Native Plant Landscaping
I have been deeply involved in the native plant movement, here in Florida, for more than 30 years and my writings reflect my sincere commitment to incorporating them in developed landscapes. That said, I believe that we have missed the point. The concept that an "all native" yard will somehow magically suffice to restore the environmental damage that we've created using traditional landscape approaches is simply wrong. It will not.
The real change will come when we select plants for the ecological attributes they will bring to our yards. The concept of creating a "living landscape", does not necessarily denigrate one group of plants over another. It sees them only for the role they will play in achieving our landscape goals. Just as many non-natives are little more than plastic show pieces, some natives will also fall far short of achieving what we desire. In a "living landscape", each selection we make should have a positive role to play. It requires us to first identify our goals and then choose wisely.
We must first define what it means to be a "native." As I sit here in Florida, my state is inundated by invasive species purposely imported at one time to placate someone's need for a missing aesthetic or to provide a service that someone thought was not being performed by something already here. Such invasives exist throughout the modern world. It is not just a Florida problem. We spend countless millions of dollars each year attempting to control such plants - mostly to no avail in the long term; money that would have been much better spent on land acquisition and management. When I talk about non-native plants, I am not giving a pass to those species, but not all non-natives have invasive qualities.
As a species, humans have traded for and brought home a great many plant species that were not originally present. One of my Florida favorites, spiny hackberry (Celtis pallida), is certainly one of those. This is a species found in the arid desert Southwest as well as in Mexico, Central and South America. In Florida, it is a state-endangered species and we protect it as such. Here, it is recorded only on a few native American middens. It's bright yellow succulent fruit are edible. Though it may have made it to Florida in the droppings of migratory birds, it seems most likely that native peoples brought it here as a food plant. Otherwise, it should be also be found in xeric areas elsewhere in the state. It is native by definition, but it was likely introduced. I have planted it for its wildlife value, not because it is native. Not everything humans have traded for and introduced are problems or detrimental to nature's balance.
Dr. Doug Tallamy, most famous for his book Bringing Nature Home, has sparked a great conversation on the importance of native plants. Everyone involved in this movement owes him a debt of gratitude for this, but I believe he has also skewed the conversation in a way that is also detrimental. His discussion is too simplistic and perhaps that partially explains its popularity. Creating a living landscape is not that simplistic. It is about increasing the habitat value of our properties and not simply about "native" or "non-native." We choose to maximize the habitat value of our properties by first deciding what it is we are trying to create habitat for and then looking seriously at what the missing pieces are that we have to amend. Each plant brings to the table its own set of attributes and none are created completely equal. It is not enough to look at a list of "best wildlife plants" and simply plant them One type of oak, for example, is not the same as another. Wildlife are not that simplistic either. Each has its own unique habitat needs and unless you have a great many acres to play with, you have to target your planting efforts to those species you most want to support.
It's also not just about food - whether we're talking about caterpillars, fruit, seeds, or something else. Its about cover for nesting and hiding, It's about feeding their young as much as it's about feeding the adults - in spring as well as winter, summer and fall. habitat needs change over the seasons and with the age of each species. To create a truly living landscape requires us to look at what we have and what we need to have and it makes no distinction about whether the plants are native or not. I wish it were that simple, but it isn't.
There are non-native plants that can be especially important in a landscape designed for nature. Our non-native citrus, for example, provide food for giant swallowtail butterfly caterpillars - every bit as good as our native prickly ashes. When given a choice to plant a spiny wild lime (Zanthoxylum fagara) that is dioecious and needing of both sexes to provide seeds of marginal use to my songbirds, or an orange or key lime that I can also enjoy, I will always use the non-native. When asked to choose between our native maypop (Passiflora incarnata) and the non-native hydrid Passiflora x incense, I will choose the latter. Despite trying to keep our native passionvine alive for more than a couple of years, I have failed miserably to do so. I just don't have the right conditions for it. 'Incense', however, has done spectacularly and the butterflies love it just as much. In south Florida where we have a resident population of non-migratory monarch butterflies, the non-native milkweed, Asclepias incarnata, is what sustains them over winter. Our natives are all resting below ground until spring - and many native milkweed species are very difficult to keep alive in a home landscape.
My point is that we choose plants for their ecological attributes, not their nativity. I have never had the luxury of managing a large yard. I have to pack in everything I can into the standard lot that I live on. I do not have room for plants that do not have a defined function. I'm betting most of you don't either.
The real change will come when we select plants for the ecological attributes they will bring to our yards. The concept of creating a "living landscape", does not necessarily denigrate one group of plants over another. It sees them only for the role they will play in achieving our landscape goals. Just as many non-natives are little more than plastic show pieces, some natives will also fall far short of achieving what we desire. In a "living landscape", each selection we make should have a positive role to play. It requires us to first identify our goals and then choose wisely.
We must first define what it means to be a "native." As I sit here in Florida, my state is inundated by invasive species purposely imported at one time to placate someone's need for a missing aesthetic or to provide a service that someone thought was not being performed by something already here. Such invasives exist throughout the modern world. It is not just a Florida problem. We spend countless millions of dollars each year attempting to control such plants - mostly to no avail in the long term; money that would have been much better spent on land acquisition and management. When I talk about non-native plants, I am not giving a pass to those species, but not all non-natives have invasive qualities.
As a species, humans have traded for and brought home a great many plant species that were not originally present. One of my Florida favorites, spiny hackberry (Celtis pallida), is certainly one of those. This is a species found in the arid desert Southwest as well as in Mexico, Central and South America. In Florida, it is a state-endangered species and we protect it as such. Here, it is recorded only on a few native American middens. It's bright yellow succulent fruit are edible. Though it may have made it to Florida in the droppings of migratory birds, it seems most likely that native peoples brought it here as a food plant. Otherwise, it should be also be found in xeric areas elsewhere in the state. It is native by definition, but it was likely introduced. I have planted it for its wildlife value, not because it is native. Not everything humans have traded for and introduced are problems or detrimental to nature's balance.
Dr. Doug Tallamy, most famous for his book Bringing Nature Home, has sparked a great conversation on the importance of native plants. Everyone involved in this movement owes him a debt of gratitude for this, but I believe he has also skewed the conversation in a way that is also detrimental. His discussion is too simplistic and perhaps that partially explains its popularity. Creating a living landscape is not that simplistic. It is about increasing the habitat value of our properties and not simply about "native" or "non-native." We choose to maximize the habitat value of our properties by first deciding what it is we are trying to create habitat for and then looking seriously at what the missing pieces are that we have to amend. Each plant brings to the table its own set of attributes and none are created completely equal. It is not enough to look at a list of "best wildlife plants" and simply plant them One type of oak, for example, is not the same as another. Wildlife are not that simplistic either. Each has its own unique habitat needs and unless you have a great many acres to play with, you have to target your planting efforts to those species you most want to support.
It's also not just about food - whether we're talking about caterpillars, fruit, seeds, or something else. Its about cover for nesting and hiding, It's about feeding their young as much as it's about feeding the adults - in spring as well as winter, summer and fall. habitat needs change over the seasons and with the age of each species. To create a truly living landscape requires us to look at what we have and what we need to have and it makes no distinction about whether the plants are native or not. I wish it were that simple, but it isn't.
There are non-native plants that can be especially important in a landscape designed for nature. Our non-native citrus, for example, provide food for giant swallowtail butterfly caterpillars - every bit as good as our native prickly ashes. When given a choice to plant a spiny wild lime (Zanthoxylum fagara) that is dioecious and needing of both sexes to provide seeds of marginal use to my songbirds, or an orange or key lime that I can also enjoy, I will always use the non-native. When asked to choose between our native maypop (Passiflora incarnata) and the non-native hydrid Passiflora x incense, I will choose the latter. Despite trying to keep our native passionvine alive for more than a couple of years, I have failed miserably to do so. I just don't have the right conditions for it. 'Incense', however, has done spectacularly and the butterflies love it just as much. In south Florida where we have a resident population of non-migratory monarch butterflies, the non-native milkweed, Asclepias incarnata, is what sustains them over winter. Our natives are all resting below ground until spring - and many native milkweed species are very difficult to keep alive in a home landscape.
My point is that we choose plants for their ecological attributes, not their nativity. I have never had the luxury of managing a large yard. I have to pack in everything I can into the standard lot that I live on. I do not have room for plants that do not have a defined function. I'm betting most of you don't either.
Comments
Post a Comment