Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 16:30:44 EDT From: Davidogray@aol.com To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg1981$foo@default> Subject: Re: CP introductions and "nativeness"
Hello Ivan and list,
<< Juniper's book reports that Darlingtonia had been previously found in
nearby Inglenook Fen. If this is true, then Human activity may have
eliminated it there. >>
Far more probable, is that the Darlingtonia reported at Inglenook was
*introduced*, not native. Juniper, et al. are wildly wrong on various aspects
of Darlingtonia botany including things as obvious as the shape of the seeds
( Sorry, Daniel Joel ). Hawkeye Rondeau corrects this error in C.P. of the
West.
D. californica does/did not occur in coastal habitats anywhere south of the
Oregon border AFAIK. Why this should be, is something of a mystery, but I
have seen no reliable reports of natural populations in coast-side California
habitats. They are big attention-grabbing plants and are almost always noted
by early plant surveys, so its unlikely that they were simply missed. Its not
native to anyplace near Albion California.
<< Also, Darlingtonia does not seem to me to fit into the weed criteria; it
is not invasive. >>
The more important thing to consider about high-minded theories on
"restoring" populations that were "lost" is that you will very likey
introduce non-native pests and pathogens. And to what end? To make a CP theme
park? Let's leave wild parts of our state as they are with their own natural
flora and fauna.
Cheers,
David
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:09 PST