
Guidelines For Landscaping To Protect Native Vegetation From
Genetic Degradation
Adopted December 1, 2001
"Genetic
pollution from non-native ecotypes of native plants has the
potential to be almost as damaging as noxious weeds to the
natural heritage of California…" -Truman Young, UC Davis
Purpose: to protect the remaining natural stands of
California's native vegetation from genetic degradation.
Introduction: Ecological landscaping, or restoration, is
an emerging science. An important aspect is proper matching of
genotypes to the environment to be restored. Oftentimes the
designation of "native" is used in a broad manner to
cover large areas. However, fine-scale genetic differentiation can
occur in response to both biotic and abiotic factors in the
environment, which can change quickly across a given landscape.
Abiotic factors include climate, elevation, and aspect. When
non-local populations of a species are introduced into a given
environment, they may not establish successfully. For example,
"native" antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata
'Lassen') promoted by the Soil Conservation Service to restore
depleted rangelands, burned areas, mined lands, and other
disturbed sites in the western US, originated from a single strain
from the Lassen area of California (Knapp and Dyer 1998). However,
it was found that although the 'Lassen' bitterbrush often does
establish well in many areas, it commonly experiences a decline in
vigor before maturity (S. Monsen, USDA Forest Service Shrub
Sciences Laboratory, Provo UT, pers. comm. in Knapp and Dyer
1998).
When we introduce non-local genes into an area through
horticulture or restoration, the genetic integrity of surrounding
native populations may be affected. According to Millar and Libby
(1989), "The genetic nature of introduced stock can
profoundly influence the behavior of the individuals, which in
turn may affect the dynamics of the entire community and disrupt
or alter the course of co-evolution within the community".
THE GUIDELINES:
Ecological/Revegetation Landscaping**
When landscaping for ecological purposes (habitat restoration,
mitigation, revegetation, etc.) first encourage natural
revegetation of local ecotypes of native taxa by actively managing
against weeds and exotics.
If natural revegetation from surrounding areas or the native
soil seedbank is inadequate, actively assist revegetation by
planting seeds or plants grown from seeds, cuttings or divisions
collected locally. What follows is a hierarchical list of
recommended collection sites with the most desirable listed first:
- From the project site.
- From adjacent or nearby sites, such as from the same
watershed at the same approximate elevation and slope aspect
as the project site.
Erosion Control Landscaping**
When landscaping for erosion control in or near natural areas,
the following practices are recommended with the most desirable
listed first:
- To provide immediate protection and allow gradual
re-colonization by local ecotypes,
- Use biodegradable erosion control blankets made of 100%
natural materials or seedless hydromulch or straw.
- Use sterile or non-persistent plants at low planting
densities:
- As a nurse crop for local natives
- To avoid cross-pollination with native vegetation
- And to preclude migration of non-natives into
adjacent natural areas.
- Sow or plant local ecotypes of native taxa (see above).
Horticultural Landscaping
When landscaping for ornamental purposes and if naturally
occurring native vegetation exists on, close to, or downstream
from the project site, the following cautions are recommended:
- Prevent irrigation runoff and fertilizer & pesticide
overspray into native vegetation.
- Avoid planting any taxa that are invasive.
- Avoid planting any taxa that are likely to cross-pollinate
wild natives growing nearby. Some examples of promiscuous
cross-pollinators include Ceanothus, Arctostaphylos,
Quercus, Mimulus, and Erysimum.
- Avoid vegetation management practices that adversely impact
local native vegetation (ex. Timing of brush clearance or
pruning).
- If you wish to landscape with a taxon that grows locally,
use plant material propagated from those wild populations
(check your local native plant nursery or CNPS Chapter for
availability).
- Avoid landscaping with cultivars of taxa that grow locally,
since their genetic make-up may be unknown, non-local or from
multiple, wide-ranging populations. Cultivars of
locally-occurring taxa should be avoided unless it is
absolutely certain they originated locally.
NOTE: It is understood that these guidelines are of
special importance in the "urban interface": areas where
natural vegetation and man-made landscapes come into close
contact. It is not the intent of these working guidelines to add
unnecessary constraints or to discourage the planting of a broad
selection of natives where it is very unlikely that their presence
would have any effect upon rather distant native plant taxa or
habitat. The intent of these guidelines is to instruct and provide
guidance, utilizing concepts of conservation biology and genetics,
in areas where landscapes or potential landscapes are very close
to native habitat.
- There may be situations where additional botanical
consultation will be necessary to determine appropriate
practices (e.g. unique floristic areas containing high
endemism or special edaphic features). In areas where rare and
endangered taxa occur or where there are significant plant
occurrences, all revegetation activities should be planned and
executed with caution and the greatest respect for the
ecological fragility of these areas.
- All revegetation activities should have adequate advance
preparation. Advance planning is especially important for
activities that involve seed/propagule collection and
propagation.
- Wherever possible, the native topsoil and seedbank should be
preserved.
- In some cases, evaluation of existing features such as
native seed bank or abundance of exotic species may dictate a
more passive planting approach where the area is managed to
remove exotics and then allowed to revegetate on its own via a
natural influx of propagules from adjacent areas.
- For erosion control landscaping, various other CNPS Policies
may also be appropriate material to consult, such as the CNPS
Statement of Policy on Seeding After Wildfire (see www.cnps.org
for a complete list of policies).
Resources
California Native Plant Society state office (916) 447-2677.
Website: www.cnps.org
Local chapters of the California Native Plant Society.
Local and regional herbaria and botanic gardens.
Local, regional and state floras.
Glossary
abiotic factors: the non-living physical and chemical factors
in an environment that affect ecological interactions (ex. light
availability, moisture availability, temperature, pH, etc.)
biotic factors: all living organisms and their effects, both
direct and indirect, on other living things (ex. Predator-prey
relationships, poisonous plants, herbivores, etc.)
close: Adjacent or within pollen or seed dispersal range.
cultivar: A cultivated variety, often propagated vegetatively
and often of unknown lineage. (e.g. Ceanothus 'Julia Phelps' or
Populus fremontii 'Nevada', etc.)
ecotype: A genetic subdivision of a taxon with distinct
physiological or morphological characteristics.
floristic region: See The Jepson Manual (Hickman 1993)
genetic degradation: deleterious change in a native taxon's
gene pool due to addition of non-local genes. The gene source can
be plants of --
a) the same genus or species, but a non-local Californian taxon,
ecotype or cultivar;
b) the same genus, but a foreign taxon.
genotype: the internally coded, inheritable information
(genetic make-up) carried by each living organism.
local natives: native taxa occurring naturally on a site.
non-persisting: a plant that will disappear from the landscape
in less than three years without affecting the native vegetation
or seed bank.
phenotype: the visible characteristics of an organism.
seed bank: the seeds that are present in, or on, the soil at the
site.
sterile: incapable of successful sexual reproduction;
infertile.
taxon: a scientifically named organism (e.g. Nassella
pulchra, Oenothera deltoides var. howellii, Lyonothamnus
floribundus ssp. asplendifolius, etc.)
References and Further Reading
Guinon, M.L. 1992. Promoting gene conservation through seed and
plant procurement. In: Proceedings: Western Forest Nursery
Association . General Technical Report RM-221. USDA Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
Endler, J., S. Mazer, M. Williams, C. Sandoval, and W. Ferren.
No Date. Problems Associated with the Introduction of Non-native
Genotypes on NRS Reserves. [Online], Available from: URL
http://nrs.ucop.edu/resources/nonnatives.html,
[Accessed 27 November, 2001].
Hickman, J, ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of
California. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Knapp, E.E. and A.R. Dyer. 1998. When do genetic considerations
require special approaches to ecological restoration? In: Fielder
P.L. and P.M. Kareiva, eds. Conservation Biology, 2nd Edition. New
York: Chapman and Hill, Inc. p. 345-363.
Knapp, E.E. and K.J. Rice. 1994. Starting from seed: genetic
issues in using native grasses for restoration. Restoration &
Management Notes 12:1: 40-45.
Knapp, E.E. and K. J. Rice. 1996. Genetic structure and gene
flow in Elymus glaucus (blue wildrye): implications for native
grassland restoration. Restoration Ecology 4:1: 1-10.
Knapp, E.E. and K. J. Rice. 1997a. Comparison of isozymes and
quantitative traits for evaluating patterns of genetic variation
in purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra). 1998. Conservation
Biology 12:5: 1031-1041.
Knapp, E.E. and K.J. Rice. 1997b. Ecotypes of native species:
how local is local in restoration plantings? In: Proceedings,
California Exotic Pest Plant Council Symposium Volume 3: 1993.
California Exotic Pest Plant Council. Pages 51-55.
Millar, C.I. and W.J. Libby. 1989. Disneyland or native
ecosystem: genetics and the restorationist. Restoration &
Management Notes 7:1: 18-24.
Montalvo, A.M., S.L. Williams, K.J. Rice, S.L. Buchmann, C.
Cory, S.N. Handel, G.P. Nabhan, R. Primack, and R.H. Robichaux.
1997. Restoration biology: a population biology perspective.
Restoration Ecology 5:4: 227-290.
Montalvo. A.M. and N.C. Ellstrand. 2000. Transplantation of the
subshrub Lotus scoparius: testing the home-site advantage
hypothesis. Conservation Biology 14:4: 1034-1045.
Rogers, D.L. 1992. Genetic management of plants in the
California state parks: a primer. Pacific Southwest Research
Station (USDA Forest Service) and Ca Dept. of Parks and Rec.
Schettler, S. 1997. How Local Is Local? In: O'Brien, B. C., L.
C. Fuentes, and L. F. Newcombe, eds. Out of the Wild and Into the
Garden II: California's Horticulturally Significant Plants. 1995
Symposium Proceedings. Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden Occasional
Publications #2. Pages 36-40.
Smulders, M.J.M, J. van der Schoot, R.H.E.M. Geerts, A.G.
Antonisee-de Jong, H. Korevaar, A. van der Werf, and B. Vosman.
2000. Genetic diversity and the reintroduction of meadow species.
Plant Biology 2 (2000): 447-454.

|