VOL. 34, NO. 2 • APRIL 2006 FREMONTIA - cnps.org · THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF IONE’S RARE PLANTS...

F R E M O N T I A 1V O L U M E 3 4 : 2 , A P R I L 2 0 0 6

A JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYA JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYA JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYA JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYA JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

$5.00 (Free to Members)

VOL. 34, NO. 2 • APRIL 2006

FREMONTIA

MARY LEOLIN BOWERMAN (1908–2005)

VEGETATION MAPPING IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY

IONE PLANTS

A NATIVE PLANT GARDEN

2 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 4 : 2 , A P R I L 2 0 0 6

The California Native Plant Society

(CNPS) is a statewide nonprofit orga-

nization dedicated to increasing theunderstanding and appreciation of

California’s native plants, and to pre-serving them and their natural habi-

tats for future generations.

CNPS carries out its mission throughscience, conservation advocacy, edu-

cation, and horticulture at the local,state, and federal levels. It monitors

rare and endangered plants and habi-

tats; acts to save endangered areasthrough publicity, persuasion, and on

occasion, legal action; provides experttestimony to government bodies; sup-

ports the establishment of native plant

preserves; sponsors workdays to re-move invasive plants; and offers a range

of educational activities includingspeaker programs, field trips, native

plant sales, horticultural workshops,

and demonstration gardens.Since its founding in 1965, the tra-

ditional strength of CNPS has been itsdedicated volunteers. CNPS activities

are organized at the local chapter level

where members’ varied interests influ-ence what is done. Volunteers from

the 32 CNPS chapters annually con-tribute in excess of 87,000 hours

(equivalent to 42 full-time employees).

CNPS membership is open to all.Members receive the quarterly jour-

nal, Fremontia, the quarterly statewideBulletin, and newsletters from their lo-

cal CNPS chapter.

CALIFORNIA NATIVEPLANT SOCIETY

Dedicated to the Preservation ofthe California Native Flora

VOL. 34, NO. 2, APRIL 2006

F R E M O N T I A

Copyright © 2006

California Native Plant Society

STAFFSacramento Office:

Executive Director . Amanda Jorgenson

Development Director/Finance Manager . . . . . . . . . . . Cari Porter

Membership Assistant . . . . Christina

Neifer

Bookkeeper . . . . . . . . . Anne Wood

At Large:

Fremontia Editor . . . . . . . Linda Ann

Vorobik, PhD

Senior Conservation Botanist . . . . . .

position open

Rare Plant Botanist . . . . . Misa Ward

Senior Vegetation Ecologist . . . Julie

Evens

Vegetation Ecologist . . . . Anne Klein

East Bay Conservation Analyst . . . . .

Lech Naumovich

Legislative Advocate . Vern Goehring

Legal Advisor . . . . . . . Sandy McCoy

Website Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . . .

John Donaghue

CNPS Bulletin Editor . . . . . . Bob Hass

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Brad Jenkins (President), Sandy McCoy

(Vice President), Steve Hartman (Trea-

surer), Lynn Houser (Secretary). At

Large: Sue Britting, Charli Danielsen,

Dave Flietner, Diana Hickson, David

Magney, Spence McIntyre

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

MEMBERSHIPMembership form located on inside back cover;

dues include subscriptions to Fremontia and the Bulletin

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

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

CHAPTER COUNCIL

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

Sherryl TaylorChannel Islands . . . . . . Lynne KadaDorothy King Young (Mendocino/

Sonoma Coast) . . . . . Lori HubbartEast Bay . . . . . . . . Elaine P. JacksonEl Dorado . . . . . . . . Amy HoffmanKern County . . . . . . . . . Lucy ClarkLos Angeles/Santa Monica Mtns . . .

Betsey LandisMarin County . . . . . . . . Bob SoostMilo Baker (Sonoma County) . . . . .

Reny ParkerMojave Desert . . . . . . Tim ThomasMonterey Bay . . . . Rosemary FosterMount Lassen . . . . . . . Catie BishopNapa Valley . . . . . . Marcie DannerNorth Coast . . . . . . . Larry LevineNorth San Joaquin . . James BruggerOrange County . . . . . . Sarah JayneRedbud (Grass Valley/Auburn) . . . .

Marie BainRiverside/San Bernardino counties . .

Katie BarrowsSacramento Valley . . Diana HicksonSan Diego . . . . . . . . Dave FlietnerSan Gabriel Mtns . . . Gabi McLeanSan Luis Obispo . . . David ChippingSanhedrin (Ukiah) . Chuck WilliamsSanta Clara Valley . . . Judy FenertySanta Cruz County . Casey StewmanSequoia (Fresno) . . . . Peggy JonesShasta . . . . . . . . . . . Dave DuBoseSierra Foothills (Tuolumne, Cala- veras, Mariposa) . . . Patrick StoneSouth Coast (Palos Verdes) . . . . . .

Barbara SattlerTahoe . . . . . . . . . . Michael HoganWillis L. Jepson (Solano) . . . . . . . .

Allison FleckYerba Buena (San Francisco) . . . . .

Mark Heath

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

Linda Ann Vorobik, Editor

Bob Hass, Copy EditorBeth Hansen-Winter, Designer

Brad Jenkins, Jake Sigg, David Tibor,and Carol Witham, Proofreaders

CNPS, 2707 K Street, Suite 1; Sacramento, CA 95816-5113

(916) 447-CNPS (2677) Fax: (916) [email protected]

PROGRAM DIRECTORS

CNPS Press . . . . . . . . . Holly Forbesand Gail Milliken

Conservation . . . . . . . position openHorticulture . . . . . . . . . Peigi Duvall

Posters . . . . . . . . . Bertha McKinleyand Wilma Follette

Rare Plants . . . . . . . . . Ann HowaldVegetation . . . . . .Todd Keeler-Wolf

F R E M O N T I A

Printed by Premier Graphics (www.premiergraphics.biz)


SAVIOR OF THE MOUNTAIN: MARY LEOLIN BOWERMAN (1908–2005)by Barbara Ertter ....................................................................................................... 3

Mary Bowerman was a strong force in California botany throughout her long life, andsignificantly contributed to the saving of Mt. Diablo, one of the prime open spaces east ofthe San Francisco Bay area. Her life and achievements are reviewed in this tribute by herfriend and collaborator on the revised flora of Mt. Diablo.

A NEW MODEL FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING: VEGETATION MAPPINGIN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY by Julie M. Evens and Anne N. Klein ....... 11

The California Native Plant Society, working collaboratively with the California Depart-ment of Fish and Game and Aerial Information Systems, has created a field-basedinventory and a fine-scale map of vegetation, based on state and national classificationsystems. These products are particularly valuable to those involved with conservationplanning efforts which represent, model, and monitor vegetation.

THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF IONE’S RARE PLANTS by George Hartwell ..19

Millions of years in the making, one of California’s unique natural resources is at risk ofoblivion, the result of at least two insidious impacts. One is a plant pathogen; another isthe malignant growth of commercial, industrial, and residential development. In thisarticle on the rare plant species of the Ione Chaparral plant community, the authorexplores the manmade aspects of both threats, and whether their relentless momentumcan be reversed.

A NATIVE PLANT GARDEN IN THE BERKELEY HILLS, PART ONEby Jenny S. Fleming .................................................................................................25

A steep slope in the Berkeley Hills facing the Golden Gate Bridge is the setting for one ofCalifornia’s premier native plant gardens. Created by Jenny and Scott Fleming over thecourse of 50 plus years, this unique half-acre garden features a redwood forest floorplanting, a Sierran meadow of grasses, wildflowers, and bulbs, and a stunning rock gardenfilled with countless treasures.

SPRING WILDFLOWERS FROM GRASSLANDS AND OAK WOODLANDSPhotographs by Barbara Ertter, John Game, George Hartwell, Carl Jones, SteveMatson, and Linda Vorobik ..................................................................................... 29

Enjoy a selection of photographs of spring wildflowers that might be found in your localgrassland or adjacent oak woodland, or that you might find while enjoying the trails ofMt. Diablo in Contra Costa County (see B. Ertter’s article on page 3).

BOOKS RECEIVED ..................................................................................................................... 31

BOOK REVIEWS ........................................................................................................................31

CONTENTSEDITORIAL: THE BENEFITS OF MEMBERSHIP....................................................................... 2

THE COVER: Goldfields (Lasthenia spp.) and new leaves on oak announce the arrival of spring in the woodlands along SanAntonio Valley Road, east of Mt. Hamilton in the San Francisco Bay area. Photograph by C. Jones. For other images in this sametheme, see pp. 29-30; for information on Carl Jones and other photographers contributing to this issue, see inside back cover.


USEFUL WEBSITES ANDCONTACTINFORMATION

California Native PlantSociety (CNPS):

www.cnps.org, with links toconservation issues, chapters,publications, policy, etc.

For updates on conservationissues:

Audubon Societywww.audubon.org

Center for Biological Diversitywww.sw-center.org

Native Plant ConservationCampaign www.plantsocieties.org

Natural Resources DefenseCouncilwww.nrdc.org

Sierra Clubwww.sierraclub.org

Wilderness Societywww.wilderness.org

For voting information:

League of Women Voterswww.lwv.org , includes onlinevoter guide with state-specificnonpartisan election andcandidate information.

US Senatewww.senate.gov

US House of Representativeswww.house.gov

California State Senatewww.sen.ca.gov

California State Assemblywww.assembly.ca.gov

To write letters:

President George W. BushThe White House1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NWWashington, DC 20500

Senator Barbara Boxeror Senator Dianne FeinsteinUS SenateWashington, DC 20510

Your CA RepresentativeUS House of RepresentativesWashington, DC 20515

GUEST EDITORIAL:THE BENEFITS OF MEMBERSHIP

hat does membership in the California Native Plant Society (CNPS)

say about us? First and foremost, it indicates that we are fans of

California’s native plants and natural landscapes, that we recognize and

appreciate the authentic and natural flora, as it existed before weeds, before

development and habitat destruction, and before extinctions. Beyond that,

CNPS membership says different things for different members, indicated by

the myriad activities that you, as a member, participate in. This diversity is

one of the great strengths of CNPS and provides us with a cornucopia of ways

in which we can express our appreciation of native plants and share that

appreciation with a community of like-minded individuals.

What are the benefits of being a CNPS member? Your membership

brings you Fremontia and the CNPS Bulletin four times a year. Your chapter

affiliation avails you of programs, hikes, and chapter newsletters. Specialty

books and posters are available to you at chapter events as well as online at

www.cnps.org. Hard-to-find native plants for your garden are available for

purchase at chapter plant sales, often with early entry or discounts as part of

your CNPS membership.

Membership also provides each of us ways to make a positive difference

in this world, through support or participation in schools programs, rare

plant surveys, garden tours and wildflower shows, sensitive habitat manage-

ment, weed eradication...the list goes on. In addition, your membership

makes possible the continued availability of two publications essential to

native plant conservation: the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of

California and the Manual of California Vegetation. And our status as a large,

respected statewide organization, with over 9,000 members, including many

plant science professionals, brings additional clout when CNPS sends letters

containing policy recommendations to government agencies.

Membership in CNPS makes a distinct statement. It says that we appreci-

ate California’s genuine and often unique flora and that we value the need to

conserve what is left of it for future generations. I hope you share your

appreciation of native plants and your enthusiasm for the work of CNPS

chapters and staff with friends and community members. Let them know the

benefits of membership. If our numbers grow, we can accomplish even more.

Make a difference with your membership: be active, join in, share, meet,

lead, follow, fund, plant, maintain, research, support, save, speak about, and

enjoy California’s authentic flora of beautiful native plants!

Brad Jenkins

President, CNPS

W


O

SAVIOR OF THE MOUNTAIN:MARY LEOLIN BOWERMAN (1908–2005)

by Barbara Ertter

n October 9, 2005, a di-verse group of peoplegathered at the base ofMount Diablo, some in

social wear, others dressed for a hike.Conservationists, landowners, sci-entists, agency staff, and dear friendsalike had gathered together to paytribute to Mary Leolin Bowerman,a woman whose interests and ac-complishments were as diverse asthe attendees themselves. Mary (Leoto her oldest friends) was extolledas cofounder and ardent supporterof the organization, Save MountDiablo, as author of the definitiveflora of Mount Diablo, as recipientof numerous awards for her tire-less conservation efforts, as a dedi-cated scientist, and as a somewhatreserved, wryly humorous, self-assured, perceptive, tenacious (butever-courteous), warmly remem-bered friend.

As is so often the case, Mary’s lifetrajectory had taken numerous twistsand turns, with little evidence at thebeginning of her career of the formher future accomplishments wouldtake. The only child of well-to-doparents (Lindley H. Bowerman andAda Sarah Wesson Bowerman), MaryLeolin was born January 25, 1908,in Toronto, Canada, and spent someyears in England before ending upin southern California as a teenager.Mary was strong-willed and a bit of arebel, making choices and decisionsas she saw fit (e.g., favoring boys’haircuts and clothing). She attendedPasadena High School and JuniorCollege, where she later recalled:

My father had always wanted tobe a physician, and he pickedout the courses I should take atjunior college, hoping to steerme in that direction. I was gen-erally unhappy in my human

physiology class, but I had seenthis nice classroom with plantsin it through an open door, so Iswitched to botany about twoweeks after I registered. ThoughI had never taken a botany orbiology course, my interest wentback a long way. My kindergar-ten teacher had sent a note homeremarking that I was especiallyinterested in natural history.When I was 15, I thought Iwanted to be a landscape gar-dener.*

Several inspirational femaleteachers provided role models andseminal influence for future careers,not only for Mary but also for class-mate Annetta Carter. In 1928, bothyoung women matriculated at Uni-versity of California in Berkeley(UC): “My father would have sentme to Stanford, but I said no. Hesaved himself some money becausemy botany teacher at junior collegein Pasadena [Florence Brubaker,who received her Master’s from UC]said I must go to Berkeley.” WhereasAnnetta would eventually achieverecognition for her devotion to theflora of Baja California (biographyin Fremontia 19, No.4, pp. 12–14,1991), Mary made the first steps onthe path to a lifelong commitmentfor Mount Diablo.

STUDENT YEARS

Coinciding with the move of theBotany Department and UniversityHerbarium into the newly completedLife Sciences Building in 1930, Mary

Mary Bowerman as young girl. Photographcourtesy of Save Mount Diablo.

and Annetta received their AB de-grees in botany with 5 other gradu-ates, all women. The two friendsremained at UC to pursue master’sprojects, at one of those heady timeswhen a cohort of exceptionally tal-ented and inspired students over-lapped and contributed to a synergyof ideas from which all benefited.Notable among Mary’s fellow stu-dents were David D. Keck (PhD,1930), Katherine Esau (PhD, 1931),Herbert Mason (PhD, 1932), Lin-coln Constance (PhD, 1934), andDaniel Axelrod (PhD, 1938), whowere destined to make significantadvances in fields as diverse as bio-systematics, plant anatomy, and pa-leobotany.

During the time that Mary startedat UC, Willis Linn Jepson was thereigning professor of vascular plantsystematics. When Mary began hergraduate work in 1930, however,Jepson was on leave, visiting distantherbaria and participating in the In-ternational Botanical Congress inCambridge, England. It was Herbert

* Quotes from an interview of M.L. Bowermanconducted by Galen Rowell in 1996, pub-lished on pp. 187–191 of Bay Area Wild: ACelebration of the Natural Heritage of the SanFrancisco Bay Area, Mountain Light Press(published by Sierra Club Books), 1997.


Mason, acting as Jepson’s assistant,who first directed Mary towardMount Diablo, initially as a seniorproject. At that time, it was com-mon for botany majors at UC to beassigned the flora of a local peak.Constance, for example, was doinga floristic survey of Redwood Peakin the Oakland Hills, published in1932. As one of the only botanystudents to own a car, Mary wasgranted Mount Diablo:

I don’t think I thought of MountDiablo as being anything spe-cial, at least in the beginning. Iwas a student at Berkeley, andProfessor Mason had suggestedI do a study to identify all theplants up there, and that was allthere was to it. I wasn’t suffi-ciently knowledgeable to real-ize whether anything was spe-cial on Mount Diablo becauseI’d been living in England andthen Pasadena.

Mary nevertheless threw herselfwhole-heartedly into the study, dis-playing the tenacious and exhaus-tive commitment to detail that rep-resented both her hallmark and baneto scholastic productivity. Not be-ing satisfied with a simple inventoryof species, Mary accumulated dataon climate, soils, geology, paleo-botany, and the history of collectingefforts on Mount Diablo, includingan effort to locate collections by the

California Geological Survey housedat Harvard University. Ecology, atthat time a novel and still somewhatsuspect addition to the family of bio-logical sciences, caught Mary’s spe-cial interest, resulting in a detailedanalysis of plant communities andassociated species. Putative hybrids,especially in Quercus, were also fa-vored subjects, and a major fire in1931 provided an abundance of post-fire observations. Mary was also well-situated to incorporate concurrentstudies and revolutionary new ideasby her fellow students, such as thegeoflora concept of Daniel Axelrod,and floristic assemblage comparisons

with Mount Hamilton, then beingstudied by Helen Sharsmith.

Given the scope of Mary’s inter-ests, it quickly became evident thather intended flora was well beyondthe senior paper it had started as,and was accordingly continued as amaster’s project. In later years, Marydelighted in relating how she hadthe effrontery to inform Jepson thatthe Mt. Diablo project was further-more going to be her doctoralproject, not just a master’s thesis:

. . . I made my way into Jepson’sinner sanctum in the Life Sci-ences Building at Berkeley, andwhen I announced that my the-sis was now going to be a doc-toral dissertation, he looked alittle startled and fell silent. . . .I remember standing there whilehe discussed the pros and cons.After a while he said, “All right.”

Mary made her first visit to

RIGHT: Mary on Mt. Piños in May of 1928.BELOW: Mary and her car, a Nash Junior, atthe summit of Mt. Diablo, in June of 1930.Photographs courtesy of Save MountDiablo.

View of Mt. Diablo, Contra Costa County, from the east. Photograph by B. Ertter.


Mount Diablo in June of 1930, andcontinued making regular visitsthrough 1935, totaling 150 daysspent on the mountain. Field workwas complicated by the fact that al-most the entire mountain was inprivate hands. One of seven stateparks created before the establish-ment of the California State ParkSystem in 1927, Mount Diablo StatePark began in 1921 as a 630-acre“state park and game refuge” andwas only 1,463 acres at the time itwas incorporated into the new statepark system in 1931. The small par-cel of summit was at one time ownedby the Mount Diablo DevelopmentCompany, which had constructedan automobile road to the summit(North Gate Road) with plans for aluxury hotel, but which then wentbankrupt following World War I.

I started going up there everyweek about a year before thetop became a state park, in 1931.There was a private toll roadwith a steep entrance fee, butwhen I went to the owner inOakland and told him I wasstudying all the flowering plantsand ferns and didn’t want topay each time, he graciouslyagreed. I was usually workingon private property, even afterthe park was created.

Beyond the limited network ofexisting roads, Mary chose to domost of her exploring on foot, espe-cially after an equestrian mishap lefther stranded. She benefited by thecreation of additional trails and im-proved roads built on Mount Diabloby the Civilian Conservation Corpsduring the Depression years of the1930s. Botanizing was particularlylimited on Lime Ridge, with specialarrangements needed to access thequarries that were still being activelymined for calcium carbonate to makecement.

It took Mary six years to com-plete the requirements for her doc-torate, bestowed in 1936. Duringthis time she also served briefly as ateaching assistant in botany (fall

1935), published a paper on west-ern skunk-cabbage (Madroño 2:106-107, 1933), and participated in fieldtrips with other botany students inthe Calypso Club. The year 1934was a particularly eventful one, withturbulent departmental and regionalpolitics forming a backdrop to Mary’ssuccess in passing her German andFrench examinations and advanc-ing to candidacy for a PhD. WilliamSetchell retired as Chair of theBotany Department, Herbert Masonassumed charge of the UniversityHerbarium, and Jepson was in thethroes of one of his periodic epi-sodes of depression. And, on June 4,the herbarium observed “three hourscessation of activity out of respect tothe Governor” (from UC herbariumrecords), following the fatal heartattack of Gov. James “Sunny Jim”Rolph, who had achieved notorietyfor his praise of a lynching mob inSan Jose the year before, in thedepths of Depression-era turmoil.

FLORA OF MT. DIABLO

Mary’s dissertation was titled “Aphytogeographic analysis of the vas-cular plants of Mount Diablo, Cali-fornia.” Eight years passed beforean expanded version was publishedas The Flowering Plants and Ferns ofMount Diablo, California: Their Dis-tribution and Association into PlantCommunities, printed in 1944 by theGillick Press and offered for sale at$3.75. In addition to its utility as asynopsis of the flora of MountDiablo, Mary’s opus was trend-set-ting in its comprehensive approachto floristics, notably in the incorpo-ration of ecological information. Asnoted in the foreword, “This is thefirst attempt in California to describethe habits of each species individu-ally. The habitat, altitudinal range,abundance, period of blooming, as-sociated species, and distributionupon the mountain have been inde-pendently determined for each spe-cies.” Presciently, Mary also tooknote of the future conservation value:

The California landscape ischanging rapidly as a result ofthe impact of man. Already wehave to guess what the pristinevegetation was like; but we mayat least leave for posterity therecord of its composition today.Such a record is essential toknowledge and understandingof what changes are taking placeand is prerequisite to any at-tempt at intelligent control.Conservation of our resourcesis contingent upon our under-standing of the role of the vari-ous elements of the environ-ment.

Parental resources allowed Maryto remain buffered from the De-pression and financially indepen-dent, a particular boon in a timewhen suitable jobs were few and farbetween. One job she was consid-ered for, which would have takenher back to southern California, wasa pro tempore position at PomonaCollege, resulting from Philip A.Munz’s departure in 1944 to accept

Johnny-jump-ups (Viola pedunculata) fromMt. Diablo, as might have been seen byMary on one of her many field expeditions.Photograph by B. Ertter.


a professorship at Cornell Univer-sity. Instead, Lyman Benson washired at Pomona College, and twoyears later Munz returned to Cali-fornia to take over the position va-cated by Carl Wolf at Rancho SantaAna Botanic Garden.

Although the opening at PomonaCollege did not provide Mary a por-tal into an academic career, it mayhave nevertheless had a significanteffect on her research productivity.The same financial independencethat served so well in other regardsleft Mary without the external pres-sure to produce, leaving her perfec-tionist streak unfettered. In a 1940letter to Helen Mar Wheeler, his fa-vorite former student and confi-dante, Jepson expressed his frustra-tion with this aspect of Mary:

When I returned from lun-cheon, poor Miss Bowermancheerfully caught me in the cor-ridor (where so many personslie in wait for me). I know whenI’m caught and I try to be de-

cent about it! . . . Poor girl! Sheis seeking the impossible for herthesis—now six years plus 4years old. . . . She would like,however, to talk it all over fromnow until Domesday [Dooms-day]. She cannot reach deci-sions!

It is probably not mere coinci-dence that Mary finally publishedher opus and deposited her pressedcollections in the University Her-barium in 1944, the same year as theopening at Pomona College; such isstandard practice when aligning one-self for an academic opportunity!

FLORA OF BRITISHCOLUMBIA

In lieu of a professional appoint-ment, Mary remained at Berkeleyand continued to pursue projects ofinterest in the University Herbarium.Evidently she continued her field-work on Mount Diablo, but the ex-pectation of a new, updated editionsomehow remained unmet even af-ter the original book was long out ofprint. At some point, however, herfocus shifted to a new floristicproject, triggered by the British Co-lumbia collections and influence ofThomas T. McCabe.

Purportedly a graduate of Har-vard, McCabe and his wife ElinorBolles McCabe (a direct descendentof writer/naturalist Frank Bolles)were living in a remote part of Brit-ish Columbia in the late 1920s, whenthey contacted the Museum of Ver-tebrate Zoology at UC Berkeley withoffers of zoological specimens. Even-tually the McCabes moved to Berke-ley, returning to British Columbiaduring the collecting season, andTom became a research associate atthe museum. Beginning in the early1930s, he also began submittingplant collections from British Co-lumbia to the University Herbarium,to be determined by a Mrs. Linsdale(presumably the wife of Jean M.Linsdale who also worked at themuseum).

After a falling-out with the mu-seum in 1934, Tom obtained spacein the herbarium, where his increas-ing number of collections werehoused as a separate unit on theeighth floor. Unwilling to distributeduplicates for fear of rivals, he nev-ertheless allowed the loan of par-ticularly difficult groups to special-ists, including willows and sedges.Violets were sent to Milo S. Baker atSanta Rosa Junior College, who de-scribed Viola McCabeiana in 1940.

Tom apparently had the gift ofinspiring young researchers. Severalzoologists cite his influence in theirown careers (e.g., Barbara Blanchard,Ian McTaggart Cowan), and mycolo-gist Vera Miller worked with McCabeon fungal inventories of British Co-lumbia and the Bay Area. Derivingimpetus from her own Canadianroots, Mary also fell under Tom’sinfluence and became engrossed inhis vascular plant collections, withthe ultimate goal of producing a full-fledged flora of British Columbia.This project suffered a serious set-back when Tom suddenly died of aheart attack in 1948. Mary’s deter-mination to finish the flora remainedstrong, but the manuscript was bothincomplete and increasingly out-dated as the years went by.

As a final setback to Mary’s aspi-rations of an academic career, a spacecrunch developed at the UniversityHerbarium, exacerbated by the floodof veterans enrolling on the G.I. Bill.With no formal appointment and ascanty publication record, Marycould not successfully compete forincreasingly limited work spacewithin the herbarium. AnnettaCarter, then serving as PrincipalHerbarium Botanist, was given theunenviable task of informing her oldfriend that she would have to vacatethe herbarium, taking her specimenswith her. The McCabe collectionsfrom British Columbia were takenby Mary to her home in Lafayetteand returned to campus only aftermany years had passed. They arenow fully integrated into the main

Springtime slope of Mt. Diablo with oak(Quercus) leafing out and the silver lupine(Lupinus albifrons) in full bloom. Photo-graph by B. Ertter.


University Herbarium collection,where they represent an invaluablerecord of the British Columbia flora.

SAVE MOUNT DIABLO

The eviction from Berkeley notonly interfered with Mary’s researchactivities, but also curtailed regularsocial interactions with the vigorousbotanical community in the her-barium. While staff and studentsstruggling to meet tight deadlinesmay have breathed a sigh of relief atthe departure of someone with nosuch constraints, Mary now neededto seek elsewhere for a social outlet.Following her father’s death in 1954,Mary and her mother (a major pres-ence in Mary’s life until her death in1980 at the ripe age of 108) movedto Lafayette, closer to Mary’s belovedmountain but more removed fromthe botanical scene at Berkeley. Oncein Lafayette, Mary became involvedin the local conservation group ofthe Sierra Club, which she had firstjoined in 1942 as an active memberof the Natural Science Section. Sheled field trips, where she is remem-bered as “a very patient teacher,”and also became active in the Cali-fornia Native Plant Society (CNPS).

Mary’s life took a new turn in1971, setting her on the course thatwould ultimately be her primaryclaim to fame, as well as deep per-sonal satisfaction. Although someadditional acreage had been added toMount Diablo State Park, and some

nearby areas had also been preservedas public open space, huge swaths ofbucolic pastureland and bountifuloak woodlands in the central EastBay were disappearing under subur-ban development. With the immi-nent arrival of Bay Area Rapid Tran-sit (BART) to interior Contra CostaCounty in 1972, the situation wasdoomed to go from bad to worse. Asrecalled by Mary, at a meeting of thelocal Sierra Club conservation group:

In 1971, a member named ArtBonwell [an electrical engineerat Dupont] came up to me andsaid, “Don’t you think we oughtto do something about MountDiablo?” He was referring tohow moneys [sic] appropriatedby the state to buy additionallands for Mount Diablo StatePark had been diverted to buyFranks Tract in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for a staterecreation area.

Taking up the challenge, Maryand Art organized a meeting of rep-resentatives of local groups. Fifteenpeople attended the meeting on De-

TOP: View from Mt. Diablo looking west, with encroaching urban sprawl in the distance.Photograph by B. Ertter • ABOVE: Mary Bowerman and Arthur Bonwell hiking on a property(Kittrell) where development was proposed in Morgan Territory on Mt. Diablo’s east side,1993. Photograph by S. Joseph. LEFT: Mary Bowerman and Arthur Bonwell photograph forDecember 2000 Diablo Magazine, announcing their “Diablo Magazine 2000 Threads ofHope” award for lifetime achievement. Image by S.Hoover and S. Bromberger. Photographscourtesy of Save Mount Diablo.

cember 7, 1971, where Mary statedher dream “that the whole of MountDiablo, including its foothills, shouldremain in open space.” The organi-zation Save Mount Diablo (SMD)was formed that night, with the ob-jectives of educating the public andacquiring lands. SMD eventuallygrew into one of the dominant land-acquisition forces in the central East


TOP: A solitary oak nestled within one ofMt. Diablo’s many distinctive rocky out-crops. Photograph by C. Jones. ABOVE: BobDoyle and Mary Bowerman at Save MountDiablo 25th Anniversary, on December 11,1996. Photograph by S. Kraughto, courtesyof Save Mount Diablo.

Bay, working closely with both therapidly growing Mount Diablo StatePark and the East Bay Regional ParksDistrict. Mary served as the group’svice president for resources until theend of 1995, and remained on itsLand Acquisition Committee for therest of her life.

Serving with Mary on this com-mittee was Bob Doyle, who met Marywhen he became a volunteer teach-ing assistant for Jane Helrich, anelementary school teacher and friendof Mary’s. In the heady atmosphereof environmental activism that char-acterized the late 1960s and early1970s, Helrich organized a field tripfor youth representatives to Sacra-mento, to see first-hand the work-ings of environmental legislation. Asrecalled in Bay Area Wild by Doyle,who became one of Mary’s closestfriends and who went on to becomeAssistant General Manager of theEast Bay Regional Parks:

Dr. Mary Bowerman joined uson that bus ride to Sacramentoand voiced her own advocacy.She became a very dear friendbefore she cofounded Save

Mount Diablo with Art Bonwell.I was the kid among this groupof elder statespersons, witness-ing a series of battles that mus-tered grassroots support forfunding of parks and conserva-tion efforts. Their successes atthat time—not just locally butalso statewide and in Washing-ton—are a fantastic legacy thatI feel so lucky to have been partof at such a young age.

Save Mount Diablo provided theoutlet and focus where Mary’s par-ticular blend of attributes finallybloomed. Her tenaciousness and in-ability to say “Enough!” were chan-neled into an unyielding effort toalways acquire more land, and more,and a little bit more. At the sametime her level-headed manners andpositive outlook, combined with theinherent self-confidence of the well-to-do, enabled her to appeal effec-tively to potential donors, politicians,and landowners alike. Above all, shestayed true to her scientific roots,insisting on strict adherence to sup-portable facts and scientifically de-fensible arguments. According toDoyle, “Mary Bowerman was always,always, questioning me: ‘Are yousure? Explain what you saw.’ Iwatched her exercise that same pre-cision in her land and financial deal-ings for Save Mount Diablo—takingthe principles of natural sciences andapplying them to the political world.”

Mary’s commitment to SMD be-came her crowning achievement forwhich she received multiple awards,including a State of California Golden


The fifth and final Blackhawk development dedication to Mt. Diablo State Park, with SaveMount Diablo President Malcolm Sproul, Governor Gray Davis, Congressman GeorgeMiller, Mary Bowerman, Senator Tom Torlakson, and Blackhawk developer Ken Behringon May 15th, 1999. Photograph by S. Joseph, courtesy of Save Mount Diablo.

Bear award, John Muir MemorialAssociation’s John Muir ConservationAward (1980), the Chevron TimesMirror Magazine National Conserva-tion Award (1996), Contra CostaCounty Women of Achievement Hallof Fame Award (1998), DiabloMagazine’s Threads of Hope Volun-teer Award for Lifetime Achievement(2000), and the Daughters of theAmerican Revolution’s National Con-servation Medal. She was recognizedon September 9, 1998, in the Con-gressional Record, and on May 22,1982, a trail at the summit of MountDiablo was named the Mary LeolinBowerman Fire Interpretive Trail.

A NEW EDITION (FINALLY!)

Although her work with SaveMount Diablo took up a majority ofher time, Mary retained her self-identity as a botanist first and fore-most. She continued to study andcollect the flora of Mount Diabloand adjacent areas, sharing thisknowledge with friends and col-leagues in the Sierra Club and CNPS.James B. Roof, director of the EastBay Regional Parks Botanic Garden,paid homage to her efforts in thisregard when naming a variant man-zanita growing at nearby Black Dia-mond Mines Regional Preserve asArctostaphylos bowermaniae (TheFour Seasons Volume 5, No. 4, pp.15–18, 1978):

This Arctostaphylos is named for

Dr. Mary Bowerman, native plantpreservationist; life-long ob-server of and authority on thebotany of Contra Costa County;distinguished author of TheFlowering Plants and Ferns ofMount Diablo and numerous bo-tanical and conservation articles.It is intended to commemorateher great affection for and knowl-edge of the native plants of Cali-fornia which she has generouslyshared with her fellows alongmany pleasant trails.

Mary’s connection with the Uni-versity of California was reinitiatedin the early 1980s, when she struckup a friendship with a fellow mem-ber of the CNPS, Susan D’Alcamo.Mary’s former mentor, Willis LinnJepson, had left an endowment thatestablished the Jepson Herbariumfollowing his death in 1946, as anadministrative unit separate from thedepartmental herbarium that en-sured a continued focus on the Cali-fornia flora. A key provision was thathis Manual of the Flowering Plants ofCalifornia be kept current and inprint. Susan had taken on the chal-lenge of fundraising for a completelyrevised edition, and Mary became asignificant contributor. The result-ant book was published in 1993 asThe Jepson Manual: Higher Plants ofCalifornia.

Mary’s ties to the Jepson Her-barium continued to grow, and in1994 she agreed to lead a field trip

to Mount Diablo in conjunction withthe first Jepson Herbarium Sympo-sium. This in turn led to my owncollaboration with Mary, beginningwith a joint collecting trip to thesummit of Mount Diablo on June19, when we realized that both of ushad regretted not being able to par-ticipate in the other’s field trip! Wehit it off well enough that arrange-ments were made in 1995 for theJepson Herbarium to take on thechallenge of updating The FloweringPlants and Ferns of Mount Diablo, bythen an increasingly out-of-date andhard-to-obtain collector’s item. Itackled the taxonomic updating,various sections were farmed out toappropriate specialists, and Susanserved as project “midwife.” Fundsprovided by Mary allowed graduatestudent Lisa Schultheis to serve astechnical editor, beginning with thescanning of the original edition.

The initial plan was to produce astraight-forward update, staying astrue as possible to the original bookwhile incorporating any additionalspecies discovered on the mountainsince 1944 and whatever updateswere needed to reflect current no-menclature and scientific knowl-edge. What was calculated to be atwo-year project reached completionseven years later, with manifold rea-sons for the prolonged preparationperiod. Foremost was the sheer mag-nitude of changes needed, well be-yond what anyone expected, espe-cially given the exemplary nature ofMary’s original survey. Amazingly,the number of species known fromMount Diablo was increased by one-fourth, consisting of a combinationof new weeds, taxonomic “splits,”and outright new discoveries.

Mary’s inevitable reluctance to“sign off” on the manuscript alsodelayed final publication, furthercomplicated by her seasonal routineof spending winters in Hawai’i atthe home of her close friend GordonHaas, who she had met at a financialconvention, followed by the gantletof tax season. All of this further-

1 0 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 4 : 2 , A P R I L 2 0 0 6

TOP : Barbara Ertter, MaryBowerman, and LisaSchultheis at lookout onMt. Diablo, 1998. Pho-tograph by B. Ertter. •ABOVE: Mary Bowermanwith Susan D’Alcamo,Barbara Ertter, and LisaSchultheis at the booksigning celebration for thenew Flora of Mount Diablo( LEFT). Photograph by T.Morosco.

Mary at the summit lookout, 1998. Photo-graph by B. Ertter.

INSET ABOVE: Mary at the Blackhills dedi-cation in 1997. Photograph by S. Kraughto,courtesy of Save Mount Diablo.

more coincided with a period whenCNPS itself was undergoing seriousrestructuring, with the publicationprogram eventually coming underthe wing of Susan D’Alcamo.

A final determined push resultedin the publication of a second edi-tion by CNPS in November 2002,

two months before Mary’s 95thbirthday. A well-attended book sign-ing took place on December 6, co-sponsored by CNPS and the JepsonHerbarium. Mary, while undeniablypleased with the long-awaited newedition, was still chagrined that nu-merous species found on MountDiablo subsequent to the decisionto “close the book” to changes wererelegated to an appendix. She wasmollified only with the promise oftheir full incorporation in a thirdedition, and further expressed herhopes that the British Columbia floracould one day be completed.

Blessed with good genes and atemperate lifestyle, Mary entered hernineties in excellent health and con-tinued to enjoy walks on her be-loved mountain whenever possible.In 2000, she participated in a ban-quet celebrating the 50th anniver-sary of the Jepson Herbarium, asone of Jepson’s last surviving stu-dents (the other such participant,Lincoln Constance, died the follow-ing year). Declining health was evi-dent by age 95, however, and afterseveral hospital stints Mary LeolinBowerman passed away on August21, 2005, at age 97. Fortunately thiswas not before she was able to enjoythe celebrated rediscovery by MikePark of the Mount Diablo buck-wheat (Eriogonum truncatum), a spe-cies which Mary was the last to seenearly 70 years previous. Mary wasinterred with her parents at Chapelof the Chimes in Oakland, and acelebration of her life was held bySave Mount Diablo at Mitchell Can-yon on October 9.

Mary’s judicious management offinancial resources allowed her tobe generous with friends and causesthat she supported, and allowed herto leave significant legacies to SaveMount Diablo and the Jepson Her-barium. More important by far arethe more intangible contributionsshe left, in the form of abiding friend-ships, lasting inspiration, and anever-expanding vision of the extentto which her favorite mountain’s

natural landscape could be, andshould be, preserved. Above all else,Mary serves as the quintessential ex-ample of someone who, after facingsevere setbacks in her initial careeraspirations, went on to find a truercalling, yielding much more pro-found contributions than she wouldhave ever achieved in academia.Mary saved Mount Diablo; whocould ask for a better legacy?

RESOURCES

Adams, S., compiler. Historyof Mount Diablo State Park.Available at: www.mdia.org/mtdiablohistory.htm.

Holleuffer, C., compiler. 1985. AnnettaCarter’s oral history. CaliforniaWomen in Botany series. RegionalOral History Office, Bancroft Library.University of California. Berkeley, CA.

Rowell, G. 1997. M.L. Bowerman andB. Doyle, interviews in 1996. In BayArea Wild: A Celebration of the Natu-ral Heritage of the San Francisco BayArea. Mountain Light Press, SierraClub Books. San Francisco, CA.

Save Mount Diablo website: www.savemountdiablo.org, especially “SMDCofounder Dies” link.

University Herbarium and Jepson Her-barium Archives, University of Cali-fornia at Berkeley.

Barbara Ertter, University of California,1001 Valley Life Sciences Bldg #2465,Berkeley, CA 94720-2465. [email protected]

F R E M O N T I A 1 1V O L U M E 3 4 : 2 , A P R I L 2 0 0 6

A NEW MODEL FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING:VEGETATION MAPPING IN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY

by Julie M. Evens and Anne N. Klein

n southern California, conservationefforts have focused on identify-ing and protecting “coastal sagescrub” habitat, which is home to

the California gnatcatcher and over100 other imperiled plant and ani-mal species (CDFG 2005). This habi-tat is fragmented across 6,000 squaremiles of southern California. Thewestern portion of Riverside Countymakes up nearly one-quarter of thisfragmented area and is under in-creasing pressures from growth anddevelopment (RCIP 2003). The pres-sures upon coastal sage scrub andother habitats have prompted anintegrated regional planning effortwith new resource-based method-ologies.

Western Riverside County’spopulation is expected to doublefrom 1.4 million to 2.8 millionpeople by 2020 (RCIP 2003). Thesouthwestern portion of the countyincludes the rapidly growing citiesof Temecula, Murrietta, and Lake

Elsinore, whichall border thewildlands of theSanta Ana Moun-tains. The north-western portionof the county in-cludes the ever-expanding devel-opments of Co-rona, MorenoValley, Perris, andRiverside. Thecentral-easternportion of west-ern RiversideCounty includesthe towns ofAnza, Hemet, andIdyllwild, andthese cities are surrounded in thesouth and east by the Agua TibiaWilderness and the San JacintoMountains in the Cleveland and SanBernardino National Forests, respec-tively.

CAN CURRENT DIVERSITYSURVIVE FUTUREDEVELOPMENTS?

Until recently, western RiversideCounty was largely rural, agricul-tural, and undeveloped. The Countyspans 1.26 million acres and cur-rently has over 800,000 acres of un-developed land (see Figure 1). Adiversity of climates and naturalplant communities occurs across theremaining wildlands—from coastaland lowland areas containing coastlive oak (Quercus agrifolia), Califor-nia sagebrush (Artemisia californica),California buckwheat (Eriogonumfasciculatum), and alkali grasslands;to foothill regions with chamise(Adenostoma fasciculatum), hoaryleafceanothus (Ceanothus crassifolius),interior live oak (Quercus wislizeni),and other chaparral or woodlands;to montane zones with Eastwoodmanzanita (Arctostaphylos glandu-losa), Coulter pine (Pinus coulteri),black oak (Quercus kelloggii), and

A view showing intact vegetation in the Santa Ana Mountains and urban development inthe Perris Plain, Western Riverside County. Photograph by K. Ironside.

Figure 1. Map of Western Riverside County showing public/quasi-public (PQP), undeveloped and private (Criteria Area), and urbanlands. The Habitat Conservation Plan will include 347,000 acresof PQP and 153,000 acres of Criteria Area as the core area forreserves (RCIP 2003). Map by K. Fien.

I


other hardwood or conifer forests;and to semi-desert regions withGreat Basin sagebrush (Artemisiatridentata), California juniper (Juni-perus californica), honey mesquite(Prosopis glandulosa), and otherscrublands.

The natural communities are de-clining rapidly due to the effects ofhistoric development patterns andincreased development pressureswithin the last 15 years. Past effortsto preserve natural communitieshave been haphazard and largelyuncoordinated. Piecemeal efforts tomitigate development have little abil-ity to sustain flow within and be-tween ecosystems, including wild-life mobility and genetic flow withinspecies. As development pressurescontinue to increase, so have con-flicts between landowning interestsand the state and federal regulatoryprocesses associated with protect-ing endangered, threatened, and oth-erwise rare species (RCIP 2003).

Since local agencies need to re-spond to increased demands onnatural resources, the County hasbegun a comprehensive regionalplanning effort involving the localcities, developers, landowners, en-vironmental organizations, andother stakeholders. Specifically, theCounty has undertaken conserva-tion planning through a federal Habi-tat Conservation Plan (HCP) in con-junction with a state Natural Com-munities Conservation Planning(NCCP) effort. The land-use plan-ning efforts have been combined intoa Multi-Species Habitat Conserva-tion Plan (MSHCP; see sidebar fordefinitions). The MSHCP effort be-gan in 1999, and includes the NCCP,an update of the county GeneralPlan, and a transportation corridorplan (RCIP 2003). These plans wereintegrated to help address the in-tense demands by developmentwhile protecting multiple speciesand habitats under multiple juris-dictions (from undeveloped foothillsand montane forests to urbanizedcenters in the valleys) (RCIP 2003).

Further, the County is implement-ing the MSHCP to initiate an open-space plan for the western part ofthe County.

In 2005, the MSHCP was offi-cially adopted by the local and re-gional governing agencies to con-serve over 500,000 acres of reserveland. The core area of reserves willinclude different habitat types across347,000 acres of public land and153,000 acres of private land (RCIP

2003). The core areas for the MSHCPwere identified using a general habi-tat and vegetation map, which wascompleted by biological consultantsin 1995 (PSBS and KTU+A 1995).

LIMITATIONS OF THEORIGINAL MSHCP MAP

Since 1995, the extent and char-acter of vegetation and habitats havechanged within western Riverside

DEFINITIONS OF CONSERVATION APPROACHES ANDPROJECT COLLABORATORSHabitat Conservation Plan (HCP), per Section 10 (a) (1) (B) of theEndangered Species Act of 1973:

To provide species protection and habitat conservation within thecontext of non-federal development and land use activities; toprovide a process that promotes negotiated solutions to endan-gered species conflicts; and to provide an alternative to litigation,providing a species a pathway to stability and recovery. Privatelandowners minimize and mitigate the incidental take of listed,proposed and candidate species associated with their actions, andthe Fish and Wildlife Service issues an incidental take permit aslong as the action will not “appreciably reduce the likelihood ofthe survival and recovery of the species in the wild.”Multi-Species HCP: To cover all listed species and species thatmay be listed in the future.

Natural Communities Conservation Plan Program (NCCPP), perFish and Game Code 2805 and CDFG (2005a):

To identify and provide for the regional or areawide protectionand perpetuation of natural wildlife diversity, while allowingcompatible and appropriate development and growth. “Wildlife”means and includes all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphib-ians, and related ecological communities, including the habitatupon which wildlife depend for their continued viability (Fish andGame Code 711.2).

Adaptive Management, per the California NCCP Act of 2002:To use the results of new information gathered through the moni-toring program of the plan and from other sources to adjustmanagement strategies and practices to assist in providing for theconservation of covered species.

Species and Habitat monitoring, per the California Department ofFish and Game (CDFG) Resource Assessment Program (2005b):

The collection and analysis of observations or data repeated overtime and in relation to a conservation or management objective.Over time, monitoring develops information on trends (increas-ing, decreasing, static) in species or habitats that can be related toconservation and management activities.

Project Collaborators (and acronyms):Aerial Information Systems (AIS)California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)Resource Assessment Program (RAP)


County. For example, suppressionof fire has resulted in shifts fromponderosa pine and Jeffrey pine(Pinus ponderosa and P. jeffreyi) toincense cedar and white fir (Calo-cedrus decurrens and Abies concolor),while increases in fire frequency andnitrogen deposition have resulted inshifts from chaparral and coastal sagescrub to grasslands with exotic plantspecies (Allen et al. 2000; Keeley1990; Minnich 1995; Minnich andDezzani 1998; Zedler et al. 1983).

The existing 1995 map is notable to represent recent ecologicalchanges in western Riverside Coun-ty; further, it characterizes vegeta-tion very broadly and anecdotally,without reliably differentiating themain plant communities (Allen etal. 2005; RCIP 2003). Because themap is based upon limited ground-truthing and out-dated data (e.g.,early 1900s Weislander surveys),vegetation types are not accuratelydepicted. Common vegetation typesare clearly under-represented, in-cluding black oak (Quercus kellog-gii), Coulter pine (Pinus coulteri),and redshank (Adenostoma sparsi-folium). Additionally, there is a lackof specificity within broad habitatcategories of the map, such as mon-tane coniferous forest, oak and ri-parian woodland, coastal sage scrub,and chaparral.

Likewise, rare vegetation typesare under-represented in the 1995map. Desert scrub types have notbeen differentiated, including typeswith jojoba (Simmondsia chinen-sis), lotebush (Ziziphus parryi), andMuller oak (Quercus cornelius -mulleri). Also, well-known but lo-cally rare types have not been differ-entiated, such as conifer woodlandswith lodgepole pine and limber pine(Pinus contorta and P. flexilis) andalkali plains with smooth tarplant(Centromadia pungens subsp. laevis),a List 1B rare plant. Understandingand mapping the distribution of rareplant communities statewide and lo-cally is necessary for developingproper conservation strategies.

In addition, animal habitats aremisrepresented or difficult to iden-tify when vegetation patterns are notproperly depicted in maps. For ex-ample, suitable habitat for targetanimal species are not easily identi-fiable using the 1995 map, becausethe map lacks structural featuresimportant to animal species, such asplant overstory height and cover,and the degree of exotic plant inva-sion and land clearing. Further, thedifferent types of coastal sage scrubcommunities that California gnat-catchers prefer are not reliably cap-tured in the 1995 map. However,this is an important species that theMSHCP aims to conserve in perpe-tuity. When detail is not included invegetation maps for NCCPs, essen-tial habitats for rare/target speciesare characterized poorly.

NEW RESOURCE-BASEDASSESSMENT EFFORTS

Current emphases within thewestern Riverside MSHCP are to in-tegrate a monitoring program andan adaptive management plan,which will be guided by strongerresource assessments of species andplant communities. The first fiveyears of the newly adopted MSHCPare devoted to gathering objective,baseline information on the distri-bution and abundance of plants, ani-mals, and the habitats in which theylive. This information will be usedto determine long-term monitoringstrategies and will include periodicevaluations of the adequacy of miti-gation and conservation strategies.The California Department of Fishand Game (CDFG) is responsiblefor developing the strategy for thefirst eight years of the MSHCP (RCIP2003), and the University of Cali-fornia (UC) Riverside, Center forConservation Biology, has beenhired to help build and implementthe monitoring strategy.

In mid 2002, the CDFG’s Re-source Assessment Program fundeda pilot study including a fine-scale

TOP TO BOTTOM: A rare vegetation communitydominated by smooth tarplant (Hemizoniapungens subsp. laevis). Photograph by A.Klein. INSET: Close-up of smooth tarplant,a CNPS List 1B plant. Photograph by D.Taylor. • An association of limber pine andlodgepole pine with chinquapin (Pinusflexilis-Pinus contorta/Chrysolepis semper-virens), a locally rare community near SanJacinto Peak. Photograph by A. Klein.

vegetation inventory and mappingeffort within the MSHCP area. Theyinitiated the study to develop con-sistent and reliable monitoring strat-egies for the county’s conservationplan. Since HCP-NCCP efforts have50+ year lifespans, CDFG wanted toinclude reliable vegetation mappingsubstantiated by field data and mapaccuracy assessment. If that weredone, conservationists, county plan-ners, and land managers would beassured that the mapped locationsadequately represented the differentvegetation types found on theground.

Knowing that the products andoutcomes of this effort provide anew standard for future NCCPsand HCPs in California, CDFGpartnered with other entities that


had already developed standardizedtechniques for vegetation invento-rying and mapping. The California

Native Plant Society (CNPS) Veg-etation Program was hired to con-duct field sampling and to develop

the vegetation classification, whileAerial Information Systems (AIS)was hired to create the map. CNPS

Table 1. Example showing fine-scale CNPS Alliances and Associations nested within broader MSHCPcoastal sage scrub habitat types.

Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat

Alliance Association

Artemisia californica Artemisia californica/Amsinckia menziesii

Artemisia californica-Malosma laurina

Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum

Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum-Malosma laurina

Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum-Salvia apiana

Artemisia californica-Salvia apiana Artemisia californica-Salvia apiana

Artemisia californica-Salvia mellifera Artemisia californica-Salvia mellifera

Encelia californica Encelia californica-Artemisia californica

Eriogonum fasciculatum Eriogonum fasciculatum

Keckiella antirrhinoides Keckiella antirrhinoides

Keckiella antirrhinoides-Artemisia californica

Keckiella antirrhinoides-Eriogonum fasciculatum

Malacothamnus fasciculatus no association currently defined

Malosma laurina Malosma laurina-Eriogonum fasciculatum

Malosma laurina-Eriogonum fasciculatum-Salvia apiana

Malosma laurina-Eriogonum fasciculatum-Salvia mellifera

Malosma laurina-Tetracoccus dioicus

Riversidean Sage Scrub (Upland) Habitat


Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum

Encelia farinosa Encelia farinosa

Encelia farinosa-Artemisia californica

Ericameria palmeri no association currently defined

Eriogonum fasciculatum Eriogonum fasciculatum

Eriogonum fasciculatum-Encelia farinosa Eriogonum fasciculatum-Encelia farinosa

Eriogonum fasciculatum-Salvia apiana Eriogonum fasciculatum-Salvia apiana

Lotus scoparius no association currently defined

Malacothamnus fasciculatus no association currently defined

Salvia apiana Salvia apiana-Encelia farinosa

Coastal Scrub Habitat


Salvia mellifera Salvia mellifera

Salvia mellifera-Lotus scoparius

Salvia mellifera-Rhus ovata


and UC are working collaborativelywith CDFG to ensure that data arecollected consistently and are main-tained within a centralized databasesystem for this project and othersthroughout the state.

Use of concomitant efforts to in-ventory and map vegetation enablesa broad-based and reliable approach,which can extend beyond the MSHCParea to all of California. Instead ofusing Holland’s (1986) method togenerally define and map vegetation,this study uses the National Vegeta-tion Classification System (Grossmanet al. 1998) and A Manual of Califor-nia Vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). This system places veg-etation into a multi-level hierarchysystem, where “associations” are con-sidered the finest level of vegetation(e.g., Engelmann Oak/Poison Oak/Grass Association), and “alliances”are at the next highest level (e.g.,Engelmann Oak Alliance). Becausethe inventory is hierarchical in na-ture, different plant communities maybe represented at multiple scales andmay be cross-linked to other systemsthat define vegetation at coarser scales(see Table 1).

Agencies (such as CDFG, Cali-fornia State Parks, National ParkService, and the US Forest Service)have adopted the same system fordocumenting vegetation across Cali-fornia. Because the system has beenused in Ventura, Los Angeles, andSan Diego counties, the western Riv-erside County classification adds tothe understanding of vegetation atthe local as well as the regional level.

NEW DATA COLLECTIONAND MAPPING STRATEGIES

In September 2002, CNPS be-gan collecting field data to develop avegetation inventory of western Riv-erside County. The primary sam-pling method used to develop theinventory was the CNPS “Vegeta-tion Rapid Assessment” (see sidebaron p. 16). This method is used tocollect a large number of samples

across an extensive landscape whentime and funding are limited. TheRapid Assessment was most suit-able for the western Riverside effortbecause field staff were tasked tocollect as much information as pos-sible across >800,000 acres of landin an 11-month timeframe.

During the sampling season, fieldstaff traveled around the county col-lecting information to represent asmany common and rare plant com-munities as possible. The informa-tion they collected was continuallysupplied to AIS staff who were work-ing simultaneously on the map. Inturn, AIS helped the field ecologistsselect their sampling sites by provid-ing boundaries of existing naturallandscapes within the MSHCP Area.

AIS created the vegetation mapby manually photo-interpreting re-cent digital aerial photographs. Theyused environmental data layers andthe survey data to guide their map-ping. Since the mapping was basedon the best interpretation of aerialphotography (which had a base reso-lution of 1–2 meters), their poly-gons of vegetation had minimummapping units of 1–2.2 acres. (Themap can be accessed at http://bios.dfg.ca.gov/ by selecting the “Public BIOSData Viewer” option. To view themap, click on the “Add Bios Layers”function button and add the datalayer entitled: “Vegetation–WesternRiverside Co. [ds170]”.)

The polygons were labeled withvegetation names using the CNPSreference data and classification, andthe polygons were assigned at-tributes for structure (amount ofoverstory cover) and disturbance(degree of clearing or exotic spe-cies). AIS used the CNPS informa-tion to associate aerial photo signa-tures to vegetation types defined onthe ground. Then they extrapolatedthose signatures to the rest of thestudy area by modeling characteris-tic environmental factors (e.g., slopeand aspect, geologic substrate) thatcorrelated to the field-defined alli-ances and associations. When AIS

was not able to differentiate amongplant communities, they mergedcombinations of similar alliances orassociations into “mapping units.”More detailed mapping may need tooccur within the adaptive manage-ment plan as preserve lands are ac-quired and/or managed.

TOP TO BOTTOM : California BuckwheatAlliance (Eriogonum fasciculatum), Brittle-bush Alliance (Encelia farinosa), and mixedCalifornia Sagebrush—California Buck-wheat Alliance (Artemisia californica-Eriogonum fasciculatum), three relativelycommon coastal sage scrub vegetation typesin western Riverside County. Photographsby J. Evens (top), L. Vorobik (inset), andK. Ironside (center and bottom).


Accuracy of the new map wasassessed by the CDFG ecologists toestablish the value of the final mapand determine areas for improve-ment. Around 10% of the fieldsamples, representing the main veg-etation types in the map, were with-held from the photo-interpreters.The names assigned to these samplesin the vegetation classification werecompared to the names assigned tothem on the draft map, and an accu-racy assessment score of >80% wasdesired. The new map received anoverall score of 84% and systematic

suggestions were provided to thephoto-interpreters to improve thefinal map.

ADVANTAGES OF ANINTEGRATED APPROACH

This is the first time that an inte-grated and standard approach hasbeen used in an HCP-NCCP effort,and it provides a model for use infuture conservation plans. This in-tegrated approach results in severalproducts that benefit conservationplanning: the map, classification, and

the set of data collected on theground. The map and classificationafford better representation of tar-get habitats for conservation plan-ning because they are based on aunified state and national classifica-tion system that can be used at mul-tiple scales.

The data collected in over 1,200field surveys have a variety of appli-cations. Land managers can use theinformation to effectively implementrestoration projects, to monitor plantcommunities over time, and tomodel plant and animal habitats us-ing the structure and compositiondata. Land managers also can usethe data to identify “quality” standsof vegetation based on disturbancesof invasive species or human im-pacts. Fire ecologists are already us-ing the species and structural infor-mation to develop better fire fuelsmodels and vegetation trend analy-ses. Continued collection and analy-sis of vegetation and habitat datawill allow land planners and manag-ers to adaptively manage the areaswithin the MSHCP.

The new map has additional ap-plications for county planners toconserve species habitats within theMSHCP reserve area. CDFG hasmade broad comparisons of the newmap with previous land coverages,providing rough estimates of howmuch agricultural land or natural

Figure 2 (BELOW LEFT). A comparison of the 1995 map’s delineation of a Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub habitat with the 2005 map’s fine-scaledelineation of coastal sage scrub vegetation types. Figure 3 (BELOW RIGHT). Habitat features of gnatcatchers are modeled in GIS using the2005 map from high to low quality. Gnatcatchers have shown a preference for coastal sage scrub dominated by California sagebrush andbuckwheat, with shrub cover between 25-40 percent and shrub height less than 2 meters (Allen et al. 2005; Atwood and Bontrager 2001).Maps by K. Fien.

THE CNPS “VEGETATION RAPID ASSESSMENTPROTOCOL” IS DERIVED FROM THE CNPS “RELEVÉPROTOCOL” (CNPS 1998)Both protocols can be viewed at www.cnps.org.

Characteristics of the Rapid Assessment method:

• Surveys takes 15 to 30 minutes to complete

• Surveys can be collected year-round (with caveats)

• Surveys represent stands of vegetation varying from <1 acre to >5acres

Examples of attributes collected using the Rapid Assessment method:

• List of dominant and characteristic species

• Percent cover of species

• Percent cover of tree, shrub, and herbaceous layers

• Slope, aspect, and elevation

• Soil texture and geology

• Site history, clearing, erosion, exotic plant and grazing intensity,etc.


land has already been lost to devel-opment (see Table 2). This informa-tion will assist county planners inprioritizing areas to be conservedbased on what natural habitats re-main. Other possible comparisonsinclude determining the proportionof rare and common alliances thatoccur within versus outside the cur-rently conserved areas, so that plan-ners can identify new areas for con-servation on land that is not pro-tected.

Wildlife biologists, botanists,ecologists, preserve managers, andothers can use the new map for avariety of purposes because the newmap, in addition to indicating thevegetation type, has multiple at-tributes associated with each poly-gon of vegetation. For example, wild-life biologists at UC Riverside areusing the map to more accuratelymodel and identify suitable habitatfor the imperiled California gnat-catcher. Since gnatcatchers showpreferences for certain coastal sagescrub species and certain overstorycover of shrubs, habitats correlatedwith gnatcatchers are modeled inGIS (see Figure 3).

Additional value is inherent inthis type of integrated project. Spe-cifically, the map and field inven-tory contain information on distur-bance impacts from land clearingand exotic plant species. Land man-agers easily can use information tolocate highly impacted stands of veg-etation, so that they can restore themto more natural states. See thesidebar for various landscape-level

analyses that could assist in target-ing locations for new reserves.

In order to maximize implemen-tation of the classification systemfor inventory and monitoring, werecommend that CDFG and theCounty of Riverside collect addi-tional surveys, including those gen-erated by the CNPS relevé method.Now that a consistent and more ac-curate classification system has beenput in place, CNPS anticipates thatadditional data will build upon thisbase. Luckily, the adaptive manage-ment plan allows flexibility for fu-ture sampling and analysis, whichwill help provide a more completepicture of the diversity of plant com-munities occurring in western Riv-erside County.

IMPLICATIONS FOR LAND-USE PLANNING ANDCONSERVATION

The MSHCP aims to conserveover 500,000 acres of land. Thisinventory and mapping approachallows for detailed assessments inreserve design and land manage-ment. Fortunately, the structure ofRiverside’s MSHCP allows updatesand new information to be incorpo-rated into the vegetation map dur-ing the term of the permit. Thereare many applications of using thenew map and inventory for land useplanning.

With the new vegetation map,survey data, and report produced inthis project, resource managers havestronger and more scientifically-based tools for their land-use plan-ning and conservation activities.Agencies and land managers are bet-ter equipped to prioritize specificreserve locations within the generalfootprint of western Riverside’s corereserve lands by using more detailedon-the-ground information for veg-etation and habitats. Further, theyhave more precise location informa-tion on habitats in which specificrare species may occur, and they

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL FIELDSAMPLING AND INVENTORYING

• Private lands that have not been surveyed

• Plant communities that are more accurately captured in moist orEl Niño years

• Grass, forb, wetland, riparian, vernal pool, and alkali playacommunities that should be visited during peak phenology usingrelevé/quadrat techniques

• Alliances and associations that have fewer than 5 samples

Table 2. The area of land covered by natural and non-naturalfeatures in the 1995 vegetation map as compared to the 2005 map.

MSHCP Name (Collapsed) 1995 acres % 2005 acres %

Agricultural Land 169,348 13.5% 151,999 12.1%

Water 12,197 1.0% 21,100 1.7%

Developed/Disturbed Land 218,098 17.4% 296,621 23.6%

Grasslands 154,024 12.3% 91,219 7.3%

Playas, Vernal Pools, and Marshes 10,194 0.8% 4,365 0.3%

Coastal Sage Scrub 156,330 12.4% 222,153 17.7%

Riversidean Alluvial Fan Scrub 7,937 0.6% 4,665 0.4%

Desert Scrub 14,575 1.2% 8,922 0.7%

Chaparral 434,622 34.6% 368,173 29.3%

Riparian: Scrub; Woodland; Forest 15,019 1.2% 21,950 1.7%

Woodland and Forests 34,478 2.7% 33,255 2.6%

Montane Coniferous Forest 29,884 2.4% 31,633 2.5%

Rock Outcrop 0 0.0% 650 0.0%

Totals 1.26 million 1.26 million

Polygon Count 17,004 72,264


can better quantify how much of agiven habitat they already have inconservation versus how much theymay still need to conserve. They alsoare better apt to identify areas onthe map that have high vegetationdiversity, so that they can better pro-tect all of the unique coastal, mon-tane, and desert environments foundin the area.

Since the new vegetation map isbased on standardized methods, re-peat mapping of the vegetation canbe done at set intervals (e.g., every8-10 years) using the same quanti-tative rules. Thus, the baseline map-ping and future re-mapping can pro-vide a complete picture of the statusand trends in vegetation and habi-tats, which could assist adaptiveshifts in MSHCP management deci-sions over the lifetime of the plan.Further, land managers can assessthe total number of acres per plantcommunity that have been histori-cally lost and the acres that could bepotentially lost in the future, so thatthey can prioritize and drive conser-vation of vegetation types that maybe experiencing significant losses.

APPLICATIONS OF THE NEW MAPIn sum the new map can be implemented in numerous ways:

• To accurately identify habitat locations which are suitable for spe-cies covered in GIS modeling

• To accurately reflect current site environmental and habitat condi-tions (e.g., intact versus disturbed coastal sage scrub)

• To identify locations that need further study or monitoring foradaptively managing the region

• To identify areas converting from coastal sage scrub to grassland (ashuman population and nitrogen deposition increase)

• To identify locations that support high biodiversity of vegetation inGIS modeling

• To better identify the rarity and diversity of plant communities, sothat adequate representative areas are conserved for all the differentalliances and associations found in the region

The general public and resourcemanagers also have more informa-tion on the importance, rarity, andabundance of vegetation, which canbe applied to conservation planningand management decisions. Withrarity rankings established for thenew vegetation classification, localCNPS chapters and other groupscan provide direction to local landplanners on conservation strategies.People involved in restoration canmake more informed decisions onhow to restore vegetation to a morenatural state, applying informationfrom a mostly intact area to a dis-turbed area. Thus, they have betterinformation to steer managementefforts, as well as conservation ef-forts.

With the vegetation informationand methods presented in this inte-grated project, people have a solidknowledge base in vegetation assess-ment and mapping to apply in theirefforts. This information allowspeople to be more aware and en-gaged in scientifically-based conser-vation and management of naturalplant communities, which can re-

sult in wiser land-use and conserva-tion decisions in the future.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many thanks to the AIS team,including Carmelita Gutierrez,Debbie Johnson, John Menke, andMarci Young. Additional thanks toKristi Fien for creating map fig-ures, and to Kirsten Ironside(Larsen) and Todd Keeler-Wolf forproviding their expertise in the fieldand office.

SELECTED REFERENCES*

Allen, M., et al. 2005. CCB 2005: To-wards developing a monitoringframework for Multiple SpeciesHabitat Conservation Plans. Part I.University of California. Riverside,CA.

Atwood, J.L. and D.R. Bontrager. 2001.California gnatcatcher (Polioptilacalifornica). In: Poole and Gill, eds.The Birds of North America, No. 575.The Birds of North America, Inc.Philadelphia, PA.

CDFG (California Department of Fishand Game). 2005. Natural Commu-nity Conservation Planning. Avail-able at www.dfg.ca.gov/nccp/index.html.

Grossman, D.H., et al. 1998. Interna-tional classification of ecologicalcommunities: Terrestrial Vegetation ofthe United States. The Nature Con-servancy. Arlington, VA.

Minnich, R.A. and R.J. Dezzani. 1998.Historical decline of coastal sagescrub in the Riverside-Perris Plain,California. Western Birds 29:366-391.

PSBS and KTU+A. 1995. Western Riv-erside County Multi-Species HabitatConservation Plan Phase I—Infor-mation Collection and EvaluationReport for Riverside County, CA.

RCIP (Riverside County IntegratedProject). 2003. MSHCP Final Docu-ments Volume I—The Plan. Avail-able at www.rcip.org/mshcpdocs/vol1/mshcpvol1toc.htm.

Julie M. Evens and Anne N. Klein, 2707 KStreet, Suite 1; Sacramento, CA [email protected]; [email protected]

*The following website contains the full vegetation report, PowerPointpresentation, and complete references associated with this project:

www.cnps.org/programs/vegetation/index.htm


THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF IONE’S RARE PLANTSby George Hartwell

ithin an hour com-mute southeastfrom Sacramentolies a geologic odd-

ity known as the Ione Formation.Roughly 18 miles long and 3 to 4miles wide, it is located in gentlyrolling Sierra foothills juxtaposedwith pastoral ranchlands, strands offoothill woodland, vernal pools,swales, and meadows. The plantcommunity that grows upon it isknown as Ione chaparral.

From a hilltop perspective, lowheath-like chaparral vegetationdominates the viewscape, punctu-ated with an abstractly patternedpatchwork of chalky-white to sepia-colored sunburnt earth. As landscapearchitect Frederick Law Olmstead

wrote in 1865, “. . . there are morestupendous rocks, more beetlingcliffs, there are deeper and moreawful chasms, there may be as beau-tiful streams, as lovely meadows;there are larger trees.”

While he was actually describ-ing a portion of the Yosemite Valley,his words may as well have depictedthe austere, ascetic harshness andunderstated complexity of the Ionechaparral landscape. This unique is-land of rare endemic, edaphic plantspecies evolved to thrive in an oth-erwise barren ecologic niche on nu-trient poor, highly acidic soils—satu-rated in winter, bleached-bone dryin summer, and hostile to most otherplant life.

Olmstead also noted, “By no state-

ment of the elements of the scenerycan any idea of that scenery be given,any more than a true impression canbe conveyed of a human face by ameasured account of its features.”

The US Fish and Wildlife Ser-vice (FWS) described the region’sgeology in 1999 in its petition forlisting Ione manzanita, one of thearea’s rare plant species:

The Ione Formation, comprisedof a unique Tertiary Oxisol, con-sisting of fluvial [stream or riverproduced] estuarine, and shal-low marine deposits [Bureau ofLand Management 1989] wasdeveloped under subtropical ortropical climate during theEocene [35–57 million yearsago]. The Ione soils are coarse-

Habitat of Ione buckwheat (Eriogonum apricum var. apricum). All photographs by author except as noted.

W


textured and exhibit soil prop-erties typical of those producedunder tropical climates, such ashigh acidity, high aluminumcontent, and low fertility [Singer1978 in US FWS 1999].

The face of the Ione Formationis cratered by decades of surface min-ing, cleft by roads and highways,and blotched with an incongruouscollage of agricultural, commercial,and residential development. Grow-ing like persistent stubble beard fromits weathered skin, a pair of endan-

gered buckwheats, a diminutivemanzanita, and a couple of otherunusual plant species of the Ionechaparral have managed to survivethis austere wilderness, but their fu-ture remains uncertain.

Clay, sand, lignite (a form ofcoal), gravel, aggregate, and goldmining continue to chew away atthe dwindling habitat for these rarespecies. The urban workplaces ofSacramento and Stockton drive newresidential and commercial devel-opments—upstart centers of eco-nomic sprawl—deeper into areasonce reserved for rattlesnakes. Yet,the impacts of human tinkering withIone’s suite of rare plants exceedeven the obvious: the invasion of anoften fatal plant pathogen, Phytoph-thora cinnamomi, is complicating anystrategy for the conservation of atleast the Ione manzanita, and mayaffect many other plant species thatare commonplace in the area.

Perhaps the mostly widelyknown of Ione’s rare plants is Ionemanzanita (Arctostaphylos myrtifo-lia) and two forms of Eriogonum,Ione buckwheat (Eriogonum apricumvar. apricum) and Irish Hill buck-wheat (Eriogonum apricum var.

Soil in the habitat of Ione buckwheat.

TOP RIGHT AND BOTTOM RIGHT: Irish Hill buckwheat (Eriogonum apricum var. prostratum). •BELOW: Ione buckwheat (Eriogonum apricum var. apricum). Photograph by S. Matson.


prostratum). Ione manzanita is a fed-erally listed threatened species. Bothvarieties of Eriogonum apricum arestate and federally listed as endan-gered.

There are at least two other un-common upland plant species inIone-associated soils, both of whichalso occur in Amador and neighbor-ing counties in the same elevationranges—Amador or Bisbee Peak rushrose (Helianthemum suffrutescens),and Parry’s horkelia (Horkeliaparryi). The former still buds inbotanic limbo until debate over itsspecific status is resolved. Some bota-nists think of it only as a local aber-ration of the common sun rose(Helianthemum scoparium).

According to the Fish and Wild-life Service, “Arctostaphylos myrti-folia is reported from 17 occurrences.[It] may occur in about 100 indi-vidual stands which cover a total ofabout 404.7 hectares (1,000 acres)(Roy Woodward, Bechtel, in litt.1994). It occurs primarily on out-crops of the Ione Formation withinan area of about 35 sq. mi in AmadorCounty. In addition, a few disjunctpopulations occur in CalaverasCounty.”

“Eriogonum apricum is rarer,” theFWS said (1999), citing a 1984 Na-ture Conservancy document: “Erio-gonum apricum var. apricum is re-stricted to nine occurrences occu-pying a total of approximately 4 hect-ares (10 acres) on otherwise barrenoutcrops within the Ione chaparral. . . The two known occurrences ofE. apricum var. prostratum are re-stricted to otherwise barren outcropson less than 0.4 hectares (1 acre) inopenings of Ione chaparral on pri-vate land.”

Perhaps three-quarters of Ione’sunique plant community exists onRancho Arroyo Seco, site of theHoward Ranch, a 20,000-acre pri-vate holding established originallythrough a Mexican land grant in1844 and operated, at this writing,by the heirs of Charles S. Howard,an entrepreneur who owned the leg-

endary race horse Seabiscuit. It isone of the largest privately-ownedranches in California.

Other populations of rare Ioneplants grow mostly on lesser-sizedprivate lands. The California Depart-ment of Fish and Game (CDFG)and the US Bureau of Land Manage-ment own small protective reserves.Some rare plants grow on state high-way rights-of-way. Others occupythe skinny edges of western AmadorCounty’s rural roadways, and someoccur on the East Bay MunicipalUtility District’s Lake Comancheland holdings in northern CalaverasCounty.

The specter of potentially explo-sive land development in westernAmador County may be the mostobvious and imminent threat to thesurvival of Ione’s rare plants. TheHoward Ranch was offered for salein 2005 at a market price believed tobe in excess of $85 million.

A sales brochure produced byreal estate broker Grubb & Ellisheralded “A Once in a Lifetime Op-portunity” for the potential buyer.“With its combination of size, wild-life, natural resources, and inherentbeauty, Rancho Arroyo Seco is aunique and desirable property,” thebrochure declares. “The ranch’sproximity within northern Cali-fornia to the employment growthareas of Sacramento, San Francisco,and the Silicon Valley creates op-portunities to share in their bur-geoning economies and real estateappreciation,” the advertisementasserts.

According to Ken Noack (per-sonal communication, December 6,

2005), senior adviser with the realestate company, “The property isunder contract with a buyer and willlikely close in the second quarter of2006,” in the absence of complica-tions.

Amador County District 2 (Ionearea) Supervisor Richard Forster(personal communication, January9, 2006) commented on the ranchsale and the perceived intent of aprospective buyer: “Gold Rush De-velopers [is] talking about [build-ing] 8,000 homes over 20 years. Thatwould seriously impact plants andmore species that have been identi-fied under the Endangered SpeciesAct as either threatened or endan-gered. Namely, there’s the tiger sala-mander and vernal pool fairyshrimp.”

While Forster is an advocate forthe economic well-being of the area,including mining and related busi-nesses, he also supports a realisticapproach to environmental impacts.“Being cognizant that the nativeplants thrive in areas where miningoccurs, we need to have a programthat is protective of those native spe-cies and follows the mandate of thelaw.” Whether Amador County willembrace natural resource conserva-tion in the future is unclear. Thecounty’s General Plan (County ofAmador 1996)—the local govern-ment document that prescribes ablueprint for community develop-ment—includes “wild west” lan-guage that promotes the philosophyof self-governance in the form of“home rule” at the expense of re-source protection:

It is important to understand

Amador rush rose (Helianthemum suffrutescens). • Parry’s horkelia (Horkelia parryi).


that the value of minerals is notin the minerals themselves, butin the right to mine those min-erals . . . Unlegislated or regula-tory taking under the guise ofthe Endangered Species Act, the

Clean Water Act or others isnothing more than a de factotaking of the right to mine.

The General Plan goes furtherin its diatribe, stating in anotherparagraph:

Territories set aside for the pro-tection of endangered speciesthreaten every use of the land,including hunting and fishing.

Amador County’s General Planis under review in anticipation ofrevision by the end of 2008 or early2009, according to Planning Direc-tor Susan Grijalva (personal com-munication, December 20, 2005).“We would assume and expect thatour new general plan would addressthe issues of endangered species,possible habitat conservation, andthings of that nature that the publichas asked the Board [of Supervi-sors] to consider,” she explained.

While continued land develop-ment will surely imprint additionalpermanent and irreversible scars onthe face of the Ione chaparral, thesubcutaneous emergence of thePhytophthora pathogen may producean affliction from which there is noforeseeable recovery for Ione’s uniquemanzanita species and others. Plantpathologist Ted Swiecki, founder ofthe consulting firm Phytosphere Re-search, was studying another fungaldisease of Ione manzanita, Fusi-coccum spp., cankers that causesbranch and twig dieback, when he

discovered a pathogenic phenom-enon that appeared ominous:

We were working in the CDFG[Apricum Hill] reserve. One daywhen I happened to be out thereI took a stroll over to an areabeyond where we had our [re-search] plots. This isn’t Fusic-occum, it’s something else,[Swiecki thought] It’s worsethan that. This mortality centerobviously wasn’t Fusicoccum.This was a patch that was to-tally devastated. Potentially, [itwas] something more importantthan Fusicoccum.

Swiecki’s subsequent reports toCDFG revealed the pathogen to bePhytophthora cinnamomi, a plant dis-ease that he characterized as “a prettyaggressive” pathogen:

It’s a root-rotting organism. Ithas a wide host range. It movesfairly rapidly. It can move withwater. It spreads around a lotfaster than some other soil-borne fungi.

He also points out that once it’sestablished, getting rid of it is prob-lematic:

It tends to be very long lived inthe soil, and beyond that, alsodifficult to eradicate. Once thesoil’s infested there’s not muchyou can do about it. Arctosta-phylos myrtifolia is limited tocertain soil types. Once thosesoils become infested withPhytophthora cinnamomi it’s analmost irreversible loss of habi-tat for [Ione manzanita]. Theycan no longer support healthystands of Arctostaphylos myrti-folia. If this pathogen gets spreadthroughout the range of Ionemanzanita, those plant popula-tions are headed for extinction.Since we aren’t making new suit-able habitat anywhere, that’s aproblem for the survival of thespecies.

The disease is affecting otherCalifornia manzanitas, too, Swieckinoted. “It’s almost as severe on Arc-tostaphylos viscida [white-leaf man-

Ione manzanita (Arctostaphylos myrtifolia),from the Carbondale Road area. Photo-graphs by S. Matson.


zanita] as A. myrtifolia. Probablymost manzanitas are going to be sen-sitive to Phytophthora cinnamomi tovarying degrees.”

The extent of the disease and itsrelentless spread is worrisome froma macroscopic perspective. “It’sclearly affecting a native ecosystem,”Swiecki observed. “What’s uncom-mon is to see it taking out a chunkof native vegetation here in Califor-nia. It hasn’t been seen as a majorpathogen in these types of nativehabitats in California prior to thesetimes, at least on a large scale.”

Phytophthora cinnamomi has af-fected plant species from Europe toSouth Africa to Australia and be-yond. In a paper presented for theSudden Oak Death Online Sympo-sium in 2003, writer Gretna Westeof the University of Melbourne dra-matically described the effects ofthe disease on the native forests ofAustralia:

Phytophthora cinnamomi hascaused severe dieback and dis-ease in the native forests, wood-lands, and heathlands of south-ern Australia. The Australianflora is entirely different fromthat of other countries; high spe-cies richness developed duringa long period of isolation, . . .P. cinnamomi has devastated thediverse species of the under-story, caused epidemic diseasesince 1973. More than 1,000 spe-cies are susceptible, and the rarerspecies are endangered and maybecome extinct. . . . The deathand degradation of a complete,unique, and beautiful forest eco-system is shocking.

Phytophthora cinnamomi hasstewed in the soils or in horticul-tural and agricultural environs ofCalifornia for decades, according toresearcher Swiecki:

We’ve had it in California sincethe turn of the 20th century. It’sbeen in avocado and citrus or-chards. It’s a pretty common dis-ease of nursery container stockand consequently it becomes a

problem in planted landscapes.It also turns out to be a problemin various Christmas tree farms,including the foothill and Si-erra regions. Curiously, it re-ally hasn’t been found [to be]causing problems in native eco-systems in California until thisparticular finding. It may be [re-sponsible] for coast live oak de-cline in San Diego County.

In the absence of known eradi-cation methods, many researchersadvocate avoidance of infected ar-eas to prevent epidemic spread ofthe disease to healthy plant commu-nities. Activities that cause the move-ment of soil from one place to an-other may spread the disease. Theseinclude vehicle traffic, especially off-road travel, mining, grading, con-struction activities, and even foottraffic. Infested soil is most readilymoved when it is wet, so avoidingactivities that spread the pathogenis particularly important through-out the wet season, Swiecki reported.

Storm runoff can exacerbate theproblem.

According to Swiecki, two basicmanagement strategies are criticalto minimizing the impact of P.cinnamomi on A. myrtifolia popula-tions:

First and foremost, it is neces-sary to prevent the spread of P.cinnamomi into stands that arecurrently free of this disease.Secondly, and of almost equalimportance, the spread of thepathogen from existing diseasecenters within extant standsneeds to be slowed or stopped.

In addition to the Phytophthorastudies commissioned by the CDFG,the US FWS is developing manage-ment strategies for the recovery ofIone’s rare plants. A draft plan, pre-pared by consultant botanist Roy A.Woodward, is under review and re-vision by the Sacramento office ofthe FWS. It outlines ways the fed-eral government, in collaborationwith others, may implement effec-

Chaparral about two miles southeast of Ione, on the north side of Highway 88 (AmadorCounty). Photograph by S. Matson.


tive species protection and recoveryprograms. FWS officials state thatthe plan may be released for publiccomment within a year.

Craig Aubrey (personal commu-nication, January 12, 2006), FWSSacramento Recovery Branch chief,reviewed the plan’s major strategies.“A variety of tools are available un-der the Endangered Species Act tohelp states and landowners plan andimplement projects to conserve spe-cies,” Aubrey explained. The toolkitincludes so-called “traditional” con-servation grants:

Funded activities include habi-tat restoration, species statussurveys, public education, andoutreach, . . . propagation andreintroduction, . . . surveys, ge-netic studies, and developmentof management plans.

Conservation lands might be ac-quired through “Recovery Land Ac-quisition Grants,” Aubrey added,stating:

Loss of habitat is the primarythreat to most listed species, andland acquisition is often themost effective and efficientmeans of protecting habitats es-sential for recovery of listed spe-cies before development orother land use changes impairor destroy key habitat values.

I asked Aubrey whether the emer-gence of the Phythophthora pathogenwould precipitate relisting of Ionemanzanita from its current threat-ened status to that of endangered. Heresponded:

We are not currently consider-ing upgrading the listing statusof Ione manzanita. When we doour five-year review for Ionemanzanita, we will evaluate rel-evant new information regard-ing the magnitude and immi-nence of previously identifiedor new threats to the species,and then provide an updatedassessment of the status of thespecies and its threats.

The next review is expectedwithin five years, he said.

Depending on your perspective,five or so years may be a lifetime orjust a nanosecond in the geologictime required for the evolution ofIone’s rare plants. Regardless, it’stime enough for developers’ bull-dozers to wipe from existence anynumber of Ione’s rare plants. It maybe inadequate time to see thecompletion of effective recoveryplans, the allocation of funding toadvance them, or their final imple-mentation.

Whatever the number of years,they may chronicle many more soggywinters in the Ione area like the oneof 2005–2006, when rivers, streams,and drainages swelled beyond ca-pacity, and washed eroded soil, silt,and debris far afield. Subtly blendedinto the muddy brew, a covert cas-cade of millions upon millions ofliving, motile fungal zoospores per-colated deep into their new-foundenvirons, some to touch the vulner-able roots of susceptible species witha caress of certain death.

It’s only a matter of time—whether measured in years, months,or days—that the fate of Ione chap-arral will be decided. With prudentmanagement, some of its naturalheritage may be preserved for fu-ture generations. Absent that, an-other of California’s unique naturalresources may disappear, suffocatedbeneath the concrete, asphalt, andgreened front lawns of epidemicland development, or killed by aless visible but equally lethal en-emy, Phythophthora.

As F.L. Olmstead (1865) wroteabout another once-natural place:

The time will come when NewYork will be built up, when allthe grading and filling will bedone, and when the pictur-esquely-varied, rocky formationof the Island will have been con-verted into the foundations forrows of monotonous straightstreets, and piles of erect, angu-lar buildings. There will be nosuggestion left of its present var-ied surface.

If we intervene and act wisely,we can save some of this pristinewilderness. If not, time and thoseprocesses already in motion will de-cide the fate of the Ione chaparral.

REFERENCES

Beveridge, C., and D. Schuyler, Eds.1983. The Papers of Frederick LawOlmstead, Volume III: Creating Cen-tral Park, p.196. The Johns HopkinsUniversity Press. Baltimore, MD.Available at www.centralparknyc.org.

County of Amador. 1996. General Plan,Policy 14, Public Lands Policy.

Olmstead, F.L. 1865. Yosemite and theMariposa Grove: A Preliminary Re-port. Library of Congress Exhibit.The Evolution of the ConservationMovement, 1850–1920. Converted tohtml by D. Anderson, 1998. Avail-able at www.yosemite.ca.us.

Swiecki, T.J., E.A. Bernhardt, and M.Garboletto. 2003. Diseases threatenthe survival of Ione manzanita (Arc-tostaphylos myrtifolia). PhytosphereResearch, Vacaville, CA and Univer-sity of California, Berkeley. Availableat http://phytosphere.com/onlinelist.htm.

Swiecki, T.J., E.A. Bernhardt, and M.Garboletto. 2005. Distribution ofPhytophthora cinnamomi within therange of Ione manzanita (Arctosta-phylos mytrifolia). Phytosphere Re-search, Vacaville CA and Universityof California, Berkeley. Available athttp://phytosphere.com/onlinelist.htm.

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999.Endangered and threatened wildlifeand plants. Federal Register 64(101):28403–28413. Available at www.fws.gov/policy/library/99fr28403.html.

Weste, G. 2003. Disease caused byPhytophthora in Australia and its im-pact on native forests, woodlands,and heathland. American Phyto-pathological Society. Sudden OakDeath Online Symposium. Availableat: www.apsnet.org/online/SOD/.

Woodward, R.A. 2003. Ione species re-covery plan draft. Region 1, US Fishand Wildlife Service. Portland, OR.Unpublished.

George Hartwell, 5875 Park Circle, Ione,CA 95640. [email protected]


A NATIVE PLANT GARDEN IN THE BERKELEY HILLS,PART ONE

by Jenny S. Fleming

his article is reprinted as a three-part series with permission fromRancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden. The original publication is:

Fleming, J.S. 1997. A Native Plant Garden in the Berkeley Hills. In Out ofthe Wild and Into the Garden II: California’s Horticulturally SignificantPlants. 1995 Symposium Proceedings. Rancho Santa Ana Botanic GardenOccasional Publications #2. Pp. 218-225.

ur garden, which someknowledgeable peoplebelieve to be the oldestprivately owned Cali-

fornia native plant garden, sur-rounds our home on a very steeplot in the Berkeley hills north of theUniversity of California campus.Our irregular, one-half acre lot risesabout 110 feet from the lowest cor-ner on Shasta Road diagonallyacross the property to the top cor-ner, from about 760 to 870 feet inelevation.

The property is predominantlysituated on a northwest-facing ridgeadjoining a ravine cutting across the

neighbor’s property on our north-eastern border. Our exposure curvesaround from the west to nearlynorth. Prevailing winds come fromthe west, through the Golden Gate,and often bring fog.

Our property was originally cov-ered primarily with annual grasses,

two tall elderberry shrubs (Sambu-cus caerulea [Jepson = S. mexicana]),plentiful bulbs (Triteleia laxa, Di-chelostemma capitatum), Californiapoppies (Eschscholzia californica)and grass iris or blue-eyed grass(Sisyrinchium bellum). Much of theoriginal cover was bulldozed out

O

Douglas irises, checkerblooms, and bunch grasses grace the meadow portion of Scott and Jenny Fleming’s garden. All photographs byS. Holt.

T


when we leveled an area to provideflat space for the house, patios, anda tiny lawn.

Creating a building site andsome level outdoor living area re-quired extensive excavation andgrading, including scalping the top-soil across the center of the prop-erty down to what my husband calls“God’s own concrete”—a pebble-studded, heavy, hard clay. Whileexcavating for a drainage line, myhusband, Scott, found it easier tobreak out a concrete overflow fromthe foundation footings than to digthrough the subsoil.

Our wide, exposed, aggregatedriveway leads diagonally uphill tothe garage level below the singlefloor living area of the house. Youcan reach the living area by climb-ing a concrete staircase in front orby a ramp going up along the westside. From a landing halfway up thefront stairway, a path leads downalong the top of the driveway retain-ing wall and a rock stairway leadsup to the meadow and patios. Fromthe southwest end of this level, awell constructed stepping stone pathmade of flat pieces of lava 3 to 4inches thick switchbacks up the hill,providing foot and wheelbarrow ac-cess to the garden on the sunny up-per hillside. A rock stairway built ofthe same natural stepping stones pro-vides an alternate route up the hill-side at the northerly end of the mainyard level.

Drainage, a major consideration,is provided by drainlines under theuphill edge of the paths. These pathsare sloped to direct water to thedrainlines. Another major drainagefeature is a recirculating waterfall,pool, and stream system that over-flows into a 6-inch diameter drain-pipe leading to the street along ournortheasterly boundary.

Good sturdy retaining walls areessential for stabilizing areas of fill

dirt resulting from the excavation.Our most attractive, along the streetfrontage, is a 4-foot high “dry rock”wall of Sonoma County fieldstone.By “dry rock” I mean a wall builtonly of rock stabilized by dirt com-pacted behind the rock. Our wallsgenerally slope back about 15 de-grees from vertical for increased sta-bility and are built up from a firmfoundation layer in a trench. Thesewalls, ranging from 1 foot to about 8feet high, have stood for nearly 40years with virtually no displacement,despite numerous minor earth-quakes and downpours. A dry rockwall assures excellent drainage.

We have also built walls of con-crete rails and “deadmen”—concretebeams with wide ends to lie betweenthe rails and project back into theslopes of dirt fill—to handle moredemanding fill-retention problems.This was a necessary, though lessattractive, means to support an 8-foot rise above the driveway and in

other potentially unstable areas ofdeep fill on steep slopes. These walls,especially the dry rock walls, are“self-landscaping.” Eventually ferns,heucheras, and other nice plantshave filled the joints between therocks and spaces between the rails,a lovely sight. Over time, lichenshave discovered much of the rock.

With our first child coming alongin 1954, we needed to develop somepaths and play space and build fencesso a toddler would not “fall off theyard.” Before we had time to con-sider serious landscaping, we vis-ited the Native Plant Botanic Gar-den in Tilden Park, just a mile upand over the hill. We soon devel-oped the habit of taking lunch thereon sunny weekend days.

We fell under the spell of thegarden’s beauty and, following manylong conversations with James Roof,founder and director, we decided todevelop a native plant garden. Thisappealed to Scott, who liked manyof the plants that he had met whilehiking in the Sierra near his teenagehome in Reno, Nevada.

When we started, did we plan to

Hearst ceanothus gracefully drapes over boulders in the rock garden.

Rockwork is a critical element to the architecture of the Fleming garden. Adjacent to theflagstone patio, the meadow garden is separated from the rock garden by a dry streambedthat is flanked by a flagstone path.


be purists? I don’t think we evergave it a thought. These were beauti-ful plants and we wanted to use them.The idea of remaining purists camelater. Jim put us into contact withLouis Edmunds, owner of a nativeplant nursery in Danville, and wewere off on a lifetime commitment.

Ours is a collector’s garden, nota landscaped garden. When we sawattractive plants new to us, we wouldmake another trip to the Edmundsnursery, hoping to acquire them. Wealso obtained permits from the For-est Service to collect from the wild,using great care to minimize im-pact. I am pleased that casual col-lecting is no longer allowed.

The topography of our propertyhelped make some plant placement

easy. The area in front of the housewas on a steeply descending northslope, an obvious site for shade lov-ing redwood plants. We have twolarge redwood trees and a big-leafmaple (Acer macrophyllum) shadingthe bank. Understory shrubs includevine maple (Acer circinatum), mockorange (Philadelphus lewisii), ever-green huckleberry (Vaccinium ova-tum), salal (Gaultheria shallon), andmy prized western dogwood (Cornusnuttallii), collected from the wild asa tiny tree. Its growth is very slownow, perhaps from too much shadeand too many years in our clay soil. Itransplanted it, with a few incanta-tions, on the lower part of the slopeon April 8, 1958, a few hours after itcollapsed into the driveway in amudslide. The little dogwood keptgrowing in this shady site, spreadingbut gaining little in height.

Groundcovers for this area wereeasy to come by: wild ginger (Asarumcaudatum), false Solomon’s seal(Smilacina stellata), and redwoodsorrel (Oxalis oregana) quickly cov-ered the slope. I planted one or twosword ferns (Polystichum munitum)and their descendants proceeded topop up in many available places,especially in the crevices betweenrocks. This area receives occasionalsummer water and the dense coverprovides excellent protection fromsoil erosion. During the last twoyears of drought, thrips were an un-sightly problem by summer’s end;the salal was especially hard hit. Wehave pruned heavily and used SaferSoap with pyrethins, but with littleeffect.

There is a wide planting strip onthe downhill side of the steep drive-way, and a narrow, raised plantingstrip on the uphill side, topped bythe near vertical concrete rail wallmentioned earlier. Overhanging red-woods shade the driveway and theplanting strips on both sides.

The planting on the lower side,running the length of the driveway,continues the theme of redwood for-est floor plants, with much redwood

sorrel and the herbaceous inside-out flower (Vancouveria hexandra)interspersed with iris (Iris innom-inata) and meadow rue (Thalictrumpolycarpum [Jepson = Thalictrumfendleri var. polycarpum]). Featuredhere are some very special bulbs.Fetid adder’s tongue (Scoliopusbigelovii) appears early in spring,with elegant, shiny, pleated leaveswith purple dots close to the groundand small narrow-petaled flowers.The unpleasant odor is noticeableonly very close to the plants. A fawnlily with mottled leaves and showywhite flowers (Erythronium califor-nicum), also appears in late Febru-ary, soon followed by trilliums (Tril-lium ovatum and T. chloropetalum).

The narrow strip on the upperside of the driveway, elevated by arow of fieldstone, displays the samegroundcovers and ferns plus sugarscoops, (Tiarella unifoliata [Jepson= T. trifoliata var. unifoliata]) anddeer fern (Blechnum spicant).

The 8-foot high concrete rail wall,mentioned earlier, supports the nextgarden terrace. Between the rails ofthis wall I have used more oxalis,wild ginger, and vancouveria. Fea-tured here are many clumps of five-fingered fern (Adiantum aleuticum)and other ferns—sword fern, Cali-fornia polypody (Polypodium cali-fornicum), and goldback fern (Pityro-gramma triangularis [Jepson = Penta-gramma triangularis]). In areas oflight shade are sugar scoops, islandalum root (Heuchera maxima) anda delicate pink form of commonalum root (H. micrantha ‘MarthaRoderick’). In a larger rock pocket Ihave displayed the coastal bead lily(Clintonia andrewsiana), and wakerobin, (Trillium ovatum).

[See the next two issues of Fremontiafor a continuation of this delightfuljourney through the Fleming garden.]

Contact the author through Bart O’Brien,Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden,1500N. College Avenue, Claremont, CA [email protected]

Blue dicks and sword fern soften the con-tact between a fence and adjacent rocks.


STOP: Lupines (blue—Lupinus benthamii; white—L. microcarpus var.densiflorus) in a sea of frying pan poppies (Eschscholzia lobbii)along Point Grade, Highway 120, just below Big Flat. Photographby C. Jones. • ABOVE, CLOCKWISE: Blue-eyed-grass (Sisyrinchiumbellum). Photograph by L. Vorobik. • Tidy tips (Layia platyglossa).Photograph by C. Jones. • Cream cups (Platystemon californicus).Photograph by L. Vorobik. • FAR RIGHT: Wall flower (Erysimumcapitatum). Photograph by L. Vorobik.

o many wildflowers are in their full glory thistime of year. Presented here are images of land-scapes and flowers that one might see whilestrolling through the oaks or nearby grasslands.

Many of these flowers might be discovered while enjoy-ing the trails of Mt. Diablo in Contra Costa County (seeB. Ertter’s article on page 3).

Photographers are invited tosubmit their work for publicationin Fremontia. For more infor-mation, contact the editor [email protected]. For informa-tion on individual photographers,see the inside back cover.

SPRING WILDFLOWERSFROM GRASSLANDS AND

OAK WOODLANDSPhotographs by B. Ertter, J. Game, G. Hartwell,

C. Jones, S. Matson, and L. Vorobik


VERTICAL ROW ON LEFT, TOP TO BOTTOM: Mount Diablo fairy lantern (Calochortus pulchellus). Photographby J. Game. • Ithuriel’s spear (Triteleia laxa). Photograph by G. Hartwell. • Purple owl’s-clover(Castilleja exserta ssp. latifolia). Photograph by S. Matson. • A brodiaea found on coastal serpentine(Brodiaea stellaris). Photograph by J. Game. • Close-up of disk flowers of balsamroot (Balsamorhizadeltoidea). Photograph by S. Matson.

TOP RIGHT GROUPING, CLOCKWISE FROM MIDDLE: Purple owl’s-clover (Castilleja exserta ssp. latifolia), in asea of goldfields (Lasthenia californica). Photograph by C. Jones. • Baby blue-eyes (Nemophila menziesii)with Johnny-jump-up (Viola pedunculata). Photograph by B. Ertter. • California poppies (Eschscholziacalifornica) with annual grasses and vetch (Vicia villosa), a non-native. Photograph by C. Jones.

RIGHT: Johnny-nip (Castilleja ambigua), from coastal grasslands. Photograph by J. Game.

LARGE PHOTOGRAPH, ABOVE: Hint of spring gold from California poppies on slopes east of Bakersfieldalong Highway 233. Photograph by C. Jones.


Field Guide to the Vernal Poolsof Mather Field, Sacramento County,by Carol W. Witham. Copyright ©2006 Sacramento Valley Chapter, Cali-fornia Native Plant Society. Soft cover,spiral bound, 48 pages, 53/8x8 3/8, 130color photographs, map. $10.00. Visitwww.sacvalleycnps.org for ordering in-formation.

BOOKS RECEIVED

BOOK REVIEW

San Diego County Native Plants,by James Lightner, 2006. San DiegoFlora, San Diego, CA. 320 pages, cloth,$29.95.

Plant species are local. It alwayssurprises me how few people know thatthe secret to accurate plant identifica-tion is to have a guide specific to plantsof the region. If you are interested insouthern California plants, even the bestbook on plants of northern Californiawill result in many incorrect identifica-tions. Even for regions within southernCalifornia, you are likely to misidentifyroughly 5–10% of the species if, forexample, you use a book on plants ofthe Santa Monica Mountains to try toidentify species of the Santa Rosa Pla-teau, even though the two spots areless than 100 miles apart.

Since 1986, botanists comfortablewith using technical plant keys havebeen well served for San Diego Countywith Beauchamp’s wonderful A Flora

of San Diego County. That book is de-lightfully portable, ideal for identify-ing species in the field, and gives theessentials needed by professional bota-nists: a key and the locations and abun-dance for each species in the county.

Unfortunately, identifying plantsusing technical keys can be a difficultskill to learn, so most plant enthusi-asts in San Diego County have beenforced to use picture books from otherareas. But when James Lightner cameout with his first edition of San DiegoNative Plants in 2004, amateur bota-nists interested in local plants wereecstatic. Finally, here was a book thatconcentrated on San Diego County andonly featured species known to be inthe area. The book was as portable asBeauchamp’s, and was filled with won-derful pictures. Even advanced bota-nists were quite pleased with Lightner’sbook. There’s nothing like a key tolead you to some horrible misidentifi-

cations that can quickly be caught witha photograph, so the book has provena valuable complement to Beauchamp’sFlora.

In his guide, Lightner takes an ap-proach that needs to be used in morewildflower guides: Instead of provid-ing a single picture for each plant, hetypically includes two to three photosshowing various aspects of the plant. Iwell remember my first days in thefield puzzling over whether a picturematched a given plant or not. Often,seeing another picture—whether froma different angle, showing a differentpart of the plant, or at a differentscale—helped immensely in decidingwhether I had a match or not. Of coursethe only drawback to having more pic-tures, as this guide does, is that theytend to be a bit small and thereforeshow less detail.

Lightner organizes his book intotwo parts: Trees and Shrubs; and Her-

The vernal pools of California arebiological communities that are not onlyunique to California, but also differfrom each other—including nearby andadjacent pools. The author of what islikely to be a popular guide to the ver-nal pools of Mather Field explains inlayperson terms the special conditionsthat, over millions of years, create thesedistinctive and stunningly beautifulcommunities, and the adaptations ofthe plants and animals that enable themto survive and exploit the demandingenvironment. She explains why thepools differ from each other, and fromone region to another. The copiousphotographs—of the concentric-ringedpools as well as close-ups of plants andanimals in various stages—tell why theauthor is passionate about them, andwhy we must save them.

Not the least fascinating aspect ofthese delightful areas are the close re-lationships between plants and the in-teracting fauna—many of which existonly in a given pool—and the fact thathundreds of plants and animals canexist nowhere else. The author por-

trays the different worlds of the aquaticand the flowering phases, both ofwhich are intricate examples of theprecious diversity we have inherited.Protecting this heritage is not easy; thevery terrain that favors developmentof the pools favors the development ofhouses, and the pools are located inburgeoning areas of the state.

CLOCKWISE FROM TOP LEFT: Bluedicks (Dichel-ostemma capitatum), alkali checkerbloom(Sidalcea hirsuta), horned downingia(Downingia bicornuta), and Douglas’sbeardstyle (Pogogyne douglasii).

CLOCKWISE FROM TOP LEFT: Yellow carpet (Blen-nosperma nanum), Fremont’s tidy-tips (Layiafremontii), vernal pool goldfields (Lastheniafremontii), flying pan poppies (Eschscholzialobbii). Photographs by C. Witham.


baceous Plants. By doing so, he imme-diately reduces the number of plants tobe searched by about half. Each sectionis then further organized by family.

Amateurs may be unhappy thatthe book is not organized by flowercolor, since most beginners are unfa-miliar with the plant families, and theguide makes no attempt to teach themto the reader. By and large, however,organization by plant family is farmore useful.

Lightner’s first edition coveredonly the non-desert portions of SanDiego County, and he received manyrequests to cover the desert portion aswell. His 2006 edition now includesabout 350 desert species and an addi-tional 150 cismontane species.Lightner has also tripled the numberof grasses, sedges, and rushes to nearly100. Advanced plant enthusiasts willespecially treasure these added pic-tures and descriptions. The new bookis truly a bargain; doubling the num-ber of species only marginally in-creased the price. The book is densewith information and could almost becalled a mini-Jepson Manual except that

this one is accessible to the beginningbotanist! The new edition highlightswhich species are often confused, andin most cases gives the critical differ-entiating characters—an extremelyvaluable addition. Text has been addedfor many species, and the introduc-tion does an excellent job in summa-rizing San Diego County plant life.

The most critical part of any plantguide is the accuracy of the identifica-tion of photographs of the speciestreated, which is quite high in thisvolume due to the pre-publication re-view of the book by Dr. Jon Rebman,an expert on plants of San DiegoCounty. Lightner even has six accu-rately-identified Cryptantha species,instead of the typical “Cryptantha sp.”given in most such books.

One useful feature in the book isthe use of single-letter abbreviationsto designate one of the many geo-graphic regions (C for coast, F forfoothills, etc.) in which each species isfound. Each photo also lists the spe-cific location where it was taken.

There are two unexpected bonusesto Lightner’s guide. First, he has in-

cluded birds, insects, and spiders inhis photos, and provides an index tothem. Second, at the back is a list ofnaturalists associated with species inSan Diego County, with biographicalinformation on each person.

Having bestowed all this praise onLightner’s book, I’d like to offer a fewsuggestions for improving the nextedition. First, two species are oftendiscussed together, accompanied by anumber of pictures. In a fair numberof cases, he fails to specify which pic-tures go with which species. Second,the text is printed in too delicate afont, which makes it somewhat diffi-cult to read. Apparently this font wasused to save space. Third, a list of thevery few misidentifications I’ve found,along with a few other comments, areavailable at http://tchester.org/plants/lists/books/lightner.html.

Notwithstanding these minor criti-cisms, anyone with more than a pass-ing interest in San Diego County plantswill most certainly want to get hold ofthis book.

Tom ChesterSan Diego County Chapter

F R E M O N T I A 3V O L U M E 3 4 : 2 , A P R I L 2 0 0 6 F R E M O N T I A

MATERIALS FORPUBLICATION

Members and others are invited

to submit material for publica-

tion in Fremontia. Instructions

for contributors can be found

on the CNPS website, www.cnps.

org, or can be requested from the

next Fremontia Editor, Bart

O’Brien at [email protected] or

c/o Rancho Santa Ana Botanic

Garden,1500 N. College Avenue,

Claremont, CA 91711.

FREMONTIA EDITORIALADVISORY BOARD

Susan D’Alcamo, Ellen Dean,

Kathleen Dickey, Phyllis M.

Faber, Holly Forbes, Pam Muick,

Bart O’Brien, John Sawyer, Jim

Shevock, Linda Ann Vorobik,

and Carol W. Witham

❏ 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

Please Join Today!

Please make your check payable to “CNPS” and send to: California Native Plant Society, 2707 K Street, Suite 1,Sacramento, CA 95816-5113. Phone (916) 447-2677; fax (916) 447-2727; www.cnps.org.

❏ 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 and the CNPS Bulletin.

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

Kristi Fien is a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Research Analyst for theCalifornia Department of Fish and Game.

John Game works for the Life Sciences Division of the Lawrence Berkeley Na-tional Laboratory and is a research associate at the University/Jepson Herbaria,UC Berkeley. More of is work can be seen at the Calphotos website, http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/photos.

Saxon Holt is a professional photographer who specializes in garden landscapesand plants. He has been selling his work as fine art prints and licensing use of hisimages for over 20 years. His work can be seen at http://saxonholt.com.

Kirsten Ironside is a plant ecologist and GIS specialist at Northern ArizonaUniversity’s Merriam-Powell Center for Environmental Research. She has takenmany photographs in California while surveying vegetation.

Carl Jones is a professional illustrator, graphic designer, and photographer whohas spent much time exploring California’s scenic back-country with his camera.Carl’s work can be seen at www.carlsgallery.com.

Steve Matson is vice-president of the CNPS Tahoe Chapter, botanist, and photog-rapher. His images can be seen at the Calphotos website, http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/photos.Save Mount Diablo has graciously provided use of many of their images from anassortment of photographers. For more information on Save Mount Diablo, seewww.savemountdiablo.org.

Dean Taylor is a professional botanical consultant and long-time member ofCNPS. His photographs can be seen at the Calphotos website, http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/photos.

Linda Vorobik is the editor of Fremontia, a professional botanist, and botanicalillustrator. For information on her work, workshops, and illustrations, seewww.VorobikBotanicalArt.com.

CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHERS

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

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


California N

ative Plant S

ociety2707 K

Street, S

uite 1S

acramento, C

A 95816-5113

Address S

ervice Requested

Mary Leonin Bowerman. Barbara Erttershares rare insights into Mary’s life,and helps us relive her exploration ofMt. Diablo and her work to save thisbotanical gem and east San FranciscoBay promontory.

The vegetation series that beganin the January 2006 issue of Fremontiacontinues with a look at advances invegetation mapping as used by theCNPS vegetation ecologists Julie Evensand Anne Klein. In supporting suchresearch, CNPS is greatly contribut-ing to the understanding of habitatdiversity, and through it, protectionof native plants. The next article is acase in point of an area that needs ourattention now. George Hartwell, achampion of the Ione area and its

Nonprofit O

rg.

U.S

. Postage

PA

IDO

akland, CA

Perm

it # 3729

CONTRIBUTORS

unique soils and species, educates usabout these and about the threat tothis area by development and by theinvading plant disease, Phytophthoracinnamomi.

For pure pleasure and delight lookto pages 29 and 30 for a photographiclayout of spring flowers. And don’tmiss the Books Received note on CarolWitham’s Field Guide to the Vernal Poolsof Mather Field, or the review of thesecond edition of the 2004 volume,San Diego Native Plants, by JamesLightner, which is replete with photo-graphs useful for plant identification.Happy reading, but most of all, happybotanizing!

Linda Ann VorobikFremontia Editor

AFROM THE EDITOR

Tom Chester is a retired astrophysicist who got hooked onbotany in 2001 and studies the flora of southern Californiafull-time, now concentrating on the plants of Santa Rosa Pla-teau and Borrego Springs.

Barbara Ertter, PhD, is curator of vascular plants of westernNorth America at the Jepson and University Herbaria, Uni-versity of California, Berkeley. She and Dr. Mary Bowermancoauthored a new edition of The Flowering Plants and Fernsof Mt. Diablo, California, published by the California NativePlant Society in 2002.

Julie Evens is the lead vegetation ecologist for the Califor-nia Native Plant Society. She provides outreach and man-ages a variety of projects to describe vegetation statewide.

Jenny S. Fleming is one of the founding members, and along time Fellow, of the California Native Plant Society.Throughout her long horticultural career, and as an extraor-dinary volunteer on behalf of our native flora, Jenny and hergarden have provided inspiration and plants to innumerablegardening enthusiasts.

George Hartwell is an amateur botanist and photographer.He is retired from an eclectic career that morphed from mer-chant seaman to radio/TV news reporter; book, magazine andnewspaper writer; documentary film/video author, narratorand director; and, marketing and public affairs specialist. Someof his photos may be seen at the Calphotos website, http://elib.cs.berkeley.edu/photos.

Anne Klein is a vegetation ecologist for the California Na-tive Plant Society, where she works on vegetation projectswithin California. Her current focus is on the Sierra Nevadafoothills vegetation classification project.

h spring, the time of change andrenewal, and the CaliforniaNative Plant Society (CNPS)

is in step. As many of you know, ournew Executive Director, AmandaJorgenson, came on board this Janu-ary, and our new Fremontia Editor,Bart O’Brien, will begin his tenure byco-editing the July issue. Welcome Bartand Amanda! I am also happy to re-port that all who have contacted meare very pleased with their colorFremontia. Please check the inside backcover for more information on thosewho have generously offered use oftheir photographs.

This issue begins with a tribute toone of California’s premier womenbotanists and conservationists: Dr.

VOL. 34, NO. 2 • APRIL 2006 FREMONTIA - cnps.org · THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF IONE’S RARE PLANTS...

Documents

Transcript of VOL. 34, NO. 2 • APRIL 2006 FREMONTIA - cnps.org · THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF IONE’S RARE PLANTS...