Replies

I don't know enough about Dr. Pellant to have an opinion of him. I am quite willing (as you all know) to suspect of him the usual destructive ideology, but was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until I knew more. Frankly, I haven't even read the above article yet. I was doing drainage projects all day and came in for but a few posts. Further, I thought it might be fun to take advantage of the sudden interest in productive and diverse rangeland by coming in with a more effective proposal than they expected.

Your considerations re whether to import and distribute exotic materials seem appropriate, but I would caution you that under my model you had best be prepared to fund the risk of unintended consequences. Take rhododendrons for example, a plant species indigenous to California. Is it appropriate to crossbreed indigenous stock in the wild? If not, how then do you control the pollen from cultivars if there were adverse consequences? Would you be accountable for what your customers do with the product? No? then who would be?

This is more important and representative than you might think. One would normally expect that imported rhododendrons would be little threat to other local species. There is more than one specialist that has fingered imported rhododendrons as the source of the phytophthora that is killing massive numbers of Western deciduous trees. Could a plant importer be accountable for that settlement? I doubt it.

As a result, I would expect it to be cheaper to import sterile material and perform the micropropagation here instead of paying for the risk of inadvertant infestation. If that cost isn't worth it, then it's a bad business decision to import the plant.

Now, it might be worth importing a gene that would make domestic plants resistant to a pathogen, but one would have to be rather circumspect in that regard too.

You see, I'm no purist when it comes to indigenous species; I just want people to be accountable for the consequences of what they do. I have neighbors who love eucalyptus. When they tease me about my expected disapproval I tell them that I have no objection to the tree, I would simply like them to set up a trust fund such that if it burns the seedlings a quarter mile away can be controlled for as long as the seed bank remains viable. I have just such a consequence on the end of my property and it is a five acre mess.

You are correct that people have been moving plant material all over the world for centuries. I would argue that such lack of discrimination has seriously degraded land productivity here in the US compared to what it could have been. We have yet to confront in California just how much water starthistle consumes. I would REALLY like to be able to hold my neighbors accountable for their Italian thistles. I'm getting damned tired of climbing vertical slopes on a rope to get them.

I am thus VERY cautious when it comes to variance on my own flora and think it useful to identify how they cohabit. I might as well be a purist in that regard but it's for my own interests. For example, I have found that two species very commonly found after disturbance, mimulus and eriodictyon, play a key role in protecting other bushes and trees from predation by deer and forces trees into developing a vertical stem.

The cost of reversal of an error is so enormous that the systems we have in place are laughably insufficient.

BTW, I hope you found the book worth the investment.

I am a seed collector. I do not collect plants from the wild, sometimes I'll take cuttings when exploring forests in America. I use the "plantsman" term since it's convenient.

We spend more time preparing seeds for exportation than we do gathering. We exceed the U.S.D.A. standards for our imports. I am a conservative gatherer. There has to be an abundant seed supply, we adhere to the local permits and customs of the host nation. Part of the process for our wild collections after it's stateside is a PCR assay. Followed by our previously mentioned "decision tree" model, then micropropagation as you suggested.

BTW, I've not read your entire book, but I'm enthusiastic about what I've read so far. I've recommended it to our local land rights citizens group, KAPO and our County GOP. I'll finish it next month.

You ask whether cross pollenating wild rhody's is appropriate, if it results in adverse consequences. This I see as a two sided question. Here's why. In my world, an inferior hybrid does not make it to the micropropagation lab, nor does it with any reputable hybridiser. However, I can envision a scenario where that could happen with a landowner and or gardener moving an infected old specimen. Who would be responsible then?

You mention in your book flora is not static due to naturally occurring mutations. I agree. One of the endless laws of Raulston rules of landscapes states: "You can throw a dart at a map of any location in the United States and within a half mile of the impact point, you can find totally new and wonderful plants that have new ornamental interest and potential." Do you assign this a value? (I apologize if you have, I didn't see it in your book yet.)

I don't view the exotic issue a threat with the floriculture industry today. The use of DNA sequencing, micropropagation techniques, and the wholesale use of botanical benchmarks have effectively decreased the chance of an invasive species released to the public. Consequentially, I view the crossbred native or transmutation of a native to be of superior value. Nature has its own safeguards that IF any new sport evolves in a region, it has market potential.

Now of course I realize the problems that exists with non-native species already out there and the problems they cause, and I believe you address this in your book.

The puritanical attitude I see in the industry is very disturbing to me. I consider it a form of fascism. Not only do the worrywarts want to mindlessly dictate what is planted, they try to impose their placement, pruning, and volume standards on us liberty loving floriculturists.

This group might be interested in our situation in Colorado.Three years of record drought weakened native pinyon pines so much that IPS beetles decimated these hardy trees this past summer.We have lost perhaps 2/3rds of them already over Northeast NM and Southern Colorado!

We live in cedar breaks SE of Pueblo.It is a mix of Rocky Mt.juniper,pinyon,and Gambel oak plus gramma and other native grasses Some of the(beetle and drought proof) cliffside junipers are ancient--perhaps a thousand years old.These oldies grow like bristle cone pines ie branches persist long after other parts are dead.

Our 360 acre retirement spot backs up to several huge old cattle spreads(two over 90,000 ac. plus several 10,000 ac)Everyone's cows were sold last May/June --arguably the worst drought in 325 years per FDA tree ring studies.Some big ranches were using Savory range management methods with good results until the rain stopped.

I figured out we had beetle attack at the eleventh hour and sprayed(Sevin)around the house saving only a few fine old pinyons.The fed and state experts were'nt much help--I apparently alerted them to the beetle situation.Sevin is marginal effectiveness but apparently only thing available anymore(would have paid a thousand bucks for fifty gallons of 1950's DDT).

Am looking for alternate beetle resistant trees to plant in the thin limestone soil on the breaks near the house.We just got back from a three week tour of Spain.Would any variety of olive trees survive here at just under 6000 ft? Some groves seen in Southern Spain were at about 4000' and thriving on similiar soil and scant rainfall.

Colorado olives---now that would be something!