe grasses” include downingia(Downingia concolor), smooth or ray-less goldfields (Lasthenia glaber-rima), California semaphore grass(Pleuropogon californicus), Douglas’sbeardstyle (Pogogyne douglasii), andthe delicate Lobb’s aquatic butter-cup (Ranunculus lobbii).

The pools may also contain threeendangered plant species that arelargely endemic to Sonoma County:

Burke’s goldfields (Lasthenia burkei),Sebastopol meadowfoam (Limnan-thes vinculans), and Sonoma sunshine(Blennosperma bakeri), all CNPS List1B.1 species. All three have been sub-stantially impacted through a his-tory of pressures from developmentand land conversion, and havespurred an intensive conservationmovement to preserve the few popu-lations that remain today (e.g., seeCH2M Hill 1995). Considering thatCalifornia has now lost up to 95% ofits vernal pool habitat (Holland 1978;Holland 1998), each remnant of thisunique ecosystem represents a last-standing refuge for many endemicand endangered species.

HISTORY ON THE PLAIN

Between 1970 and 1990 SonomaCounty experienced a major popu-lation boom, resulting in an escala-tion of urban development that en-croached onto the Plain and intovernal pool habitat. During thisperiod, species of concern becameprotected under Federal and StateEndangered Species Acts, triggeringthe implementation of mitigationprojects as a means to address theloss of wetland habitat.

Mitigation on the Plain prima-rily involved the creation of artifi-cial vernal pool habitat at alterna-tive sites using heavy equipment tocontour the soils. Seed (or scrapedsoils containing seeds) from de-stroyed or donor pools was thenused to “inoculate” the created pools.Oftentimes seed was transported inlarger quantities, at greater distances,

ABOVE LEFT: One of the most vibrant of endangered vernal pool species on the Santa RosaPlain, Burke’s goldfields (Lasthenia burkei) has experienced a decline in population sizeover the last 25 years. Photograph by D. Ackerly. • LEFT: Sebastopol meadowfoam(Limnanthes vinculans), another species endemic to the Plain, is also threatened bydevelopment. Photograph by M. Jenson.

N


and deposited in ways that did notreflect natural patterns of seed dis-persal. Furthermore, seeds were of-ten sown haphazardly across pools,without regard to subtle differencesin elevation (microtopography).This can have dramatic influenceson plant germination and survival,as small changes in elevation withinpools is often associated with vastlydifferent hydrological conditions,soil types, and plant communitycomposition.

Regardless of the onset of miti-gation practices and their intentionto reduce impacts to endangered spe-cies, incessant pressures from urbanencroachment and land use on thePlain continued well into the newmillennium. Recognition that thesedemands needed to be addressed re-sulted in a collaboration of stake-holders who developed the SantaRosa Plain Conservation Strategy in2005 (Goude et al. 2005). Instead ofdealing with land conversion on aproject-by-project basis, this guid-

ing document advocated settingaside contiguous conservation areasassociated with projected urbangrowth boundaries. However, at thetime of its inception, many naturalvernal pools remained scattered onprivate lands and beyond the juris-diction of the Strategy.

WHERE ARE WE NOW?

When a vernal pool specialist isasked about the state of the pools onthe Plain, they most often reply withconcern. The role and “success” ofmitigation in the conservation ofendangered plant species is conten-tious, and we still don’t understandhow past seed translocation activi-ties are affecting these populations.Despite strong opposition fromCNPS (Hubbart et al. 2001) and vari-ous conservation scientists (Elam1998; Howald 1996), seed translo-cation practices are still utilized tothis day.

Unfortunately, a majority of the

remaining vernal pools on the Plainare heavily degraded or unmanaged,leaving populations vulnerable tochanges in environmental or land-use conditions. Properly managingthese landscapes can be an expen-sive and daunting task, demandinga fundamental understanding of thecomplexities associated with vernalpool systems and their annual fluc-tuations.

Presently we are at a point wheredevelopment and land conversionhas temporarily declined in the re-gion, thereby giving pause for stake-holders to engage in the acquisition,management, and conservation ofthe remaining vernal pools. We canalso reflect upon what we havelearned over the last 25 years, con-sidering our past mistakes andachievements in preparation for thenext set of challenges.

Instead of approaching the cir-cumstances on the Plain with reser-vation, we can reevaluate our posi-tion and recognize the Plain as a

Created vernal pool in winter on mitigation property in Sonoma County with a staff gauge for monitoring pool hydrology in the center.Large Valley oak trees (Quercus lobata), as seen in the background, are often found scattered among the wet meadows of the Plain.Photograph by M. Jensen.


case study of mitigation. Adoptingthis perspective opens up many op-portunities for local botanists, ecolo-gists, naturalists, and students, aswell as land managers and policy-makers, to explore a system thathas been tampered with yet still re-quires active long-term manage-ment. Given that population growthin California is inevitable, we mustlearn how to best conserve and man-age our treasured flora, regardlessof site history.

RESEARCH ACTIVITIES

A growing awareness of the un-certain future facing vernal poolsthroughout California has led to arecent surge of research activity onthe endangered plant species foundon the Santa Rosa Plain. Armed withcontemporary scientific techniquesthat are increasingly accessible, lo-cal researchers are exploring the con-servation ecology, evolution, andgenetics of vernal pool plant spe-cies. The list of research possibili-ties seems endless, covering every-thing from grazing regimes to theeffects of hydrologic connectivitybetween neighboring pools and

swales on seed dispersal. Some ofthe current research projects relatedto vernal pools that are taking placeon the Plain include:

• comparisons of local pollinatorcommunities observed in createdand natural pools (Kandis Gilmore,Sonoma State University);

• genetic diversity and structureacross endangered plant species’ranges, as well as within individualpools (Dr. Christina Sloop, SanFrancisco Bay Joint Venture;Michelle Jensen and Dr. Nancy C.Emery, Purdue University; seeAyres and Sloop 2008);

• the effects of soil compaction onplant growth and morphology(Michelle Jensen and Dr. NancyC. Emery, Purdue University); and

• vernal pool seed bank dynamics(Hattie Brown, Laguna de SantaRosa Foundation; and Dr. Chris-tina Sloop, San Francisco Bay JointVenture).

It is the goal of many of theseresearch projects to establish anup-to-date baseline dataset that willenhance our knowledge of vernalpool species to assist conservationefforts.

BECOMING INVOLVED

There are now many opportuni-ties for members of the public toparticipate in research activities onthe Plain. One is the Adopt a VernalPool (AVP) citizen science monitor-ing program, which was initiated in2007 through the collaborative ef-forts of the California Native PlantSociety’s Milo Baker Chapter andthe Laguna de Santa Rosa Founda-tion. The AVP program currentlyconsists of over 50 volunteers thatannually monitor endangered ver-nal pool plant populations acrossthe Plain. Standardized data collec-tions are annually compiled in a pub-licly accessible database available atwww.citizen-science.org.

In the last three years, AVP vol-unteers have increased our under-standing of vernal pool dynamicsand have brought attention to a re-cent threat of invasive plant speciesinfiltrating vernal pool habitat, in-cluding the notorious pennyroyalmint (Mentha pulegium). Throughthese observations, land managershave been alerted and are beginningto coordinate their efforts to eradi-cate this threat before it takes root.

This exemplary program has en-gaged public participants from allbackgrounds. With direction fromAVP, they have been able to developa connection with the pools theywatch over, increasing their knowl-edge of the flora and scientific datacollection methods, while becom-ing part of a growing local conserva-tion community.

FUTURE PROSPECTS

As stewards of the landscape, wemust adapt to new challenges, muchlike the plant species occupyingthese unusual ephemeral wetlands.Tomorrow may bring new, unan-ticipated biological threats, andchanges in weather patterns or po-litical climates. Attempting to con-serve the remnant pools on the SantaRosa Plain—no matter how de-

Volunteers learning to identify Sebastopol meadowfoam, one of the three endangeredspecies monitored annually through the Adopt a Vernal Pool citizen science program.Photograph by H. Brown.


graded they may be—is a dauntingtask. The contributions of everyone,from academics to backyard natu-ralists, are essential for improvingour research and management ef-forts. Searching for clues among ourpast activities on the Plain will assistpolicymakers, landowners, and man-agers statewide to make better-informed decisions about how bestto conserve our valued vernal poolhabitat. By looking back on the Plainthrough the lens of collaborative un-derstanding, we can begin to moveforward.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thankthe California Native Plant Societyfor providing graduate researchfunding through its EducationalGrants Program, as well as Dr. Chris-tina Sloop, Science Coordinator forthe San Francisco Bay Joint Ven-ture, for her generous assistance.

REFERENCESAyres, D.R. and C.M. Sloop. 2008. Ge-

netic structure of three endangeredplants of the Santa Rosa Plain: Burke’sgoldfields (Lasthenia burkei), Sonomasunshine (Blennosperma bakeri), andSebastopol meadowfoam (Limnanthesvinculans). Report prepared for theU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sac-ramento, CA. Section 6 Grant E-2-P-23.

CH2M Hill. 1995. Draft Santa RosaPlain vernal pool ecosystem preserva-tion plan. Report prepared for theSanta Rosa Plain Vernal Pool TaskForce, CA.

Elam, D.R. 1998. Population geneticsof vernal pool plants: Theory, data,and conservation implications. InEcology, Conservation, and Manage-ment of Vernal Pool Ecosystems: Pro-ceedings from a 1996 Conference, ed.Witham, C.W., E.T. Bauder, W.R.Ferren Jr., and R. Ornduff. Califor-nia Native Plant Society, Sacramento,CA.

Goude, C., C. Wilcox, et al. 2005. SantaRosa Plain Conservation Strategy. USFish and Wildlife Service, Sacra-mento, CA.

ENDANGERED PLANT SPECIES OFTHE SANTA ROSA PLAIN

➤ Burke’s goldfields (Lasthenia burkei) (RIGHT) L.burkei may possibly be the most threatened of thethree endangered plant species found on the Plain.A member of the sunflower family (Asteraceae), L.burkei is noted for its golden composite inflores-cence made up of both ray and disk flowers. Pho-tograph by D. Ackerly.

➤ Sebastopol meadowfoam (Limnanthes vinculans)(MIDDLE) L. vinculans was originally discovered anddescribed by Robert Ornduff in 1969. There areapproximately 30 known populations found in avariety of wet meadows, swales, and vernal pools.The seeds of meadowfoam plants are called nutletsand have identifying ridges, or tubercles, on theseed coat. Some speculate that these ridges mayassist seed dispersal by increasing seed buoyancy.Photograph by M. Jensen.

➤ Sonoma sunshine (Blennosperma bakeri) (BOTTOM)Also known as Baker’s stickyseed, B. bakeri is anearly bloomer on the Plain with flowers signalingthe approach of spring in early March. This lovelyspecies is found only within Sonoma County. Thespecific epithet of the scientific name, bakeri, re-fers to the historic botanist for whom the localCNPS chapter is named: Milo Baker. Photographby K. Gilmore.

Hickman, J.C., ed. 1993. The JepsonManual: Higher Plants of California.University of California Press, Ber-keley, CA.

Holland, R.F. 1978. The geographic andedaphic distribution of vernal poolsin the Great Valley, California. Cali-fornia Native Plant Society SpecialPublication No. 4, Sacramento, CA.

Holland, R.F. 1998. Great Valley ver-nal pool distribution, photorevisited1996. In Ecology, Conservation, andManagement of Vernal Pool Ecosys-tems: Proceedings from a 1996 Con-ference, ed. Witham, C.W., E.T.Bauder, W.R. Ferren Jr., and R.Ornduff. California Native Plant So-ciety, Sacramento, CA.

Howald, A.M. 1996. Translocation as amitigation strategy: Lessons fromCalifornia. In Restoring Diversity:Strategies for Reintroduction of Endan-gered Plants, ed. Falk, D.A., C.I.

Millar, and M. Olwell. Island Press,Washington, D.C.

Hubbart, L., B. Ertter, A. Dennis, andC.C. Baskin. 2001. Statement oppos-ing transplantation as mitigation forimpacts to rare plants. Fremontia29(3-4): 66-67.

Norwick, S.A. 1991. Vernal pools andother seasonal bodies of standing wa-ter. Fremontia 19(3): 8-19.

Ornduff, R. 1969. Limnanthes vin-culans, a new California endemic.Brittonia 21:11-14.

Michelle Jensen, Department of Botanyand Plant Pathology, Purdue University,915 West State Street, West Lafayette,IN 47907, [email protected];Nancy C. Emery, Department of Biologi-cal Sciences, Purdue University, 915 WestState Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907,[email protected]


WALKING IN ALICE EASTWOOD’S FOOTSTEPS:ERIASTRUM SPARSIFLORUM IN KINGS CANYON

by Sarah J. De Groot

t must have been an amazing trip.In July 1899, Alice Eastwood, abotanist and curator of the her-barium of the California Academy

of Sciences (CAS) in San Francisco,traveled with three companions intothe Sierra Nevada. As Eastwood tellsit, “We were twelve days (July 2-14)in the region, and traveled on footfrom Millwood to the headwatersof Bubbs Creek, ascending bothbranches, the one leading to EastLake and Harrisons Pass, the otherto Bullfrog Lake and Kearsarge Pass.We ascended what is known as Mt.Stanford, but no other peak as the

time was too limited” (Eastwood1902b).

Millwood was located a few mileswest of the present site of the GrantGrove visitor center in Kings Can-yon National Park (Durham 1998).From there, the party probably fol-lowed a trail past Lookout Peak,which reached the south fork ofthe Kings River at Cedar Grove. Al-though this was the route generallytaken through the area (LeConte1893-6), Eastwood’s exact route isunknown, since her field notebookswere lost in the San Francisco fire of1906 (R. Wenk, California Acad-

emy of Sciences, personal commu-nication, July 22, 2009), and in pub-lication Eastwood gave only the gen-eral account of the route as quotedabove.

Somewhere along the way, East-wood collected a few specimens of anew species of Gilia. She describedthis plant three years later as Giliasparsiflora, noting that it “belongs tothe same group as G. virgata Steud”(Eastwood 1902a). Today both ofthese species are recognized withinthe genus Eriastrum (woolly-star, inthe Phlox family, Polemoniaceae),and Gilia sparsiflora is now called

I

Typical habitat of E. sparsiflorum in Kings Canyon. All photographs by S. J. De Groot.


Eriastrum sparsiflorum (few-floweredwoolly-star). Eastwood specified ageneral locality where she collectedplants of this species: “Collected bythe author in Kings River Cañon, inJuly, 1899; and also along BubbsCreek trail” (Eastwood 1902a).

I came across this species whileworking to revise the classificationof the genus Eriastrum, with the aimof providing an easier means to iden-tify each species. Already I had seena number of other Eriastrum speciesin the field, and had a good idea oftheir preferred habitat. Eriastrumsparsiflorum in Kings Canyon was ofparticular interest for two reasons:1) the species was described fromspecimens collected in Kings Can-yon—making Kings Canyon plantsthe standard by which the species, E.sparsiflorum, is defined; and 2) mostplants of E. sparsiflorum occur east ofthe Sierra crest, while Kings Canyonis on the west slope. Given the heightof the Sierra Nevada and the barrierthis could pose to plant pollinatorsor seed dispersal, I wanted to seeplants on both sides of the moun-tains to ensure that they did indeedbelong to the same species.

Using Eastwood’s publications,label data, probable route, and the1905 USGS Tehipite 30' quadrangle(see below), the likely place whereEriastrum sparsiflorum was first col-lected can be narrowed down toabout 11 miles along the Kings Riverand Bubbs Creek. This seems a bitimprecise for anyone wishing to re-locate the plant, given that E. spar-siflorum is a small annual plant withsmall white flowers—certainly easyto overlook and walk past. Could

additional specimens of this speciesfrom Kings Canyon offer more pre-cise location information?

One problem with using otherspecimens was that there was onlyone other collection besides East-wood’s. John Thomas Howell, an-other botanist at CAS, made a col-lection of Eriastrum sparsiflorum onthe 10th of August, 1940. He nar-rowed the location down better thanEastwood had: “Mouth of BubbsCreek to Zumwalt Meadows, Can-yon of S. Fk. of Kings River, Fresno,Co.” (Howell field notebook, R.Wenk, CAS, personal communica-tion, 21 July 2009). This covers adistance of just over two miles alongthe south fork of the Kings River.Howell’s location seemed preciseenough that it appeared it would befairly easy to relocate the plants bysearching the area between BubbsCreek and Zumwalt Meadow.

For many botanists, particularlythose concerned with conservationof rare plants, the lure of rediscov-ering a plant that has not been seenfor a long time is strong. It is excit-ing when a plant that is presumedextinct (e.g., any plant on CNPSList 1A) or thought to be extirpatedin an area is found again. While thespecies E. sparsiflorum was alive andwell east of the Sierra Nevada, ithad not been seen for 70 years inKings Canyon. Was it extirpated, orjust not documented because no onehad bothered to look for it? I had tofind out.

My first attempt was near theend of July 2006. It was a little latein the season, but dried Eriastrumplants sometimes persist for a few

months after going to seed, and Ithought at the very least I mightfind a site to return to the next year.Upon arrival in Kings Canyon, Iheaded straight for the high countryalong the Bubbs Creek foot trail—Eastwood said she found the plantalong Bubbs Creek, so I headed ahalf-day’s walk up the Bubbs Creektrail in search of it. Although thehabitat looked promising in someareas, I did not see any sign of Eri-astrum.

In 2008, I decided that the flat,sandy benches along the Kings Riverhad better habitat and therefore weremore likely areas to find Eriastrum.Incidentally, this was also a bit ear-lier in the season, at the beginningof July, and I had a volunteer fieldassistant along, thinking that an ex-tra set of eyes could help to spot theplants. Although we spent the daycombing the flat areas betweenRoad’s End and Bubbs Creek on thenorth side of the river, we did notsee any Eriastrum.

Looking at a map, a search ofjust two miles along the Kings Riverappeared to be a fairly quick andeasy task. But when you get into thefield and start walking, you realizethat those two miles are pretty widein places, and you have to make alot of zigzags to comb through all ofit for a population of annual plantsthat may be no larger than a diningroom table. So in 2009, with theenthusiastic help of the park plantecologist, Sylvia Haultain, I spent aday combing the area from ZumwaltMeadow to Bubbs Creek, on bothsides of the river, accompanied by 8other botanists and plant enthusi-

Tehipite 30' quadrangle, as reprinted in 1924. The area along the Kings River between Zumwalt Meadow (marked with an asterisk) andthe confluence with Bubbs Creek was searched in 2006, 2008, and 2009. In 2010 the search began farther downstream at Cedar Groveand headed east. Map courtesy of U.S. Geological Survey.


asts—18 eyes looking for the elu-sive annual. We hunted nearly ev-ery possible spot where Eriastrumsparsiflorum was likely to grow, butdid not find a single plant.

At that point, I wasn’t quite surewhere to look next. It seemed thatall the likely areas had been searched,without success. And after all, it hadbeen 70 years since Howell’s collec-tion. Maybe Eriastrum sparsiflorumjust didn’t exist in Kings Canyonanymore.

EASTWOOD’S FOOTSTEPS?

A road trip in late June 2010took me right past Kings Canyon, soI thought I’d take one more looksince I was in the area anyway. First,though, I studied the 1905 Tehipite30' quadrangle (see p. 45). It wassurveyed in 1903, so I guessed thatthe trails shown on the map wereprobably the same or very similar tothe ones on which Eastwood trav-eled in 1899. While there were trailson both sides of the Kings River be-tween Cedar Grove and Bubbs Creek,only the one on the north side iscontinuous. So assuming Eastwoodand her companions reached thesouth fork of the Kings River at Ce-dar Grove, they may have crossedthere to the north side, then crossedback to the south side at the mouthof Bubbs Creek. Since she also hadsaid that time was limited (Eastwood1902b), I guessed she probably hadnot wandered far from the trail. Ifound the pack trail at Cedar Groveand started up the canyon on thenorth side of the river, figuring Iwould follow Eastwood’s most likelyroute and try to see what she saw.

And there they were. Right alongCedar Trail between Cedar Groveand Roaring River, there were thoseelusive little white-flowered annu-als. Although the flowers were juststarting to open, the cottony woolon the bracts and calyces told me itwas certainly E. sparsiflorum. Thehabitat looked virtually identical tothe habitat of areas farther upstream

that I had searched previously. Whyhere, now, and not there, then? Ihave no idea.

The plants were so dense inplaces that I had to be very carefulwhere I walked, for fear of steppingon them. There were about 600plants up at this site in 2010. Thisnumber almost certainly fluctuatesfrom year to year, depending on theamount of winter precipitation. Theyappeared to be doing fairly well, eventhough the extent of the populationwas not particularly large.

It was 70 years since Howell’scollection, and apparently 70 yearssince it was last seen, but Eriastrumsparsiflorum still grows in Kings Can-yon—a good reminder that the ab-sence of evidence is not evidence ofabsence. Just because a particularspecies is not seen in an area forsome time does not mean that it nolonger grows there. The site seen in2010 was just east of Cedar Grove,

but there is plenty of similar habitatalong the Kings River between thereand Bubbs Creek. It is possible thatadditional populations of Eriastrumare hiding in other places in thecanyon, or even along Bubbs Creek,but just have not been seen recently.

So if your travels take you toKings Canyon, keep an eye out for alittle annual plant, 4-12 inches tall,with small white 5-petaled flowersin narrow heads and, most impor-tantly, cottony wool on the calyxand bracts.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many thanks to all the hardypeople who accompanied me in thefield, with special thanks to SylviaHaultain for her support and Se-quoia-Kings Canyon National Parkfor granting permission to conductresearch in the park. I am also grate-ful for financial support from theCalifornia Native Plant Society,Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden,the Anza-Borrego Foundation, TheCommunity Foundation serving Riv-erside and San Bernardino Coun-ties, and the Southern CaliforniaBotanists.

REFERENCESDurham, D.L. 1998. California’s Geo-

graphic Names: A Gazetteer of His-toric and Modern Names of the State.Word Dancer Press, Clovis, CA.

Eastwood, A. 1902a. New species fromthe Sierra Nevada Mountains of Cali-fornia. Proceedings of the CaliforniaAcademy of Sciences, Third Series.Botany 2(9): 285-293.

Eastwood, A. 1902b. A Flora of theSouth Fork of the Kings River, fromMillwood to the Head Waters of BubbsCreek. Publications of the SierraClub, Number 27.

LeConte, J.N. 1893-1896. Notes on theKing’s River and Mt. Whitney trails(July and August, 1890). The SierraClub Bulletin 1: 93-106.

Sarah J. De Groot, RSABG, 1500 N. Col-lege Avenue, Claremont, CA 91711,[email protected]

BELOW TOP: Few-flowered woolly-star (E.sparsiflorum). Close-up shows the uniquewoolly hairs on the calyx and bracts. Thescale bar provides an indication of howsmall the flowers are. BELOW BOTTOM: Photoshows the plant’s usual branching pattern.


MARTHA WALKER CALIFORNIA NATIVE HABITATGARDEN: CELEBRATING 25 YEARS

by Kathleen Chasey and Leah Hawks

he Martha Walker CaliforniaNative Habitat Garden en-compasses a three-acre oasiswithin Napa’s Skyline Wil-

derness Park, a 900-acre preservewith hilly woodlands and chaparral,including trails, camping, disc golf,archery, a lake, and a diversity offlora and fauna.

In the late 1970s when NapaState Hospital made this land avail-able to potential developers, inter-ested citizens rallied to save the valu-

able oak woodlands, hillside chap-arral, and riparian corridors and cre-ated Skyline Wilderness Park. Athree-acre portion—formerly theState Hospital’s dump—would ulti-mately become the home of Napa’sonly public native plant garden.

THE INGOLS’ VISION

In 1968 Ralph Ingols and hiswife Evelyne became members ofthe California Native Plant Society,

and began using their backyard topropagate native perennials forCNPS plant sales. This is where theyand friends first discussed the ideaof a public native plant garden wherevisitors could learn about and enjoyCalifornia’s flora in protected andeasy-to-access surroundings.

The Ingols spent many yearstraveling throughout California,studying and collecting its nativeflora and gaining valuable knowl-edge and background in plant iden-

T

A colorful planting of hybrid monkey flowers (Mimulus) gives visitors ideas for their home habitat gardens. All photographs by LloydChasey unless otherwise noted.


tification and propagation. By 1985,and with the help of conservationistfriends, CNPS, and the Skyline Citi-zens Association, Ralph and Evelyne

founded the Martha Walker NativeHabitat Garden on Skyline Park land,and became its first curators.

The garden was named inmemory of Martha Walker, a Napagardening icon who wrote a weeklycolumn “Let’s Go into the Garden,”which ran for 35 years in the NapaRegister. She shared her knowledgeof plants on local radio stationKVON, and taught a gardening classat Napa Valley College, “Adventuresin Gardening.” She also helpedfound the Napa Valley Chapter ofthe CNPS and was involved withother conservationist groups. Marthapassed away in 1983.

The Ingols were the driving forcebehind the success of the garden inits beginning years. After Evelyne’sdeath in 2000, Ralph continued ascurator emeritus. Terry Chappell fol-

lowed the Ingols as curator for nineyears and retired in 2009. Currentcurator Kathleen Chasey overseescare of the garden along with a groupof hard-working volunteers, as wellas the garden’s steering committeeand the board of the Napa ValleyChapter.

The initial garden site has beendescribed as a “ravine,” which madeit an ideal spot for the hospital dump,as it was close to the main road.Because of this proximity, it wasalso ideal to develop later on as agarden. The Ingols and other nativeplant enthusiasts combined theirefforts to maintain the new nativeplant garden site. Community vol-unteers, including those who cameto camp at the Park, took an activepart in the maintenance process.

Since the garden area was once

CNPS Docent Chairman Kent Rupert shares interesting bird facts with visiting schoolchildren in the garden’s central gazebo, which is shaded by native vines, including wildgrape (Vitis californica) and Chaparral clematis (Clematis lasiantha).

With the aid of hand lenses, CNPS docentLoretta Radey teaches visiting schoolchildren about the wonders of coral bells(Heuchera spp.) and why they attract hum-mingbirds. The garden’s founders wantedthe garden to be used as an outdoor scienceclassroom, and the community-fundedCNPS docent program continues thatlegacy.


the Napa State Hospital’s dump,much work had to be done to trans-form this unlikely site into the beau-tiful grounds it could become. Therewere numerous challenges. Cows,deer, and jack rabbits grazed theplants. Well water availability wasinconsistent, and thirsty stands ofredwood saplings (Sequoia semper-virens) and spicebush (Calycanthusoccidentalis) suffered. Soil consistedof clay, rock, and hospital trash.

The initial trails were cut andgraveled. Huge spray heads wereplumbed and a spring diverted tocreate a meandering creek. Cowsand deer were kept out with a newfence and the garden expanded toinclude an adjacent man-made pondwhere wood ducks raise their youngeach spring and kingfishers hunt thechorus of frogs.

EDUCATION ANDAWARENESS

As with Martha Walker’s ownmission, the mission of the MarthaWalker California Native HabitatGarden is to increase public under-standing and appreciation of Cali-

fornia native plants in their envi-ronment, and to recognize the mu-tually beneficial association of plantswith animals and people.

Both Ralph and Evelyne had beencareer educators, so it was impor-tant to them that the garden be usedas an outdoor classroom. This legacycontinues as a top priority of theNapa Valley Chapter of CNPS. In2010 the chapter set as new goals todouble the number of youth groupsthat participate in nature-related ac-tivities in the garden, and to increasethe general public’s awareness of thegarden and its value as a teachingtool. Each season now, CNPS vol-unteers teach native plant identifi-cation, propagation, and gardening.They lead tours during the wilder-ness park’s special event days as wellas during the Chapter’s plant salesand Spring Wildflower Show.

Today 400 students visit the gar-den annually during class trips andscout outings. Hundreds more ex-plore the garden with friends andfamily on day trips and while camp-ing nearby. One of the most reward-ing programs is the CNPS NaturalScience Docent Program, an all-vol-unteer, community-funded organi-

zation that provides science and cul-tural enrichment to Napa Countyschool children. The program offersactivities to explore the mysteries ofnative plants, birds, beneficial in-sects, and other critters with bin-oculars and hand lenses. Docentsteach native plant identification anduse, and demonstrate tools and arti-facts, giving children a glimpse intothe lifestyle of Napa Valley’s nativepeoples. Children handle, smell, andlearn how to use the plants that sus-tained Napa County’s original resi-dents for thousands of years.

When it became obvious thatbirds, butterflies, and beneficial in-sects were becoming more plentifulin the garden, we realized that it wasturning into a successful habitat gar-den. Birdbaths with dripping waterwere soon added, and the bird popu-lation expanded considerably to 130species.

Beautiful pipevine swallowtailbutterflies laid their eggs on Dutch-man’s pipe/California pipevine(Aristolochia californica), and inshort order a host of pollinatorsmoved in.

Today the garden includes bothyoung and mature native plants infive plant communities, includingoak woodland, mixed evergreen for-est, chaparral, redwood, and ripar-ian. Volunteers planted hundredsof trees and shrubs representing thekey species of each of these plantcommunities. These specimens pro-duce the seed, blooms, pollen, andoverall environment necessary tosupport the many species of wild-life that make their homes in thegarden.

One of the garden’s showiest na-tives is a massive fuchsia-floweredgooseberry (Ribes speciosum) cov-ered with thousands of danglingblossoms and the many Anna’s Hum-mingbirds that feed on it. Another isthe western redbud (Cercis occiden-talis), a tree-size specimen. Matilijapoppies (Romneya coulteri) and bushanemone (Carpenteria californica)are covered with blooms in late

Equipped with new knowledge on local bird species, children enter the garden withbinoculars to see what they can identify.


spring. Invariably, visitors ask whatthese flowering plants are and aboutthe possibility of obtaining such na-tives for themselves. Fortunately thesignage below these plants gives thenovice important plant identifica-tion information.

One section is now TheChildren’s Garden, and includeschild-size tables and benches, andother inviting features, so that eventhe smallest children can be intro-duced to the natural world. Recentlya work group from a local winerybuilt a teepee-shaped trellis for na-tive California pipevine (Aristolo-chia californica) and added steppingstones throughout the Children’s

Garden to invitefurther explorationthrough the giant se-quoias.

While today thegarden is truly anexample of biodi-versity, this has alsobeen one of thechallenges in main-taining it. With theexuberance of plant-ing trees and largeshrubs comes crowd-ing, low air circula-tion, occasional limbdie-off, and some-times disease. After25 years of growth,the amount of lightpenetrating the un-derstory is limited, soit is up to the horti-cultural expertise ofthe garden’s steeringcommittee to comeup with possible so-lutions.

Funds to main-tain the garden comefrom donations,grants, occasionalfundraising efforts,and the proceedsfrom the Chapter’sspring and fall plant

sales. In addition, Ralph Ingols con-tinues to donate to the garden theproceeds from books he’s authoredin the last decade.

CURATORS & COMMUNITYVOLUNTEERS

The effort of the community hasbeen invaluable in the success of thegarden. Community volunteers—in-cluding individuals, groups, clubs,and local businesses—have workedtirelessly to maintain the garden byweeding, trimming, planting, mulch-ing, and filling nectar and seed feed-ers for the birds. Local businessesand wineries have begun choosingthe Martha Walker Garden as a placewhere their employees can volun-teer. Business colleagues gather thereequipped with gloves, tools, andwheelbarrows, and work togetherwhile learning about the garden’shistory, diversity, and the value thatCalifornia native plants contributeto the environment. For many, it isa welcome introduction to conser-vation and the natural sciences.

Numerous Boy Scout Eagle can-didates have also donated time andenergy to enhance the garden withsuch improvements as plant signs,bird baths and feeders, and a ga-zebo. Last fall three young adults—

This heritage valley oak (Quercus lobata) is the signature oakof the garden, which includes young and mature native plantsin five different plant communities.

Ralph Ingols in fall 2010 at the dedication of a new gate at the entrance to the MarthaWalker Garden. In 1985 he and his wife Evelyne helped to found Napa County’s onlypublic native plant garden. Photograph by C. Belluomini.


Jackson Downing, Ryan Marquette,and Brian Mattis—transformed asunny quarter-acre weed patch intoa bunchgrass and wildflowermeadow, complete with dry creekbed, wooden bridges, and bird-houses.

Foundation grasses in themeadow now include deergrass(Muhlenbergia rigens) and fescue(Festuca idahoensis). Jackrabbits anddeer sometimes nibble the newblooms of the wildflowers, but thefirst spring display is still colorfulwith blue-eyed grass (Sisyrinchiumbellum) contrasting with the everfaithful California poppy (Eschschol-zia californica).

Recently the local Napa-SolanoAudubon Chapter, with fundingfrom Toyota’s “Together Green”campaign, sponsored the planting ofa new demonstration garden of na-tive plants favored by birds and but-terflies. A variety of nectar, pollen,berry, and seed-producing specimenswere planted and labeled, indicatingthe specific wildlife they attract. Amonth later in celebration of EarthDay, the Audubon Chapter returnedto the garden with another 30-plusvolunteers, most new to gardeningwith California natives. They helpedto install a 90-foot hedgerow for habi-tat along the garden’s northern fenceline, while learning about the ben-efits of the species they planted.

WORLD PEACE GARDEN

The Martha Walker Garden at-tained an unusual designation sev-eral years ago when it became aWorld Peace Garden, one of onlyabout a dozen in the world, and thefirst in the United States. The En-gland based World Peace GardenProject is dedicated to helping forma network of gardens and parklandsthat serve as retreats for peacefulreflection, including both smallerpersonal gardens and large publicspaces.

The garden has become both aclassroom and a place of respite.

TODAY ANDTHE NEXT25 YEARS

In celebration ofthe garden’s 25thanniversary, the deerfence surroundingthe garden has beenraised two feet and anew artisan metalgate dedicated tofounders Ralph andEvelyne Ingols hasbeen installed. Thegarden is seeingbursts of renewedenergy from volun-teers, resulting innew plantings of awildflower meadowand hedgerow, andother additions suchas secondary mean-dering paths and apicnic area beneaththe walnut tree. TheSteering Commit-tee’s three-year planincludes interpretivesigns explaining ma-jor plant communi-ties and habitat, andwhat birds or otherwildlife will be at-tracted to specific na-tives.

The Napa Valleycommunity is fortunate to have thismature, three-acre California nativehabitat garden, which is enjoyed bylocal people of all ages, as well asthose from other states and coun-tries. The winding paths are easy-to-use, many are wheelchair acces-sible, and there are benches and pic-nic tables available throughout. Thevaried gardens create a calming ef-fect, and at any time of year visitorscan observe the connection betweenplants and wildlife.

The Napa Valley Chapter ofCNPS is responsible for maintain-ing and improving the garden, whichhas become an invaluable educa-

tional tool. Thanks to Ralph andEvelyne Ingols and their CNPSfriends, their vision over 25 yearsago of a public native habitat gardenhas resulted in this spot being trans-formed into a place of beauty andgrowing biodiversity.

(For more information on thegarden, visit www.napavalleycnps.org and at the top of the page clickon Martha Walker Garden.)

Kathleen Chasey, 4050 Mt Veeder Road,Napa, CA 94558, [email protected]; Leah Hawks, 1236 Sec-ond Avenue, Napa, CA 94558, leah7hawks@ yahoo.com

A children’s garden invites exploration by youngsters of allages.


TWO VIEWS OF CNPS FELLOW CAROL WITHAM

by Eva S. Butler . . .

t the December 2009 Meetingof the California NativePlant Society (CNPS), CarolWitham became a Fellow of

the Society. She was bestowed withthis highest honor for the myriad con-tributions she has made that have bene-fitted the flora and the people of Cali-fornia. Her leadership and dedicationto conservation, education, and re-search have led to better outcomes fornative plants throughout the state.

We applaud the litigation victo-ries. We glow over her latest publica-tion—the lovely Field Guide to theMather Field Vernal Pools. We appreci-ate the leadership roles she has playedand the places she has managed to leadus. Though laudable, these outcomesare not her greatest achievements.

Carol’s most lasting influence willdefy definition and measure. It is thesubtle, almost undetectable goal of ac-tivism: a change in expectations. Onceexpectations change, we quickly losesight of how things were. A new para-digm emerges and people get on board.We progress as though it were alwaysthe plan.

Like a cloud shadow, Carol’s in-fluence is evident on a landscape level:UC Merced will alter its developmentfootprint; Sacramento developers willpreserve more vernal pools; preserveswill have solid management plans. Spe-cies and landscapes will persist be-cause Carol took the time to research,write, debate, and negotiate on theirbehalf. Carol has changed expectations.

When we look backward, diggingdeeper into the origins of fundamentalchange, we find the stories of our he-roes. This is where the story of CarolWitham will live. Her story celebratesflower power—that is, the triumph offlowers over power.

As the story unfolds, her characteremerges as strategic, tenacious, anddecidedly drawn to challenges. Thoughrooted in a passion for plants, her ac-tions speak of intelligence, persistence,and dogged attention to detail. Shedoes not fight for the sake of fighting;she fights for what is at stake, for things

that truly matter: rare plants, vernalpools, education, and the organizationthat champions these causes: CNPS.

As is true of all heroes, Carol hassacrificed much in her quest to helpCalifornians understand and appreci-ate their native flora. Few are willingto devote so much of their time on thisplanet to saving it. While we hope thatthe journey was its own reward, wefeel compelled to do more, to say more.We want to recognize the sacrifice andcelebrate the successes of our home-town hero.

If imitation is the sincerest formof flattery, there is no better way tohonor Carol’s contribution than toemulate it. She has changed our ex-pectations of what is possible. By herexample, she has changed our expec-tations of ourselves. Her story em-powers us to be more and to do morebecause we see the difference one per-son can make.

As Carol Witham joins the com-pany of the exalted Fellows of CNPS,we are reminded that she follows awell-worn path, blazed by those whohave led the way. Through our wordsand our deeds may we join her inconveying our belief and our optimismthat Calfornia’s native plants will con-tinue to bloom long after we are gone.What greater legacy can one attain thanto leave a path strewn with flowers?

. . . and by Diana Hickson

The Sacramento Valley Chapternominated Carol Witham to become aFellow of CNPS in recognition of hertremendous contributions to the Soci-ety and her remarkable achievementsin the conservation and appreciationof California’s vernal pools.

Carol has been a volunteer andleader within CNPS for over two de-cades. Over the years, her active rolesin the Society have been many andvaried. Upon becoming a member,Carol immediately took on educationalactivities at the chapter level and pro-

Carol at Oroville Table Mountain, February2010. Photograph by D. Rosen/WildsidePhotography.

Aduced regular “rare plants of the Sac-ramento Valley” articles for our news-letter.

She has served as chair of manychapter committees over the years in-cluding rare plants, vegetation, peri-odic plant watch, and conservation.When Carol is not leading activities,she is always prepared to help out byunloading plants for our fall sale, writ-ing scores of comment letters, repre-senting CNPS at land use planningmeetings, and more.

At the state level, Carol has servedas CNPS president, vice president, andmember of the Board of Directors. Sheis a long-term active participant in nu-merous program committees and boardcommittees. Carol represents CNPS invarious environmental consortiums in-cluding the California Endangered Spe-cies and Habitat Alliance and the Cali-fornia Rangeland Conservation Coali-tion. Because of her leadership-by-ex-ample style, Carol has also been highlysuccessful in recruiting new leadersfor the Society.

By far Carol’s most significant con-tribution to the flora and the Society


has been her multi-faceted and inde-fatigable campaign to preserve vernalpools. Carol is a self-educated expert inthe ecology of vernal pool ecosystemsand uses her knowledge to educate,inform, and advocate for vernal poolconservation. Her expertise was mostrecently recognized by the U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service when she was ap-pointed to chair their Vernal Pool Re-covery Plan Implementation Team.

In 2006, after many years of nego-tiations, Carol’s efforts resulted in areduced and shifted footprint for theUniversity of California Merced cam-pus, thereby protecting many speciesand sensitive habitat. She has champi-oned several successful lawsuits to pro-tect vernal pools and ensure adequatedisclosure of environmental impacts.To fund these lawsuits, Carol has or-ganized three highly successful fund-

TOP: A teachable moment at Oroville Table Mountain focused on the natural history ofbutterflies that use native violets (Viola sp.) as larval food sources. • MIDDLE: A Splash fieldtrip for school children to a vernal pool. Carol played a large role in helping to create thecurriculum, which is used by over 2,200 children each year in Sacramento County.Photographs by D. Rosen/Wildside Photography. • BOTTOM: Carol emphasizing a pointduring a monitoring training workshop at the Kiefer Landfill Wetland Preserve. Photographby M. Pakenham-Walsh.

raising events, solicited donations fromCNPS members and other organiza-tions, and has raised $70,000.

Carol teaches about vernal poolsat all levels from children to graduatestudents, laypersons to docents, andland use planners to lawyers. Carol isauthor of Field Guide to the Vernal Poolsof Mather Field, Sacramento Countywhich is a key outreach and fundraisingtool for the chapter.

In addition to being a scientist,educator, and conservation advocate,Carol has also been generous in hergiving to the Society. She is a memberof the Donor Circle and Legacy Circle.

Eva S. Butler, 1940 Markham Way, Sac-ramento, CA 95818, [email protected]; Diana Hickson, 9333 Sparks Way,Sacramento, CA 95827, [email protected]


BART O’BRIEN HONORED BY CNPSby Brett Hall

uring the March 2010 ChapterCouncil Banquet at RanchoSanta Ana Botanic Garden(RSABG), we honored Bart

O’Brien for his creative and extraordi-nary service to CNPS as Fremontia edi-tor (2006–2009).

Next to indigenous people, Bart isabout as Californian as possible. He isa fifth generation native from Hollister,California with a lineage going straightback to the Mayflower! Bart’s interestin native plants started very early. Bythe age of five he was running transectsalong the railroad tracks in search ofwildflowers—a deed for which he re-members getting into “serious” troublewith his parents!

Bart finished his early schooling inHollister and then attended UC Davis,graduating with a degree in environ-mental planning before heading toHarvard School of Design for a master’sdegree in landscape architecture. Hepracticed landscape architecture anddesign in Marin County, where he be-came familiar with Wayne Roderickand a number of other Northern Cali-fornia botanical experts. He mappedpopulations of stink bells (Fritillariaagrestis) in Nicasio for the CaliforniaNatural Diversity Database and latermoved to the Santa Clara area andjoined CNPS.

Soon after, he received a welcom-ing note from the chapter’s board of

directors inviting himto lectures and boardmeetings. So he wentand discovered allkinds of wonderfulpeople, and also thatnative plants could befar more than just afull career and a pas-time: it could be all-consuming and a wayof life.

Joining the SantaClara ranks with Bar-bara Coe, Ken Himes,Tony Corelli, SusanSommers, Bob Will,and many othershelped Bart becomeheavily involved. An-other new friend wasGerda Isenberg, wholater hired Bart tomanage Yerba BuenaNursery in the late1980s, where hejoined a short list ofimportant botanistsand horticulturistswho have held thatsame post. In 1990 hewas hired as directorof horticulture atRancho Santa AnaBotanic Garden inClaremont, California.

Bart has had an adventurous twodecades with RSABG and his accom-plishments are fascinating. In fact he’spretty well known these days. Last yearLA Times West Magazine named himamong the 100 most influential peoplein the region!

Bart is quick to describe the bigaccomplishments he has enjoyed dur-ing his Rancho days as marvelous col-laborations with friends and colleagues,notable among them the cultivar gar-den at Rancho with its beautiful plantsand magnificent baked enamel signs.Bart is well-known for an earlier pro-ject—his cultivar list book—which isan unpublished compendium on Cali-fornia cultivars. Did you know therehave been over 7,000 named Califor-nia native-derived cultivars? Bart’s scho-larly research and forensics in enumer-ating and describing these have earnedhim the affectionately used title, “Kingof Cultivars.”

The Green House Horticulturecomplex and Seed Lab were all fea-tures established at RSABG when Bartarrived, but at the time they werehoused in separate areas with fewerfacilities and resources available tothem. Bart’s job was to create detailfor the complex and coordinate with

D

Bart and lemon lily (Lilium parryi) in July 2009 in the SanBernardino Mountains. Photograph by S. De Groot.

Bart in his old office at Rancho SantaAna Botanic Garden. Photograph by B.Eisenstein.


BARBARA M. PITSCHEL: 1939–2010by Suzanne Harmon

t is with great sadness that I sharewith you news of the sudden passingof my dear friend, former colleague,and fellow Yerba Buena Chapter

board member Barbara Pitschel. Bar-bara joined her beloved husband Rolandin death exactly one year and two daysafter his passing. On August 3, withdaughter Justine and her two grand-daughters by her side, Barbara died fromlung cancer, only two weeks after shehad developed pneumonia and just fivedays after having been diagnosed withan advanced form of cancer.

I first met Barbara upon attendingmy very first CNPS meeting. I was givensuch a warm welcome, and her hospi-tality so impressed me, that I wasinspired to become a member ofCNPS on the spot. Several yearslater, I went on to have the privi-lege of working with Barbara at theSan Francisco Botanical Garden,where we quickly became friends,and where I formed a deep appre-ciation of her impeccable attentionto detail, which made working to-gether a dream come true. Barbara’shospitality, professionalism, and at-tention to detail are traits that ranstrongly through every aspect ofthe multitude of things she did forour community.

Barbara, along with husbandRoland, was one of the foundingmembers of the Yerba Buena Chap-ter of CNPS, and the Pitschels wereboth active and indispensable tothe chapter on so many levels. Bar-

bara fittingly took on the role of hospi-tality chair, providing at her own ex-pense food and refreshment at thechapter’s monthly membership meet-ings. This hospitality shone throughin all that Barbara did, and when shetook on the additional task of programchair, she insisted that the speakers atthe wonderful and varied programs betreated to dinner beforehand. She al-ways thoughtfully anticipated anytravel, equipment, or logistical needsof the speakers, and made sure theywere graciously thanked afterwards.

Barbara was also long-time editorof the chapter’s newsletter, the YerbaBuena News, the coordination of which

was impeccably orchestrated, fromcalls for submissions, getting the news-letter to the publisher, or arrangingmailing party gatherings in the com-fort of her own home. The newsletterwas consistently produced in an ex-tremely timely fashion, and always con-tained interesting and relevant topicsthat were educational to its readers.

Barbara was long-time head librar-ian at the San Francisco BotanicalGarden’s Helen Crocker Russell Li-brary of Horticulture, where she couldalways be found ready to assist andanswer questions about gardeningand native plants to anyone who camethrough the doors. Michael Mc-

Kechnie, executive director of theSan Francisco Botanical GardenSociety, had high praise for her:

“Barbara was one of the most phe-nomenally dedicated staff people Ihave ever had the pleasure of work-ing with. She loved this gardenand the library and dedicated somuch of her life to both. She alsomade sure that there was a youngand able successor, Brandy Kuhl,to take up the reins. That to me isthe ultimate expression of her lovefor the place.”

During the nearly three de-cades she worked there, the librarybecame the site of the largest andmost comprehensive horticulturalcollection in northern California.

In addition, she had a long in-

I

researchers and others to develop thefacilities. Today they clearly serve theconservation, botanical, and horticul-tural goals that Bart and his collabora-tors set forth.

Bart has many ongoing special re-search directions. Among them, the cul-tivation of Arctostaphylos, Ceanothus,Fremontodendron, Salvia, and Dudleya(especially Baja, California dudleyas),restoration planning for the Los Ange-les and San Gabriel Rivers, and recently,the Baja Rare Plant Project with manyimportant collaborators.

Bart has published many papersand two recent books, with anotherone on the way. He has introducedsome 50 California selections into hor-ticulture and we hope many more ofthose are on the way.

A few years back he moved withinRancho, handing over the director ofhorticulture post to Susan Jett. He nowholds the title, director of specialprojects. In this new focus, Bart se-cured for RSABG long-term use of 12acres of Veterans Administration landfor a nursery which will grow natives

for contract and retail for the region,and offer programs in horticulturaltherapy to veterans, among other veryinteresting projects.

Bart thoroughly enjoyed his timeas Fremontia editor, and we im-mensely appreciate the quality andcreativity of his issues, as well as hisother numerous accomplishments todate.

Brett Hall, UCSC Arboretum, 1156 HighStreet, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, [email protected]

Barbara Pitschel. Photograph by M. Bors.


HARLAN KESSEL: 1928–2010by Phyllis M. Faber

arlan Kessel died on August27 from pulmonary fibrosisat his home in Oakland, ahome notable for his book

collection and his warm, welcomingenthusiasm. Harlan served as publica-tion chair for CNPS from 1981 to 1988and remained on the Society’s Publi-cations Committee until 1999. Hebrought to his work a great knowledgeof publications as well as enthusiasmfor the work of the California NativePlant Society.

Harlan served as marketing direc-tor for the University of CaliforniaPress under August Frugé, the direc-tor of the University of California Press,where they became close friends. Afterhis retirement, August and his wife,Susan began spending more time en-joying and protecting California’s na-tive plants. When August becamePresident of CNPS, he drew Harlan inas its publications chair. Harlan’sfriendship with August and SusanFrugé lasted throughout the remain-der of the Frugés’ lives.

Books were alwaysa vital part of Harlan’sworld. He amassed anamazing collection thathe and his wife Esthercarefully cataloged intheir later years. Harlanwas a cofounder of theNorthern CaliforniaBookseller’s Associa-tion and Western Heri-tage Press and was edi-tor-in-chief of the BookClub of California.

Harlan was also acrusader for open spacein the Bay Area and a longtime direc-tor of the East Bay Regional Park Dis-trict (1976-1992), where he foughtmany battles for open space. His winsinclude the acquisition of ClaremontCanyon in Berkeley and the protec-tion of the Apperson Ridge Wilder-ness Park.

Harlan was a strong supporter ofboth the CNPS Bulletin and Fremontia.He encouraged first Marge Hawakawa,

volvement with the Council on Bo-tanical and Horticultural Libraries(CBHL), serving as its president, onthe board of directors, and on numer-ous committees. In addition, for manyyears she was West Coast editor of theCouncil’s newsletter, as well as being apopular conference speaker. In 2006Barbara received the Charles RobertLong Award of Merit for her outstand-ing dedication to CBHL and her manycontributions to the field of horticul-tural literature and information ser-vice and research.

The Pitchels were pivotal in theestablishment of San Francisco’s BernalHill Park as a natural area, beginningwith organized trash removal parties,which evolved into the hilltop habitatrestoration work parties that still con-tinue to this day, and which would, ofcourse, famously end with a wonder-ful feast prepared by Barbara at hernearby home.

Amid all that Barbara did both pro-fessionally and as a volunteer, she al-

ways found time to express her thanks,and I was regularly treated to a hand-written thank you card, even for rou-tine work that I performed. In thesecards and in visits, she would fre-quently tell me that my husband and Ireminded her exactly of herself andRoland when they had been our age.While I don’t think that I could everbe as energetic or exuberant as Bar-bara, I have always thought that to beable to accomplish even a small part ofwhat Barbara had accomplished wassomething wonderful to aspire to, andI continue to do so to this day.

There is so much more that Bar-bara accomplished, and a fuller appre-ciation of both Barbara and RolandPitschel can be found in the Spring2007 issue of Fremontia when theywere named Fellows of the CaliforniaNative Plant Society.

Suzanne Harmon, P.O. Box 1977,Murphys, CA 95247, [email protected]

and later, me (in 1984)to expand Fremontia inorder to increase ourunderstanding of thespecial nature of Cali-fornia plants and theactivities that lent sup-port to protecting them.Harlan enthusiasticallyencouraged the Societyto create a publicationsprogram that, over itsten-year tenure, pub-lished seven floras andgrew to provide a thirdof the CNPS annual

budget with books like California’s WildGardens and the first Manual of Califor-nia Vegetation.

Harlan lived a long, productive lifeworking with open space issues, pub-lications, and for our California nativeplants. His work and effectiveness willbe sorely missed.

Phyllis M. Faber, 212 Del Casa Dr., MillValley, CA 94941, [email protected]

Harlan Kessel. Photograph byA. Curtis.

H

MATERIALS FORPUBLICATION

Members and others are invitedto submit material for publica-tion in Fremontia. Instructionsfor contributors can be foundon the CNPS website, www.cnps.org, or can be requested fromFremontia Editor Bob Hass [email protected].

Fremontia Editorial AdvisoryBoard

Susan D’Alcamo, Ellen Dean,Phyllis M. Faber, Holly Forbes,Brett Hall, Tara Hansen, ToddKeeler-Wolf, David Keil, PamMuick, Dylan Neubauer, BartO’Brien, Roger Raiche, John Saw-yer, Teresa Sholars, Nevin Smith,Greg Suba, Dick Turner, MikeVasey, Carol Witham

F R E M O N T I AV O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

❏ Enclosed is a check made payable to CNPS Membership gift:

❏ Charge my gift to ❏ Mastercard ❏ Visa Added donation of:

Card Number TOTAL ENCLOSED:

Exp. date

Signature

Phone

Email

Join Today!

Please make your check payable to “CNPS” and send to: California Native Plant Society, 2707 K Street, Suite 1, Sacra-mento, CA 95816-5113. Phone: (916) 447-2677; Fax: (916) 447-2727; Web site: www.cnps.org.; Email: [email protected]

❏ Enclosed is a matching gift form provided by my employer

❏ I would like information on planned giving

CNPS member gifts allow us to promote and protect California’s native plants andtheir habitats. Gifts are tax-deductible minus the $12 of the total gift which goestoward publication of Fremontia.

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

❏ $1,500 Mariposa Lily ❏ $600 Benefactor ❏ $300 Patron ❏ $100 Plant Lover

❏ $75 Family ❏ $75 International or Library ❏ $45 Individual ❏ $25 Limited Income

CONTRIBUTORS (continued from back cover)

Brett Hall is director of the UCSC Arboretum, and president of the CNPS Board of Directors.

Suzanne Harmon was a long-time colleague and friend of Barbara Pitschel, and currently serves as membership chair for theYerba Buena Chapter of CNPS.

Leah Hawks is a long-time active member of the Napa Valley Chapter of CNPS, and coauthor of the soon-to-be-publishedSkyline Wilderness Park, Nature’s Gift to Napa Valley.

Diana Hickson is a past State CNPS Board member, member of the Sacramento Valley Chapter, and a biogeographer with theVegetation Classification and Mapping Program at the Department of Fish and Game.

Michelle Jensen is a graduate student at Purdue University, and the recipient of a 2008 CNPS Education Grant.

Russ Lewis, retired BLM ecologist, initiated the native plant restoration project at the Piedras Blancas Light Station Out-standing Natural Area. He was a member of the SLO Chapter of CNPS for many years before moving to Washington state.

Rob Moore is a California native landscape designer based in Orange County. He currently serves as sustainability cochairfor the Greater LA District Chapter of the Association of Professional Landscape Designers.

V. Thomas Parker is a professor of biology at SF State specializing in plant ecology and has worked on understandingmanzanita ecology and evolution for three decades.

Rob Preston is a senior botanist at ICF International (formerly Jones & Stokes) and a research associate with the herbariumat UC Davis.

Michael Vasey studies the systematics of Arctostaphylos and is completing his Ph.D. at UC Santa Cruz on the ecology ofmaritime chaparral in Central California.

CORPORATE /ORGANIZATIONAL

❏ $2,500 10+ Employees ❏ $1,000 7-10 Employees ❏ $500 4-6 Employees ❏ $150 1-3 Employees

F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 7 : 4 / 3 8 : 1 , O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 / J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 0

CONTRIBUTORS

California Native Plant Society2707 K Street, Suite 1Sacramento, CA 95816-5113

Address Service Requested

Nonprofit Org.

U.S. PostagePAID

A.M.S.

FROM THE EDITOR

(continued on inside back cover)

ue to a series of coincidences this past month, I hap-pened to open a copy of the first issue of Fremontia,published in April 1973. As long-time members of

CNPS may recall, this issue replaced the Society’s newslet-ter, which had been called The California Native PlantSociety Newsletter and from then on was called the Bulletin(now the CNPS Bulletin). The name Fremontia had beenselected in a contest held by a publications committee andGunder Hefta, Fremontia’s first editor.

As I turned the pages of this premier 24-page issue, Iwas impressed by a number of things. It did not look like afirst issue of a new publication, much less that of a journal.It appeared to have been professionally designed, had aclean, crisp appearance, and contained a variety of articles,photos, and illustrations.

The lead article featured “amateur” botanist Ernest Chris-tian Twisselmann, who had died the previous year. Therewas an article about valley oaks and their regenerationproblem, which if published today would still be timely.Other articles included a longer piece on vernal pools, oneon California’s Channel Islands where endemic plants werebeing decimated by feral goats and pigs, a horticulturaldefense of using the hardy species McNab cypress in thehome garden, and even something on edible weeds alongwith a recipe.

As is true of all Fremontia articles, those who write themdo so without recompense. Although some may be able tojustify a part of their time spent writing as work-related,much if not all of the work is a labor of love. The same canbe said of all CNPS members and others who donate time tochapter activities and projects. Our cover story about theFranciscan manzanita is a case in point.

—Bob Hass

DCarole Adams, BLM volunteer, was mentored by Russ Lewisand has been the native plant restoration project leader atPiedras Blancas Light Station since 2002. She is a member ofthe San Luis Obispo Chapter of CNPS.

Eva Butler is a colleague of Carol Witham and a life memberof CNPS who is dedicated to conserving vernal pools in theSacramento region through education.

Kathleen Chasey is garden curator of the Martha WalkerNative Habitat Garden in Napa County, and owner/designerof Down to Earth Landscape Design.

Michael Chassé is an ecologist with the National Park Ser-vice at Golden Gate National Recreation Area. He has beeninvolved with community-based ecological stewardship andrare plant monitoring for over 14 years.

Sarah J. De Groot is a graduate student in botany at RanchoSanta Ana Botanic Garden and Claremont Graduate Univer-sity, and the recipient of a 2008 CNPS Education Grant.

Nancy Emery is an assistant professor in the Departmentsof Biological Sciences and Botany and Plant Pathology atPurdue University.

Phyllis M. Faber is a past editor of Fremontia (1984-1999)and for many years also served as CNPS publications chair.

Mark Frey manages the Presidio Trust’s habitat restorationprogram, where he has worked since 2002.

Daniel Gluesenkamp directs habitat protection and restora-tion for Audubon Canyon Ranch’s 30 properties in SonomaCounty, and is cofounder of the Bay Area Early DetectionNetwork. He is a past president of the California InvasivePlant Council.

journal of the california native plant society · volume 37:4/38:1, october 2009/january 2010...

Documents