Vol. 33, No. 1 January 2005 FREMONTIA · 2018. 3. 30. · volume 33:1, january 2005 fremontia 1 a journal of the california native plant society fremontia $5.00 (free to members)

F R E M O N T I A 1V O L U M E 3 3 : 1 , J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 5

A JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

FREMONTIA

$5.00 (Free to Members)

Vol. 33, No. 1 January 2005

IN THIS ISSUE:IN THIS ISSUE:IN THIS ISSUE:IN THIS ISSUE:IN THIS ISSUE:

40TH ANNIVERSARY OF CNPS

THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY:

ITS MISSION, HISTORY, AND HEART by Carol Witham 33333

THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY AT THE STATE LEVEL:

WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO by Michael Tomlinson 1111111111

SAVING A RARE PLANT IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT by Keith Greer and Holly Cheong 1818181818

POLLINATION BIOLOGY OF THE CLUSTERED LADY SLIPPER by Charles L. Argue 2323232323

GROWING NATIVES: CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE by Glenn Keater 2929292929

DR. MALCOLM MCLEOD, 2004 FELLOW by Dirk R. Walters 3030303030

2 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 3 : 1 , J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 5

The California Native Plant Society(CNPS) is a statewide nonprofit orga-nization dedicated to increasing theunderstanding and appreciation ofCalifornia’s native plants, and to pre-serving them and their natural habi-tats for future generations.

CNPS carries out its missionthrough science, conservation advo-cacy, education, and horticulture atthe local, state, and federal levels. Itmonitors rare and endangered plantsand habitats; acts to save endangeredareas through publicity, persuasion,and on occasion, legal action; pro-vides expert testimony to governmentbodies; supports the establishment ofnative plant preserves; sponsors work-days to remove invasive plants; andoffers a range of educational activitiesincluding speaker programs, field trips,native plant sales, horticultural work-shops, and demonstration gardens.

Since its founding in 1965, the tra-ditional strength of CNPS has beenits dedicated volunteers. CNPS ac-tivities are organized at the local chap-ter level where members’ varied in-terests influence what is done. Volun-teers from the 33 CNPS chapters an-nually contribute in excess of 87,000hours (equivalent to 42 full-time em-ployees).

CNPS membership is open to all.Members receive the quarterly jour-nal, Fremontia, the quarterly statewideBulletin, and newsletters from theirlocal CNPS chapter.

Fremontia logo (by L.A. Vorobik) re-printed from The Jepson Manual, J.Hickman, Ed., 1993, with permissionfrom the Jepson Herbarium, UC. © Re-gents of the University of California.

CALIFORNIA NCALIFORNIA NCALIFORNIA NCALIFORNIA NCALIFORNIA NAAAAATIVETIVETIVETIVETIVE

PLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETY

Dedicated to the Preservation ofthe California Native Flora

VOL. 33, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005

FREMONTIAFREMONTIAFREMONTIAFREMONTIAFREMONTIA

Copyright © 2005California Native Plant Society

STAFFSacramento Office:Executive Director . . . . . Pamela C.

Muick, PhDDevelopment Director . . . . . vacantMembership Assistant . . . Christina

NeiferFinance Manager . . . . . . . . . . Lois

CunninghamEast Bay Conservation Analyst . . . . .

Jessica Jean Olsen

At Large:Fremontia Editor . . . . . . . Linda Ann

Vorobik, PhDSenior Conservation Botanist . . . . . .

Ileene AndersonRare Plant Botanist . . . . Misa WardSenior Vegetation Ecologist . . Julie

EvensVegetation Ecologist . . . Anne KleinLegislative Advocate . . . . . . . . . . .

Vern GoehringLegal Advisor . . . . . . Sandy McCoyWebsite Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . .

John DonaghueBulletin Editor . . . . . . . . . . . vacant

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

David Diaz, Vern Goehring, SteveHartman, Diana Hickson, LynnHouser, Lynne Kada, David L.Magney, Sandy McCoy (Vice Pres-ident), J. Spence McIntyre, CarolWitham (President)

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYCALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYCALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYCALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYCALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

MEMBERSHIPMembership form located on inside back cover;

dues include subscriptions to Fremontia and the Bulletin

Mariposa Lily . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000Benefactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $500Patron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $250Plant Lover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100

Supporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $75Family, Group, International . . . $45Individual or Library . . . . . . . . . $35Student/Retired/Limited Income . $20

CHAPTER COUNCILAlta Peak (Tulare) . . . . Joan StewartBristlecone (Inyo-Mono) . . . . . . . . .

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

Sonoma Coast) . . . Jon ThompsonEast Bay . . . . . . . . Joe WillinghamEl Dorado . . . . . . . . Amy HoffmanKern County . . . . . Laura StocktonLos Angeles/Santa Monica Mtns . . .

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

Reny ParkerMojave Desert . . . . . . Tim ThomasMonterey Bay . . . . . . Robert HaleMount Lassen . . . . . . . . Jim BishopNapa Valley . . . . . . Marcie DannerNorth Coast . . . . . . . Larry LevineNorth San Joaquin . . . . Gail ClarkOrange County . . . . . . Sarah JayneRedbud (Grass Valley/Auburn) . . . .

Chet BlackburnRiverside/San Bernardino counties . .

Katie BarrowsSacramento Valley . . Diana HicksonSan Diego . . . . . . . . Dave FlietnerSan Gabriel Mtns . . . . Lyn McAfeeSan Luis Obispo . . . . Charles BlairSanhedrin (Ukiah) . Chuck WilliamsSanta Clara Valley . . Georgia StigallSanta Cruz County . Janell HillmanSequoia (Fresno) . . . . Warren ShawShasta . . . . . . . . . . . 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 FORPUBLICATION

CNPS members and others are wel-come to contribute materials for pub-lication in Fremontia. See the insideback cover for manuscript submissioninstructions.

Printed by Business Point Impressions, Concord, CA

Linda Ann Vorobik, EditorBob Hass, Copy Editor

Beth Hansen-Winter, DesignerJustin Holl, Jake Sigg & David Tibor,

Proofreaders

CNPS, 2707 K Street, Suite 1; Sacramento, CA 95816-5113(916) 447-CNPS (2677) Fax: (916) 447-2727

[email protected]

PROGRAM DIRECTORS

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

Conservation . . . . . David ChippingHorticulture . . . . . . . . Peigi DuvallPosters . . . . . . . . Bertha McKinley

and Wilma FolletteRare Plants . . . . . . . . Ann HowaldVegetation . . . .Todd Keeler-Wolf

F R E M O N T I A


THE COVER: Members of the Riverside/San Bernardino Chapter of the California Native Plant Society learn aboutdesert plants and native fan palm oases at the Dos Palmas Preserve near the Salton Sea. Photograph by R. Muertter.

THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY: ITS MISSION,THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY: ITS MISSION,THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY: ITS MISSION,THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY: ITS MISSION,THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY: ITS MISSION,

HISTORY, AND HEART HISTORY, AND HEART HISTORY, AND HEART HISTORY, AND HEART HISTORY, AND HEART by Carol Witham ........................................... 33333

This first in a series of four articles is a celebration of the members and local chapters whichmake up our society. Carol Witham, current CNPS president, introduces a series of vignettesfor seven southern chapters with a brief history of the organization and its members.Summaries of the remaining CNPS chapters will appear in the next three issues ofFremontia.

THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY AT THETHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY AT THETHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY AT THETHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY AT THETHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY AT THE

STATE LEVEL: WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DOSTATE LEVEL: WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DOSTATE LEVEL: WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DOSTATE LEVEL: WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DOSTATE LEVEL: WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO

by Michael Tomlinson .................................................................................... 1111111111

The work of local CNPS chapters is augmented by a number of statewide programs that areorganized and carried out by paid and volunteer staff. This article introduces the Rare Plant,Vegetation, Conservation, and Horticulture programs, and summarizes how the statewideSociety is structured and governed.

SAVING A RARE PLANT IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENTSAVING A RARE PLANT IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENTSAVING A RARE PLANT IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENTSAVING A RARE PLANT IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENTSAVING A RARE PLANT IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT

by Keith Greer and Holly Cheong ...................................................................1818181818

What happens to rare plant populations when the urban landscape encroaches? AuthorsGreer and Cheong describe the habitat of the rare willowy monardella (Monardellalinoides ssp. viminea), a riparian plant of the San Diego area, and assess how changes inwater flow affect its populations.

POLLINATION BIOLOGY OF THE CLUSTERED LADYPOLLINATION BIOLOGY OF THE CLUSTERED LADYPOLLINATION BIOLOGY OF THE CLUSTERED LADYPOLLINATION BIOLOGY OF THE CLUSTERED LADYPOLLINATION BIOLOGY OF THE CLUSTERED LADY

SLIPPER SLIPPER SLIPPER SLIPPER SLIPPER by Charles L. Argue ..................................................................... 2323232323

The California flora includes three species of lady slipper orchid, the very showy Cypripe-dium californicum and C. montanum, and the clustered lady slipper, C. fasciculatum. Inthis article the author describes in detail the flower form and pollination of the clustered ladyslipper, and discusses the strategy employed by this orchid to reproduce.

GROWING NATIVES: CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE GROWING NATIVES: CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE GROWING NATIVES: CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE GROWING NATIVES: CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE GROWING NATIVES: CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE by Glenn Keator ............................2929292929

DR. MALCOLM MCLEOD, 2004 FELLOW OF THE CALIFORNIA NDR. MALCOLM MCLEOD, 2004 FELLOW OF THE CALIFORNIA NDR. MALCOLM MCLEOD, 2004 FELLOW OF THE CALIFORNIA NDR. MALCOLM MCLEOD, 2004 FELLOW OF THE CALIFORNIA NDR. MALCOLM MCLEOD, 2004 FELLOW OF THE CALIFORNIA NAAAAATIVETIVETIVETIVETIVE

PLANT SOCIETY PLANT SOCIETY PLANT SOCIETY PLANT SOCIETY PLANT SOCIETY by Dirk R. Walters ......................................................................................3030303030

LETTERS TO THE EDITORLETTERS TO THE EDITORLETTERS TO THE EDITORLETTERS TO THE EDITORLETTERS TO THE EDITOR ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3232323232

BOOK RBOOK RBOOK RBOOK RBOOK REEEEEVVVVVIIIIIEEEEEWWWWW ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3232323232

CONTENTS

GUEST EDITORIAL: GUEST EDITORIAL: GUEST EDITORIAL: GUEST EDITORIAL: GUEST EDITORIAL: 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE

PLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETYPLANT SOCIETY.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22222


USEFUL WEBSITESUSEFUL WEBSITESUSEFUL WEBSITESUSEFUL WEBSITESUSEFUL WEBSITES

AND CONTACTAND CONTACTAND CONTACTAND CONTACTAND CONTACT

INFORMATIONINFORMATIONINFORMATIONINFORMATIONINFORMATION

California Native PlantSociety:www.cnps.org, with links toconservation issues, chapters,publications, policy, etc.

For updates on conservationissues:Audubon Society www.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 online voterguide with state-specific nonparti-san election and candidateinformation.

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:

40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

orty years ago an inspired and dedicated group of native plant enthusi-asts, fresh from the battle to save a native plant garden in the East Bay

hills, founded the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Today we havemuch to be thankful for: that small beginning grew into a respected andinfluential native plant conservation organization of over 9,700 members.We are enormously grateful to all the dedicated and talented people whohave built and sustained CNPS over the years.

To celebrate the 40th anniversary of CNPS, we are planning a series ofevents spanning the year 2005. These activities will give members andsupporters the opportunity to acknowledge and share our experiences inthe spirit of friendship that has always characterized our organization. The40th-year events will include activities hosted by both the statewide organi-zation and local chapters of CNPS. The June and September ChapterCouncil meetings (to be held in the Sacramento Valley and SouthernCalifornia areas, respectively) will be enhanced with extra events, such aspresentations or field trips provided by exceptional presenters. We areplanning workshops at these gatherings in which CNPS volunteer groups—such as chapter treasurers, program chairs, or rare plant coordinators—canexchange experiences and learn from each other. There will also be table-top displays and posters where chapters will present who their membersare, their history, their special plants and places, and their work. In addi-tion, we will honor CNPS founders at these meetings and at our annualbanquet in December. We strongly encourage all interested members,together with friends and family, to attend these special Chapter Councilmeeting events. (Look for specific event information and updates in yourCNPS Bulletin.)

We have a new 40th Anniversary logo (shown on page 17) to be used bychapters for materials or events they produce during 2005, as a way ofcelebrating and spreading the news of the valuable work of CNPS to thepublic and local politicians. In addition, two beautiful books will also beavailable for sales and outreach in 2005: the new book on the desert flora,The Best Year Ever, and a new printing of California’s Wild Gardens, nowwith the different subtitle of A Guide to Favorite Botanical Sites.

In addition, we will celebrate our 40th year in each of the 2005 issues ofFremontia. Each issue will begin with an article about several of the CNPSregional chapters, including their history, natural surroundings, and ac-complishments—so that we can be inspired by the great work of othersand the beauty of our botanically diverse state. The next article or articleswill feature statewide programs—so that we can all appreciate the hardwork being done by both paid staff and especially by volunteers. Thisshould be a fun-filled and motivating year for all of us. Let’s join incelebrating the best of our great organization and the people who make itall happen—us!

—Jim Bishop and Diana Hickson, Co-chairsCNPS 40th Anniversary Committee

FFFFF


THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY:

ITS MISSION, HISTORY, AND HEART

by Carol Witham

he mission of the Califor-nia Native Plant Society(CNPS) is to increase un-

derstanding and appreciation ofCalifornia’s native plants and to con-serve them in their natural habitatsthrough education, science, advo-cacy, horticulture, and land stew-ardship. This mission statementclearly recognizes our dual role ofbeing a native plant appreciationclub and being a science-based con-servation organization. These verydifferent but overlapping purposeshave served CNPS well during thepast four decades.

The California Native Plant So-ciety began in 1965 with a specificconservation mission—to save thenative plant garden east of San Fran-cisco Bay (now the Regional ParksBotanic Garden). That same year,Sacramento Valley became the firstofficial chapter of the organizationdue to the efforts and enthusiasm ofG. Ledyard Stebbins and his desireto protect rare plants. By the end ofour first decade, the Society had 12chapters and about 900 members.Since then CNPS membership hasgrown to over 9,700 and is orga-nized into 32 chapters.

From the outset, the foundersof CNPS realized that people weremore enthusiastic about conservingsomething they were familiar with;those that had personally experi-enced the beauty and wonder of theCalifornia flora would more vigor-ously work for its protection. Fieldtrips quickly became a major toolfor increasing membership andsharing native plants and their habi-tats with members of the local com-munity. Every chapter continues tocarry on this tradition—sometimesmixing business with pleasure inorder to count rare plants, survey

T

Mojave Desert Chapter spring 2004 field trip to the Zzyzx area with about 20 members participating; at least 75 species were inflower at this site. Photograph by T. Thomas.


plant communities, or monitor con-servation easements.

Native plant sales, another of ourtraditional outreach activities, startedout of necessity. The first plant salewas held in 1966 for the very practi-cal reason of needing to pay the of-fice rent. Today most chapters holdwell-publicized and highly success-ful native plant sales. Proceeds from

these sales are used to fund chapteractivities. They are also a great wayto attract new members, share thebeauty of native plants, and educatemembers of the community on morewater-conserving alternatives forhome landscaping.

The Society’s dedication to con-servation and other forms of advo-cacy has also grown over the years.What began as an endeavor to savea native botanical garden has growninto far-reaching efforts through-out the state. CNPS gathers infor-mation on rare plants and advo-cates the protection of their habi-tat. We are doing the same for rareplant communities. We encouragegood land management and we fightbad laws and poorly planned devel-

Top: Members of the South Coast Chap-ter at a July 2004 assessment of the WhitePoint Nature Preserve. Photograph byJ. Iwens. • Far left: Members of theRiverside-San Bernardino Chapter at DosPalmas Preserve near the Salton Sea,looking at Washington fan palm (Washing-tonia filifera). Photograph by R. Muertter.• Near left: A San Gabriel MountainsChapter field trip to Eaton Canyon.Photograph by G. McLean. • Bottom left:At the San Diego Chapter’s native plantsale. Photograph by L. Pardy. • Bottomright: An Orange County Chapter hike.Photograph by J. Hampton.


opment. And because we use scien-tific information in our advocacyand conservation efforts, we are awell-respected environmental orga-nization.

While CNPS has grown inmany ways, members always havebeen and always will be the heart ofthe organization. Members sharetheir personal appreciation ofCalifornia’s native plants withfriends and neighbors through gar-dening, photography, wildflowerhikes, and the books that decoratetheir coffee tables. They also con-tribute one-half million dollars an-nually through dues and in responseto fund appeals. These funds arecritical to our ongoing efforts inthe areas of conservation, legisla-tion, rare plants, and vegetation.

Members are special in anotherway as well—they volunteer. Fromthe very beginning, CNPS has beena volunteer-based organization.When something needs to getdone—from organizing a chapterspeaker program to writing a com-ment letter on a developmentproject—chances are it will be doneby a volunteer. And CNPS mem-bers are enthusiastic about theirvolunteerism. Last year volunteerscontributed over 87,000 hours tofurther the mission of CNPS.That’s the equivalent of 42 full-time employees!

Volunteers have found hundredsof ways to contribute their time toCNPS. Our volunteers know thatyou don’t have to be an expert aboutplants, conservation, or anything

else. For example, at the last plantsale I attended, volunteers did ev-erything from growing the plantsto running the cash register. Vol-unteer jobs included unloading theplants, making attractive displays,pricing the plants, providing infor-mation to shoppers, making andselling refreshments, making lunchfor the volunteers, lugging plantsto cars, and giving talks on nativegardening. And this was just one ofmany events being held by the localchapter.

The next time you read yourchapter newsletter, take a close lookat the number of people listed asboard members or committeechairs. These are all dedicated vol-unteers. Or look over the activitiesand events and consider that theyare all being accomplished throughthe efforts of volunteers. Perhapsyou, too, can find a small but per-sonally rewarding task that contrib-utes to the culture and the mission

of CNPS. Every volunteer activityI have ever undertaken in this orga-nization has resulted in new friends,a feeling of accomplishment, and arenewed dedication to both our mis-sion and to the people that makeCNPS what it is. I am proud of whowe are and personally look forwardto many more years of volunteeringfor this great organization.

As CNPS enters into its fifthdecade, we should all celebrate ourgrassroots origins and our dedica-tion to both the native flora and tothe spirit of volunteerism. We dedi-cate the following section in thisissue of Fremontia to all those whohave contributed their own uniquetalents to the past accomplishmentsof CNPS, and in numerous waysboth large and small, helped to pre-serve our precious native plants forfuture generations.

Carol W. Witham, 1141 37th Street, Sac-ramento, CA 95816. [email protected]

Map of the local chapters of the California Native Plant Society (for greater clarity, seemap in color at www.cnps.org under “Chapters”). The chapters summarized in the textinclude the Los Angeles/Santa Monica Mountains Chapter (27), the San GabrielMountains Chapter (28), the Riverside-San Bernardino Chapter (29), the South CoastChapter (30), the Orange County Chapter (31), the San Diego Chapter (32), and theMojave Desert Chapter (33).

A Malibu Bluffs plant walk with the LosAngeles/Santa Monica Chapter of CNPS.Photograph by E. Landis.


LOS ANGELES/LOS ANGELES/LOS ANGELES/LOS ANGELES/LOS ANGELES/

SANTA MONICASANTA MONICASANTA MONICASANTA MONICASANTA MONICA

MOUNTAINSMOUNTAINSMOUNTAINSMOUNTAINSMOUNTAINS

CHAPTERCHAPTERCHAPTERCHAPTERCHAPTER

Size of chapter: Approximately 500membersWebsite address: www.lacnps.org

In 1967 the Sierra Santa MonicaChapter formed, with HelenFunkhouser serving as first presi-dent. Over the years, public confu-sion about our area of influence ledto changing the chapter name toSanta Monica Mountains Chapterand, more recently, to Los Angeles/Santa Monica Mountains Chapter.

Due to the chapter’s geographi-cal boundaries, we are faced with amultitude of urban-wildland inter-face challenges. The chapter in-cludes Los Angeles, a densely ur-ban area containing primarily iso-lated patches of native habitat. How-

ing, revegetation, horticulture, edu-cation, communication, and part-nerships.

Augmenting everything else wedo each year are activities specifi-cally geared toward public outreach,including 11 monthly educationalprograms, tabling at public events,our bimonthly Toyon newsletter, andour informational website (www.lacnps.org). Our chapter has also pub-lished three books: Flowering Plantsof the Santa Monica Mountains:Coastal and Chaparral Regions inSouthern California by Nancy Dale,Southern California Native Plants forSchool Gardens by Betsey Landis, anda children’s book, Grandmother Oakby Rosi Dagit. We have also devel-oped a recommended list of nativeplants available to homeowners,landscapers, and developers in theSanta Monica Mountains.

SAN GABRIELSAN GABRIELSAN GABRIELSAN GABRIELSAN GABRIEL

MOUNTAINSMOUNTAINSMOUNTAINSMOUNTAINSMOUNTAINS


Size of chapter: Approximately 180membersWebsite address: www.cnps-sgm.org

What began in 1985 as an offshootof the Los Angeles/Santa MonicaMountains Chapter has now blos-somed into the vibrant San GabrielMountains Chapter. Over the yearsthere were periods when the chap-ter was “drought deciduous,” butwe always have grown new leavesand branches, and today we’re quitevigorous.

Our well-attended evening pro-

SEVEN SOUTHERN CHAPTERS OFSEVEN SOUTHERN CHAPTERS OFSEVEN SOUTHERN CHAPTERS OFSEVEN SOUTHERN CHAPTERS OFSEVEN SOUTHERN CHAPTERS OF

THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYTHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYTHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYTHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETYTHE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

Each issue of Fremontia Volume 33 will include summaries of local chapters, beginning with chapters in the south, andproceeding northward. As editor, it is my hope that readers will be inspired to read the newsletter or attend a meetingor field trip of one of the other chapters, or if you are not already a member of CNPS, that you will join us! (Membershipform appears on the inside back cover.)

ever it also encompasses the nearbySanta Monica Mountains and otheradjacent areas that include a diversepalette of habitat types, includingdesert, mountains, marshland, andseashore areas.

Most of our chapter board mem-bers also serve on committees ortask forces of public agencies andgovernmental entities or of othernonprofit organizations interestedin the environment. We offer a fullarray of activities for people inter-ested in conserving and enjoyingour native flora. These includechapter hikes and walks, fungusforays, desert field trips, rare plantsearches, weed wars, revegetationprojects, native plant gardening, ouroutdoor Spring Wildflower Showand Fall Plant Sale, a new memberspicnic, and a Garden Party. To ac-complish our varied goals we makeuse of a host of conservation tools:local botanical knowledge, weed-

The Los Angeles/Santa Monica Chapter plant sale. Photograph by S. Hartman.


grams reflect the diligence and pro-fessionalism of our Program Chairs.Many of the presenters are affili-ated with Rancho Santa Ana BotanicGarden on the Chapter’s easternedge, so we hear regularly from bothprofessors and graduate students,all with fascinating research to re-late. At least one program each yearhas a horticultural theme.

Under the Oaks: Native Plants forFoothill Gardens is the chapter’s an-nual fundraiser. Late fall is primeplanting time, and we are usuallythe last (for the calendar year) CNPSplant sale in southern California.The sale features native plants andwildflower seeds appropriate for gar-dens in the San Gabriel, San Fer-nando, and Pomona valleys. Eachsale also features a special event suchas a book signing, a CD-ROM de-but, or a lecture.

The chapter sponsors two kindsof field trips, both of which are out-standing in quality. The first is aregular monthly walk about theEaton Canyon Natural Area in thefoothills of the San Gabriel Moun-tains near Pasadena. These trips tothe canyon are an excellent way tolearn the local flora and to beginunderstanding basic botany. Eachmonth the leaders are different, andbring a new outlook and their ownspecial expertise to the familiar walk.

The second type of walk ex-plores the San Gabriel Mountains,and affords participants numerousopportunities to study their infinite

variations. We look at willows inwinter, ferns in early spring, andseeds and fruits in early fall. Thereare wildflowers in the burn areas(the fire-followers) and denizens ofdripping springs, subalpine plantsin the sackungen (ridgetop depres-sions), endangered species in thecarbonates, and lovely lilies in thesnowmelt gullies.

All of our activities are high-lighted in our well-illustrated quar-terly newsletter, The Paintbrush.The newsletter also contains mem-ber-authored accounts of hikes orgardening adventures, field guidesfor field trips, local plant profiles,Gabrielino plant articles by Tongvaelder, Mark Acuna, and book andwebsite reviews.

RIVERSIDE–RIVERSIDE–RIVERSIDE–RIVERSIDE–RIVERSIDE–

SAN BERNARDINOSAN BERNARDINOSAN BERNARDINOSAN BERNARDINOSAN BERNARDINO


Size of Chapter: Approximately 180membersChapter Website: www.enceliacnps.org

From desert slopes of ocotillo andbrittlebush to vernal pools and oaksof the inland valleys, the territoryfor the Riverside-San Bernardinochapter is large and diverse in floraand vegetation. Our chapter includesall of Riverside County and south-western San Bernardino County. Asis true throughout CNPS, our vol-unteers make it happen.

For some years the chapterwas somewhat inactive. In 2001,through the efforts of CNPS South-ern California Botanist IleeneAnderson and then state boardmember Lorrae Fuentes, our chap-ter was revitalized. In the process, awhole new CNPS chapter was born,the Mojave Desert Chapter. Since2001 we have had ongoing activi-ties as we try to reach out to mem-bers across a large part of inlandsouthern California.

This fast growing region pre-

sents ongoing challenges for rareplant issues and conservation. Con-servation chair Alison Shilling andRare Plant Chair Fred Roberts aretireless in their efforts to supportnative plant conservation. Withgreat support from Ileene Ander-son, CNPS has a strong presence inconservation issues including largeregional conservation plans.

Our first plant sale was held inOctober 2003 in cooperation withthe Riverside/Corona ResourceConservation District. We have co-sponsored with state CNPS staff aVegetation Sampling Workshopwith another one planned for Spring2005. Propagation workshops in thespring find our dedicated board hor-ticulturists Susan Jett, MichaelDuval, and Alison Shilling teachingbeginning native plant gardenersand helping to provide materials forfuture plant sales.

San Gabriel Mountain Chapter membersat Mt. Hillyer. Photograph by G. McLean.

Top: Lorrae Fuentes at the outreach tableat the Green Faire with the Riverside-San Bernardino Chapter. • Bottom:Members of the Riverside-San Bernar-dino Chapter in a patch of fireweed (Epi-lobium angustifolium). Photographs by N.Rutherford.


We strive to get the word outabout growing natives and nativeplant conservation issues. LorraeFuentes, our education and com-munity outreach chair, makes surewe are often out in the communityspreading the word about CNPS.We are helped tremendously byRancho Santa Ana Botanic Gardenwhich provides space for CNPS attheir plant sales and other events.

With lots of requests for helpwith inland area school gardens, weprepared an extensive supplemen-tal list for inland/desert regions toaccompany Betsey Landis's won-derful school gardens book.

Invasive plants are anotherchapter target. Renowned invasivesfoe Bill Neill spreads his effortsbetween Orange County and ourchapter in the battle against tama-risk and other exotics. Co-chair RolfMuertter keeps us in touch withthe next invasive removal projectand provides great information toour members via our chapter web-site, www.enceliacnps.org.

Our wonderful quarterly news-letter, The Encelia, is under the ablestewardship of Nancy Rutherfordwho also keeps track of our mem-bership. With help from our chap-ter outreach coordinator, SheilaMcMahon, our members are keptwell informed and in touch.

SOUTH COASTSOUTH COASTSOUTH COASTSOUTH COASTSOUTH COAST


Size of chapter: Approximately 100membersWebsite address: www.sccnps.org

One of the smallest CNPS chap-ters, the South Coast Chapter wasfounded in 1982. One of the uniquecharacteristics of the area is its geo-logical link to the Channel Islands.Some of the rare plants of the PalosVerdes Peninsula, located within thechapter’s assigned area, only occurin one other spot—the Channel Is-lands. We are very much a coastal

chapter, and our coastal area hasbeen subject to intense developmentpressures for many years. However,in recent years we have been pleasedto see a number of coastal restora-tion projects beginning to occur.Although much of the area encom-passed by our chapter boundarieshas been urbanized, our area alsoincludes the only remaining seg-ment of coastal sage scrub betweenthe Santa Monica Mountains andOrange County. The protection andpreservation of this remnant of na-tive habitat has been a primary fo-cus of our chapter in recent years.Currently a Natural CommunitiesConservation Plan (NCCP) is be-ing finalized by the city of RanchoPalos Verdes, with the hopes thatsome of the key areas may be pur-chased for preservation.

Our chapter has been diligentabout commenting on proposeddevelopment projects and their im-pacts to our native plants and habi-tat areas. Several of our memberswork on committees and with citiesand other entities to further ourconservation goals.

The South Coast Chapter hasalways had a strong horticulturalbase. We hold a plant sale every

year, a number of public programsabout gardening with native plants,and an annual Spring Garden Tour.For many years we maintained anative plant garden at Point Vicentein Rancho Palos Verdes. The gar-den was shut down several yearsago to remodel the visitor facility,and reopening was delayed whenlead contamination from previousmilitary use was discovered in thesoil. We are anticipating that con-struction of the visitor center willbe back on track soon, and that bylate 2005 we will be able to beginrestoring and expanding the nativeplant garden.

ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTY


Size of chapter: Approximately 370membersWebsite address: www.occnps.org

Orange County is one of Califor-nia’s smallest, yet it enjoys greatbotanical diversity. Habitats rangefrom coastal sage scrub to foothillchaparral, dune environments to up-land mixed conifer forest. Severalhighly localized endemics are found

South Coast Chapter’s Annual Picnic on July 11, 2004 at White Point Nature Preserve.Pictured from left to right: Angelika Brinkmann-Busi, Fabrizio Busi, Corinne Johnson,Barbara Sattler, Ric Dykzeul, and Ralph Iwens. Photograph by J. Iwens.


in the county. Unfortunately, thepleasant climate and proximity tothe ocean has made it a magnet forpeople, and the resulting develop-ment, which has obliterated irre-placeable habitat throughout thecounty, continues as a major threat.On the positive side, much of theland has been set aside in countyand state parks, and in preservesdedicated under NCCP Programs.

Our chapter was founded in1980. Initially, our activities focusedon botany, field trips, and horticul-ture. In recent years, with pressurefrom development, we have increas-ingly directed our energy towardconservation in response to pres-sure from development of thecounty’s remaining natural edges.At present, our key regional issue isthe proposed Ranch Mission Viejodevelopment plan and the officiallyseparate but functionally inter-twined toll road extension. At riskis the integrity of the San MateoCreek watershed habitat—the lastwild river south of Ventura—and

the rare plants, animals, and habi-tats found there.

We keep busy supporting edu-cation through our grants programand development of curriculum. Wehelp with planting and weeding theCalifornia Native Collection at theUniversity of California, Irvine, Ar-boretum. Fall and spring plant salesprovide funds for the chapter, and

for the past three years enthusiasticgardeners have opened their nativegardens for a Spring Garden Tour.Nevertheless, we still have time forfun with a vigorous schedule of fieldtrips in and outside the county.

Our bimonthly newsletter isposted to our website where thereare also conservation updates, linksto our field trip plant lists, field tripinformation with pictures, somehorticultural tips, and even a quiz.Visit us there!

SAN DIEGO CHAPTERSAN DIEGO CHAPTERSAN DIEGO CHAPTERSAN DIEGO CHAPTERSAN DIEGO CHAPTER

Size of chapter: Approximately 850membersWebsite address: www.cnpssd.org

The San Diego Chapter of CNPSis the southernmost chapter in thestate, and is home to native plantcommunities as varied as the beachdunes along the Pacific strand, toalpine meadows and desert dunesnear the Arizona border. More sen-sitive plant species (over 200) arefound here than in any other countyin the continental United States.Reasons for this plant diversity in-clude the variations in topography,altitude (from sea level to 4,000feet), the moisture gradient betweenthe coast and the desert, differencesin soil, and a number of Baja Cali-fornia species whose range just en-ters the southern part of the county.

The San Diego region supportsseveral rare habitats such as mari-time succulent scrub and southernmaritime chaparral. CNPS mem-bers and the general public are in-vited to learn about these uniqueplants at our monthly program inBalboa Park, which features a pre-sentation and book sales.

The conflict between a grow-ing population and the need to pro-tect endangered species has madeSan Diego a pioneer in the devel-opment of large-scale, long-term,multispecies Habitat ConservationPlans that seek to achieve a balance

between growth and conservation.From the perspective of the SanDiego chapter, the local plan hassuffered a few failures, includingthe filling of “preserved” vernalpools, and the destruction of a ma-jor population of a protected spe-cies. Monitoring this plan is one ofthe tasks of the chapter’s conserva-tion committee. CNPS-San Diegoalso actively works to conserve ourfloristic heritage by writing com-ment letters on development pro-posals, serving as a local expert onplants to local agencies, and filinglawsuits if necessary. The chapteris currently organizing work par-ties to support the survival ofNuttall’s lotus (Lotus nuttallianus)in Mission Bay, and willowy mon-ardella (Monardella viminea) inLopez Canyon.

We recognize that invasive non-native plants are a major threat tonative plant habitats, and have de-veloped a number of educationalprograms. The chapter has becomea leader in fighting invasive speciesin projects as varied as proposinglegislation to control the sale ofpampas grass, holding work partiesto hand-weed sensitive habitats, lob-bying agencies such as CalTrans touse more native plants, and work-ing with the local chapter of theAmerican Society of LandscapeArchitects to develop a “Do Not

Orange County Chapter field trip toLaguna Canyon (top). Photograph by J.Hampton.

At the San Diego Chapter’s native plantsale. Photograph by L. Pardy.

1 0 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 3 : 1 , J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 5

Plant” brochure for Southern Cali-fornia, to guide designers away fromproblem plants.

For many of our members, gar-dening with natives is their primaryinterest, and meetings that spotlightnative gardening techniques are al-ways popular. Every October inBalboa Park the chapter holds a na-tive plant sale, a major source offunds for the chapter. The plantsale succeeds due to the efforts ofdozens of volunteers. The thou-sands of dollars raised on this dayallow us to pursue our goals in con-servation, restoration, and educa-tion throughout the year. For ex-ample, the chapter has launched aprogram to award grants and freeconsultations to teachers who areestablishing native plant gardens atlocal schools. To date, 13 San Di-ego County schools have receivedfunds to develop native gardens.Our members also staff CNPSbooths at fairs and exhibitionsaround the county.

MOJAVE CHAPTERMOJAVE CHAPTERMOJAVE CHAPTERMOJAVE CHAPTERMOJAVE CHAPTER

Size of chapter: Approximately 50membersWebsite address: none

The Mojave Desert Chapter ofCNPS was started in 2000 as a splin-ter group of the Riverside/San Ber-nardino Chapter. Our membershipis primarily in the Victorville area,but there are a few members that arescattered two to four hours distant—out here we usually measure dis-tance in time instead of miles. TheMojave Desert Chapter covers theregion north of the transverse rangesin the northern portion of San Ber-nardino County, an area roughly thesize of Costa Rica. The landscape ispredominantly public and is man-aged by the Department of Defense,the National Park Service, and theBureau of Land Management. Theseagencies offer consistent opportuni-ties and challenges to the environ-

mental community to monitor andcomment upon actions that have thepotential to adversely affect the natu-ral resources of the desert.

Several rare and endemic desertplants occur on these lands, so thereis plenty of work for each of ourmembers just looking after them.Edwards Air Force Base is hometo the world’s largest stands ofCalochortus striatus and Cymopterusdeserticola. China Lake Naval Weap-ons Center contains virtually theentire distribution of Cryptanthaclokeyi. Fort Irwin, the US Army’stank training center, has significantpopulations of Astragalus jaegerianusand Cymopterus deserticola. Twenty-nine Palms Marine Corps TrainingCenter has 80 percent of the distri-bution of Escobaria vivipara var.alversonii. The Mojave NationalPreserve manages the only knownlocations of Eriogonum ericifoliumvar. thornei and Astragalus cimae var.cimae. Joshua Tree National Parkmanages Monardella robisonii andportions of the distribution ofLinanthus maculatus. The Bureau ofLand Management has the major-ity of the occurrences of Mimulusmohavensis and Eriophyllum mohav-ensis. The only extant location forPlagiobothrys parishii is on a singleprivate parcel under the county ofSan Bernardino’s planning respon-

sibility. Other significant plant oc-currences that are found within thechapter boundaries include the old-est known living plant, the ‘King-Clone’ creosote bush (Larrea tri-dentata), immediately adjacent to adesignated BLM off-highway ve-hicle unrestricted play area, and thesaguaro cactus (Carnegiea gigantea)in the Whipple Mountains.

The chapter holds meetings atthe Victor Valley College wherethere is a small registered her-barium. Pam MacKay, a biology/botany instructor at the college andfounding member of the chapter,recently authored a color photo-graphic guide, Mojave Desert Wild-flowers, that uniquely contains someof the rarest species to help educatethe public about the rare and en-demic plants of the region. Our ac-tivities consist mainly of winter andspring field trips and bimonthlymeetings, and we attempt to pro-duce a quarterly newsletter. Wehave an active conservation chair,specifically knowledgeable about theBLM. And last but not least, one ofour members, Tom Elder, is work-ing with other CNPS members toorganize the photographic tax-onomy project at the state level.

Mojave Desert Chapter field trip in 2003 to find Prunus eremophila, newly describedby Barry Prigge (in Madroño 14(4) 2002). Twenty-five members went along on this tripto the Eastern Mojave National Preserve in the Vontriger Hills, and were rewardedwith finding the plant. Photograph by T. Thomas.

Each chapter summary was authored by oneor more representatives from that chapter.

F R E M O N T I A 1 1V O L U M E 3 3 : 1 , J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 5

THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

AT THE STATE LEVEL:

WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO

by Michael Tomlinson

hen the founding mem-bers got together in Ber-keley in 1965 for the first

meeting of CNPS, I doubt theycould have conceived of what theSociety would become 40 yearslater. How do you really picture 32chapters, more than 9,700 mem-bers, 87,000 volunteer hours, and15 staff people? How could theyever have predicted that CNPS

would become the largest nativeplant society in the United States?

Today CNPS has an office inSacramento that serves as its stateheadquarters, three staffed pro-grams, and several employees acrossthe state. CNPS also continues torely on its traditional strength: itsextraordinarily dedicated volunteercorps. In fact, many CNPS pro-grams are “staffed” entirely by vol-

unteers, making CNPS fairly un-usual in the nonprofit world. In 2003volunteers gave 87,000 hours of theirtime (equivalent to 42 full-time em-ployees!) to activities ranging fromorganizing native plant sales andcommenting on land use and man-agement plans, to taking school kidson field trips to vernal pools.

CNPS STAFFEDCNPS STAFFEDCNPS STAFFEDCNPS STAFFEDCNPS STAFFED

PROGRAMSPROGRAMSPROGRAMSPROGRAMSPROGRAMS

A pivotal question in most con-servation issues involving plants inCalifornia is, “How rare is this plantor plant community, and where is itlocated?” Good answers to suchquestions—or, in other words, goodscience—becomes the basis for cre-ating viable habitat protection andmanagement plans. CNPS plant sci-ence and conservation staff work ina continuum; the Rare Plant andVegetation programs help definethe rarity of plants and vegetationtypes, and the Conservation pro-grams work to make sure that thisgood science guides planning andmanagement decisions. For in-stance, data from CNPS vegetationsurveys in the San Dieguito Riverwatershed have provided critical in-formation for prioritizing land pur-chases for the San Dieguito RiverValley Park.

THE FIRST CNPSTHE FIRST CNPSTHE FIRST CNPSTHE FIRST CNPSTHE FIRST CNPS

PROGRAM: RAREPROGRAM: RAREPROGRAM: RAREPROGRAM: RAREPROGRAM: RARE

PLANTSPLANTSPLANTSPLANTSPLANTS

Founded in the early 1970s, theCNPS Rare Plant Program devel-ops current, accurate information

Joe Molter, a Bureau of Land Management Botanist, picturedhere with his discovery of the first California occurrence ofGentner’s fritillary (Fritillaria gentneri) in Siskiyou County,2003. All photographs by the author except as noted.

Gentner’s fritillary (left) is listed as Endangered by thefederal government and was recently added to the CNPSRare Plant Program’s Inventory of Rare and EndangeredPlants. Before Joe’s discovery, the plant was thought to occuronly in Oregon. Recently, more plants were found about amile east of the first locality. This perennial herbaceousmember of the lily family grows in oak woodland and openchaparral at 1,080–1,120 meters elevation. The species isparticularly vulnerable to a number of existing and potentialthreats because its populations are very small.

W


on the distribution, ecology, andconservation status of California’srare and endangered plants, and usesthis information to promote sci-ence-based plant conservation inCalifornia. During its considerablehistory, the Rare Plant Program hasdeveloped a reputation amongpolicymakers and stakeholdergroups throughout the state for sci-entific accuracy and integrity. TheProgram’s data are widely acceptedas the standard for information on

THE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE OF CNPSTHE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE OF CNPSTHE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE OF CNPSTHE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE OF CNPSTHE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE OF CNPS

Chapter council meeting of the California Native Plant Society.

Pam Muick, Executive Direc-tor of CNPS.

ers) are elected to twoyear terms. There are noterm limits. The Chap-ter Council Chair andVice Chair also serve onthe Board. The Boardhas ultimate fiscal andlegal responsibility forCNPS. It works withthe CNPS ExecutiveDirector to approve theannual budget and program work plans, and to en-sure that these plans follow the policy directions ofthe Chapter Council. The Board has ultimate respon-sibility for hiring the CNPS Executive Director. The

ll members of the California Native Plant Soci-ety belong to one of its 32 chapters. The state-

wide Society is run by chapter delegates who formthe Chapter Council; the Board; the paid staff (bothcontractual and salaried) overseen by the ExecutiveDirector; and the programs that are run by volun-teers. The membership, through its Chapter Coun-cil delegates, works to determine the policy objec-tives of our society, and the Board and ExecutiveDirector work to implement these objectives in afiscally and legally responsible manner. (For currentlistings of Chapter Council, Board, Staff, and Pro-gram Directors, see roster on the inside front coverof this issue.)

CNPS CHAPTER COUNCILCNPS CHAPTER COUNCILCNPS CHAPTER COUNCILCNPS CHAPTER COUNCILCNPS CHAPTER COUNCIL

This body is composed of a single representativefrom each chapter. The Chapter Council delegateselect a Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary. The Coun-cil meets on a quarterly basis. At Chapter Councilmeetings delegates debate policy issues and give policydirection to the CNPS Board of Directors. The Chap-ter Council also elects the CNPS Board of Directorsand Board officers. Standing Chapter Council com-mittees include: Bylaws, Chapter Support, Gover-nance/Elections, Meeting Organization, and Pro-gram Policy.

CNPS BOARD OF DIRECTORSCNPS BOARD OF DIRECTORSCNPS BOARD OF DIRECTORSCNPS BOARD OF DIRECTORSCNPS BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Board members (up to 11) and Board officers(President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasur-

the rarity and endangerment statusof the California flora.

The primary means of distrib-uting this information is throughthe continually updated Inventoryof Rare and Endangered Plants ofCalifornia, a database of more than2,000 rare and uncommon planttaxa. It is available in print, onCD, and can be viewed at theCNPS website, www.cnps.org. Theinformation in the Inventory hasplayed a significant role in gaining

federal listings for nearly 200plants, and state listings for 29plants. These listings provide in-creased protection for these plantsand their habitats.

The CNPS Rare Plant Bota-nist, Misa Ward, coordinates, fa-cilitates, and augments the work ofscores of CNPS volunteer botanistsat both the state and local levels.She also works closely with bota-nists from state and federal agen-cies by sharing data on rare plants.

AAAAA


the authoritative publication on thesubject. Recognizing the paucity ofquantitative field data to supportthe definitions of vegetation typesthroughout much of the state, theCNPS program has developedvegetation sampling protocols andtrained numerous volunteers andagency staff in their use.

CNPS vegetation staff travelaround the state teaching volun-teers and agency professionals uni-form, scientific methods to describe

CNPS Board meets at least six times a year, usually onthe same weekend as the Chapter Council. StandingBoard committees include: Bylaws, Chapter Support,Executive, Finance, Fundraising, Leadership andEvaluation, and Planning and Evaluation.

THE STATE OFFICETHE STATE OFFICETHE STATE OFFICETHE STATE OFFICETHE STATE OFFICE

The 32 chapters across the state are the heart ofthe society and, naturally, many CNPS members’most immediate connection to the organization. How-ever, the combined efforts of the chapters and stateoffice create an organization that does more than thesum of its parts. The CNPS state office supports allprogram and chapter activities with expert guidanceon statewide and federal issues. This includes runningand staffing the Plant Science, Conservation, andLegislation programs. In addition, the staff of theCNPS state office maintains the book and poster salesprogram. Of great importance, the office staff pro-vides the essentials of bookkeeping, payroll, and auditservices; insurance for all CNPS activities; paymentof taxes and upkeep of nonprofit status; managementof membership and fundraising; website and Internetservices; general public relations and fielding of ques-tions; and coordination of statewide meetings.

CNPS STAFF AND VOLUNTEERCNPS STAFF AND VOLUNTEERCNPS STAFF AND VOLUNTEERCNPS STAFF AND VOLUNTEERCNPS STAFF AND VOLUNTEER

PROGRAMSPROGRAMSPROGRAMSPROGRAMSPROGRAMS

Who are CNPS members and how do we protectplants? Images of Dr. Seuss’s brave Lorax leap tomind: “I am the Lorax I speak for the trees.” Similarly,CNPS members—volunteers and staff—are peoplewho speak for California’s plants and habitats.

CNPS Vice President, Sandy McCoy, honoring Sue Brittingat the end of her tenure as CNPS President in 2003.

VEGETATION:VEGETATION:VEGETATION:VEGETATION:VEGETATION:

SAMPLING THE BIGSAMPLING THE BIGSAMPLING THE BIGSAMPLING THE BIGSAMPLING THE BIG

PICTUREPICTUREPICTUREPICTUREPICTURE

The Vegetation Program hadits origins in 1990 when a small adhoc subcommittee of the CNPSRare Plant Program proposed a par-allel program to develop compa-rable information about California’splant communities. In 1995 CNPSpublished A Manual of CaliforniaVegetation, which quickly became

and map plant communities suchas coastal prairie, redwood forest,and high mountain meadows. Thisis vital data collection—fundamen-tal both to science and to creatingsound, sustainable ecosystem man-agement by state, federal, andcounty agencies.

The Vegetation Program alsoserves as a nexus for the accumula-tion and dissemination of informa-tion about California vegetation. Itcoordinates a range of volunteer and

CNPS members speak for the plants using factsand science as advocacy tools. Through the CNPSprograms, volunteers and staff gather facts and con-tinuously add to the knowledge about common, rare,and endangered native plants. Many of our chapterand state activities are vehicles for sharing informa-tion: talks, hikes, school gardens, plant sales, populararticles, books, and posters. We also share this infor-mation when we testify at public hearings and to thelegislature, participate in letter writing campaigns,and occasionally use legal action to insure that plantsare being protected. Through the structure of thestate programs, and with the assistance of paid staff,CNPS members can more effectively speak forCalifornia’s plants, thus sharing our unabashed loveand appreciation of California’s native plants andtheir habitats.


agency involvement in vegetationconservation, from grassroots fieldsampling by local CNPS chapters,to focused work on individual veg-etation types requiring definition,to multi-agency coordinated proj-ects for broad-scale mapping andclassification of vegetation. Theprogram’s principle responsibilityis the maintenance and developmentof the CNPS vegetation classifica-tion. It is also responsible for coor-dinating and integrating ecologicalsampling information on vegetationthroughout the state.

The Vegetation Program hasdeveloped digital databases knownas the California Vegetation Infor-mation System (CVIS) and theRapid Assessment database to ac-complish these goals. CVIS con-sists of two parts: a Sampling Data-base, which archives the vegetationsamples collected by CNPS andother agencies and organizations,and the Classification Database,which houses the information onthe descriptions of each of thevegetation types identified in AManual of California Vegetation. TheRapid Assessment method also hasits own database to archive vegeta-

tion samples, which provides addi-tional species, environmental, andsite-quality information to charac-terize vegetation and habitats.

CNPS staff recently completed

sampling and classification fieldwork on 1.3 million acres in SanDiego and Western Riversidecounties. Having now defined thetypes and distributions of plantcommunities in this growing re-gion of the state, it will be easier tofocus CNPS conservation and res-toration efforts. Current CNPSstaff in the Vegetation Programinclude Vegetation Ecologists JulieEvens and Anne Klein, and Veg-etation Assistants Sau San andJeanne Taylor.

CONSERVATIONCONSERVATIONCONSERVATIONCONSERVATIONCONSERVATION

The Conservation Program staffand volunteers serve as advocatesfor science-based land managementpractices. Their charge is to con-serve native plant species and theirhabitats on public and private landsin California. There are laws, regu-lations, and ordinances at all levelsof government that are intended toprotect plants. Some accomplish

CNPS members looking atPeirson’s milkvetch (Astragalusmagdalenae var. peirsonii) at Algo-dones Dunes in Imperial County.

For the past decade the CNPSConservation Program has madeextensive efforts to protect Algo-dones Dunes habitat and the suiteof endemic plant species that livethere from off-road vehicles. In2004 CNPS helped the US Fishand Wildlife Service (FWS) reacha decision based on good sciencewhen it turned back efforts byoff-road groups trying to removefederal protections for the

Peirson’s milkvetch, and determined that off-road vehicle use inthe area continues to threaten the existence of this species. However,later that year FWS issued a Final Critical Habitat Rule for thePeirson’s milkvetch that reduced the area of land on which theplant will be protected by more than 60%. The ConservationProgram is currently exploring all remaining avenues to protectthese amazing dune dwellers.

CNPS members surveying serpentine vegetation on Coyote Ridge in southernSanta Clara County. In 2004 the CNPS Vegetation Program and the SantaClara Valley Chapter completed a multi-year vegetation survey of theremarkable serpentine plant communities on Coyote Ridge in southern SantaClara County. The survey more than doubled the list of known plants in thearea and generated data that will be vital to a new multispecies habitatconservation plan begun by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The plan isrequired because the area has been declared Critical Habitat for the threatenedbay checkerspot butterfly. CNPS surveyed more than 30 different plantassociations, including at least 10 new associations for California, such asthose involving the Mt. Hamilton thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. campylon),serpentine grasslands, and shrublands. Surveyors discovered a rare plant notpreviously known from the Hamilton Range, the Loma Prieta hoita (Hoitastrobilina) and a new population of the state and federally listed TiburonIndian paintbrush (Castilleja affinis ssp. neglecta).


this goal, and the program works toensure they are used as intended.Other laws are less useful and soprogram staff work with the appro-priate jurisdiction or agency to re-examine and modify sections per-taining to plant issues.

Conservation staff use science-based information provided by theCNPS Plant Science Program andpromote the use of this informa-tion by public agencies, local juris-dictions, and others involved inland-use decisions. CNPS chaptervolunteers monitor, observe, andfollow what is actually happeningin the field—what is done or pro-posed within their areas. They tes-tify, offer comments, and help in-terpret the best available scientificinformation to decision-makers.Because the state and federal En-

dangered Species Acts provide themost fundamental protection forplants in most instances, much ofthe work of CNPS relies on andinvokes these laws. Challenging orchanging them has been an impor-tant topic in recent years.

For instance, in the past decade,CNPS has played a leading role inthe nation’s first Habitat Conserva-tion Plans (HCPs) in southern Cali-fornia. Through our participationwe have learned about the opportu-nities and limitations of the col-laborative and consensus-driven re-gional plans. Our experience is thatit is critical to be involved in theseplans from their inception and workwith all parties. For instance, in theWest Riverside HCP, without theconsistent presence of the CNPSSouthern California Botanist Ileene

Anderson, native plants would nothave been included in the planningprocess.

Within the Conservation Pro-grams there are several areas offocus, including Legislation, Tim-ber/Forestry, Southern California,and the Native Plant ConservationCampaign (NPCC) (see page 16).The East Bay Chapter also recentlyadded a new staff member, conser-vation analyst Jessica Jean Olson.David Chipping is the Conserva-tion Program director.

LEGISLATIONLEGISLATIONLEGISLATIONLEGISLATIONLEGISLATION

The Legislative Program’s mis-sion is to ensure that persons for-mulating laws and regulations at alllevels—local, state, and federal, and

Southern California Regional Conservation Committee, at the Eaton Canyon Nature Center (home of the San Gabriel MountainsChapter) in November 2003. Back row (left to right): David Chipping (San Luis Obispo Chapter and state Conservation ProgramChair), Dave Magney (Channel Islands Chapter), Dave Fleitner (San Diego Chapter), Rick Fisher (San Gabriel Chapter), Pam Muick(CNPS Executive Director). Middle row: Barbara Sattler (South Coast Chapter), Cindy Burrascano (San Diego Chapter), AlisonShilling (Riverside/San Bernardino Chapter), Betsey Landis (Los Angeles/Santa Monica Mountains Chapter), Daniel Pritchett(Bristlecone Chapter), Tim Thomas (Mojave Chapter). Front Row: Steve Hartman (Los Angeles/Santa Monica Mountains Chapter),Celia Kutcher (Orange County Chapter), Ileene Anderson (CNPS Senior Conservation Botanist), David Sundstrom (South CoastChapter). Photograph by S. Hartman.


within the legislative and adminis-trative spheres—understand theimportance of California’s nativeflora and the serious threats facingthe long-term survival of many spe-cies. The CNPS mission statementclearly directs all of its programs toprotect and preserve California’snative flora, and sometimes this ne-cessitates influencing legislative ac-tions. The program accomplishesthis by monitoring how government

actions may affect plants, whetherthrough the county permit processor by compliance of individualprojects with federal law. VernGoehring, a part-time staff legisla-tive advocate, helps coordinate statelegal issues and works with localchapter volunteers and Conserva-tion Program staff.

TIMBER/FORESTRYTIMBER/FORESTRYTIMBER/FORESTRYTIMBER/FORESTRYTIMBER/FORESTRY

The CNPS Forestry Program isdedicated to protecting California’sforests and woodlands through sci-ence, advocacy, and chapter partici-pation. A recent major victory forthe program was the upholding of aruling that gives plants equal statusto animals in the review of timberharvest plans. This means that rareplants remain protected on privatetimberlands, thanks to the vigilanceof the CNPS Forestry Program andbotanists at the California Depart-ment of Fish and Game. The rulingresulted from a case monitored bythe Forestry Program since 2001, inwhich the California Departmentof Forestry and Fire Protection(CDF) rejected a timber harvestingplan that did not adequately addressthreats to rare plants.

SOUTHERNSOUTHERNSOUTHERNSOUTHERNSOUTHERN

CALIFORNIACALIFORNIACALIFORNIACALIFORNIACALIFORNIA

CNPS has a part-time staff per-son working on behalf of the orga-nization in southern California.Ileene Anderson, formerly South-ern California Regional Botanist andnow Senior Conservation Botanist,advocates on a variety of plant con-servation issues concerning privatelands such as Newhall Ranch andTejon Ranch, or concerning publiclands such as those managed by theBLM or USFS. She also works onHabitat Conservation Plans andNatural Communities ConservationPlans. Ileene has also been a leadplayer in an innovative, cooperative

stakeholder- and science-based planto protect endangered carbonateplants in the San Bernardino Moun-tains. If current trends continue, theCarbonate Habitat ManagementStrategy (CHMS) will be a modelof what can be achieved when con-servationists, businesses, and gov-ernment agencies sit at the tableand work in good faith to solve dif-ficult problems.

THE NATIVE PLANTTHE NATIVE PLANTTHE NATIVE PLANTTHE NATIVE PLANTTHE NATIVE PLANT

CONSERVATIONCONSERVATIONCONSERVATIONCONSERVATIONCONSERVATION

CAMPAIGNCAMPAIGNCAMPAIGNCAMPAIGNCAMPAIGN

The Native Plant ConservationCampaign (NPCC) is a joint projectof the California Native Plant Soci-ety and the Center for BiologicalDiversity (CBD). Emily Roberson,former CNPS Senior Policy Ana-lyst, now with CBD, helped formthe coalition in 2001 and continuesto staff it. The NPCC is a nationalgrass-roots network of state nativeplant societies, botanic gardens, andother local and regional native plantscience and conservation organiza-tions, representing nearly 60,000individual members in 29 states.The NPCC is the first and onlyorganization dedicated to federaladvocacy on behalf of native plantspecies and communities.

A key part of the project’s mis-sion is to provide low- or no-costtools to help local native plant or-ganizations educate the public,policymakers, agencies, and themedia about the values of andthreats to our nation’s native plants.An initial NPCC success was help-ing convince the US Forest Serviceto increase its staff of full-time bota-nists by 40 positions—a 30 percentincrease!

Another success story concernsthe federal native plants develop-ment program, which funds effortsby the Bureau of Land Manage-ment and the Forest Service to col-lect and propagate local nativeplants for revegetation of roads and

Emily Roberson, who served as CNPSSenior Policy Analyst for many years, isnow at the Center for Biological Diver-sity, heading up the Native Plant Pro-tection Campaign.

Peigi Duvall (right), chair of the CNPSHorticulture Program, discussing plantsales with Joan Stewart (left) at theDecember 2004 Chapter Council meet-ing. Photograph by L. Vorobik.


other projects. Congress has putmore than $10 million into this pro-gram in the past few years. Here inCalifornia, these funds have broughtus many new projects, includingForest Service greenhouses, scien-tific studies to determine which lo-cal natives are appropriate for reveg-etation projects, and propagationcontracts with private native seedproducers.

EDUCATION &EDUCATION &EDUCATION &EDUCATION &EDUCATION &

HORTICULTUREHORTICULTUREHORTICULTUREHORTICULTUREHORTICULTURE

One of the six programs ofCNPS, the state-level HorticultureProgram, has been rejuvenated inthe past year by new volunteer pro-gram chair Peigi Duvall. The Pro-gram has no paid staff. Peigi has leda fact-finding and planning processthat will allow CNPS to increaseoutreach and education effortsabout the horticultural uses of na-tive plants in our populous state.The Program has identified severalareas it will focus on as it movesforward, including:

• Outreach and education to thegardening public: CNPS’s 32local chapters are vibrant intheir horticultural activities,and the state HorticultureProgram provides support tofurther strengthen the effec-tiveness of these efforts. In2003 CNPS chapters heldmore than 40 plants sales, uti-lizing at least 14,000 volun-teer hours.

• Outreach and education to nurs-eries, the landscape industry, andmunicipalities: These groupsare key decision makers onthe broad-scale usage of na-tives in horticulture. CNPS iscurrently working to developplans to conduct targeted out-reach to these groups.

• Creation of a web-based data-base of horticultural information

on specific native plants: Al-though still in the conceptualstages of development, oncedeveloped, this database canbe used by the general publicto search for horticultural in-formation on specific plants.

• Restoration: Over the long-term, the program will lookto provide expertise on thisintersection of the horticul-ture and conservation sciencefields.

IN CONCLUSIONIN CONCLUSIONIN CONCLUSIONIN CONCLUSIONIN CONCLUSION

CNPS statewide programs inplant science, conservation, advo-cacy, education, and horticultureplay a key role in helping to in-crease public appreciation of Cali-fornia’s native plants and preserv-ing them for future generations.

Most importantly, these programsincrease the effectiveness of localchapters’ efforts by providing tech-nical and administrative support andguidance. This support can takemany forms, including maintainingthe most up-to-date information onrare plants and habitat types, strat-egizing on Habitat ConservationPlans, helping to locate the bestscientific data to influence policydecisions, training chapter volun-teers to take plant surveys, assistingchapters in their work to educatethe public on the best uses of nativeplants, and disseminating science-based information through theSociety’s two publications, Fremon-tia and The Bulletin, as well as itsown books and floras.

Michael Tomlinson, Provost’s Office ofAdvancement, University of California,Davis. [email protected]

New logo for CNPS’s 40th year, selected at the September 2004 Chapter CouncilMeeting in Marin County. Created by Sacramento Valley Chapter member, “Slowhand.”


SAVING A RARE PLANT

IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT

by Keith Greer and Holly Cheong

or its size, San Diego County isblessed with one of highest num-ber of endemic species in the

nation. Considered a hotspot for en-dangered species (Dobson et al. 1997),San Diego has also undergone wavesof rapid urbanization since the 1950s.While recent conservation effortshave focused on protecting speciesand their habitats from direct impactssuch as urban development, activeland management is equally importantto protect species on lands alreadypreserved.

This paper describes efforts of theCity of San Diego, in conjunction withthe nonprofit Friends of Los Peñas-quitos Canyon, to protect a popula-tion of the federal and state endan-

gered willowy monardella (Monardellalinoides Gray ssp. viminea (E. Greene)Abrams; see sidebars) from changes inurban hydrology.

Willowy monardella occurs in thealluvial terraces and cobble bed of in-termittent streams in Lopez Canyon,a part of the Los Peñasquitos Preservelocated within south and central SanDiego County. While Lopez Canyonis part of a city park managed for itsnatural and cultural resources, indirectimpacts from watershed urbanizationhave threatened the existing monar-della population. Since the mid-1970sthe 4.5 square mile watershed of LopezCanyon has been developed into thesuburban community of Mira Mesa.Currently, 65% of the watershed has

been covered by impervious surfacessuch as pavement or structures.

When urbanization spreads into un-developed watersheds, the percentageof impervious land surface increases,resulting in changes to hydrology thatinclude increased stream discharge andvelocity due to urban runoff, as well aschanges in the timing of these flows.White and Greer (2002) documentedan annual 4% increase in stream dis-charge since 1972 due to watershedurbanization in nearby Los Peñas-quitos Creek. This increased dischargeand velocity has resulted in increasedscouring of the streambed, undercut-ting the alluvial terraces in Lopez Can-yon that support willowy monardella.

The loss of alluvial terraces and the

F

A-Jacks, erosion control devices in Lopez Canyon, San Diego County, used to check water flow and thus protect the habitat of therare willowy monardella. All images used courtesy of City of San Diego, 2003.


enlargement of the intermittent streamchannel were predicted by KarenPrestegaard (1979) in her masters the-sis. Current and pre-urbanization aerialphotographs support Prestegaard’s pre-dictions, and can be seen in Figure 1.Since 1995 the Friends of PeñasquitosCanyon have documented the loss ofseveral large patches of monardella af-ter large storm events. Effective man-agement for willowy monardella inLopez Canyon requires managing thechanges in hydrology caused by water-shed urbanization.

Recognizing this problem, staff fromthe City of San Diego and volunteersfrom the Friends of Peñasquitos de-termined that there was a need for hy-drologic structures to slow the watervelocity and reduce scour. In addition,they determined that it would also benecessary to address changes in hydro-logic condition in the entire watershed.This resulted in a two-phase approach:a long-term goal to address the hydro-logic changes and a short-term goal ofprotecting the existing patches of wil-lowy monardella.

Working with a diverse citizens ad-visory committee, the Cities of Poway,Del Mar, and San Diego began look-ing at a comprehensive, long-term ap-proach that would create a watershedmanagement plan for the area. Thoseinvolved have just started to identifyareas of stream impairment and pos-sible solutions, but what about theshort-term?

In 2001, the City of San Diego re-

ceived grant funding from the Califor-nia Department of Fish and Game andthe California Coastal Conservancy toimplement an erosion control projectto protect willowy monardella inLopez Canyon. The first task was todesign the project. Several alternativeswere investigated and rejected prior tosettling on the final design.

The first alternative came from twoCalifornia State Parks engineers whovolunteered their time to survey themonardella sites in Lopez Canyon,along with a volunteer representingthe Friends of Los Peñasquitos Can-yon Preserve. They proposed a seriesof grade control structures includingdrop structures, weirs, gabions, andbank armoring. Ultimately this pro-posal was deemed infeasible becauseits cost exceeded the available funds.

The second alternative came fromthe Natural Resources ConservationService (NRCS) of the USDA. Theirengineers drafted plans for a simplerdesign involving cobble berms to pro-tect the two major monardella sitesfrom erosive wintertime flows. Theseplans were reviewed in a preliminarymeeting with the federal and state re-source agencies in 2002. The USArmy Corps of Engineers (ACOE)argued that the berm for the down-stream site would redirect a second-ary channel flow, possibly causing adetrimental change in hydrology.

It became apparent that obtainingapprovals from the Corps and the Re-gional Water Quality Control Board

(RWQCB) would be very time-con-suming for the berm design. In addi-tion, grant funding would have expiredbefore the permitting process forthose agencies could be completed.Also, the berm design could have pos-sibly impacted an already eroded sewerline within the canyon. Instead of risk-ing unforeseen negative impacts to thecanyon, the project team decided tolook for another solution.

After consulting with staff frommany agencies, it was determined thata new form of erosion control, calledA-Jacks, would be the best solution forLopez Canyon. A-Jacks are concretearmor units designed to interlock intoa flexible, water-permeable chain. A-Jacks help dissipate water velocity,protecting channel terraces fromscouring and erosion, two problemsexperts knew they had to solve. A-Jacks also collect sediment within thewater, minimizing impacts down-stream from deposition, a third prob-lem in the Canyon’s waterways.Downstream deposition of sedimentinto Los Peñasquitos Lagoon had al-ready caused significant impairment(California State Coastal Conservancy1985). Collection of sediment wouldalso help stabilize the terraces, pro-vide additional habitat areas for wil-lowy monardella, and hide the A-Jacksfrom view.

An engineering firm was contractedto draft a set of plans using A-Jacks toprotect the population of monardellawithout significantly altering the hy-

FIGURE 1A. Lopez Canyon, San Diego ca. 1969. Aerial photographof the canyon prior to the development of the suburbancommunity of Mira Mesa. Note the stream bed of Lopez Creekshown as a meandering white line crossing horizontally in thecenter of the photograph.

FIGURE 1B. Lopez Canyon, San Diego ca. 2002. Aerial photo-graph of the canyon after the development of the suburbancommunity of Mira Mesa. Note the enlargement of the streambed throughout the canyon. 2003 locations of willowy monardellaare shown as white triangles.


drology of the adjacent channels. Af-ter consultations and site visits withinvolved agencies, this third alterna-tive was deemed the most feasible.

Project construction began onAugust 11, 2003. Urban Corps of SanDiego was hired to conduct the instal-lation. This non-profit organization,which focuses on opportunities to con-serve our natural resources, providesjob training and educational opportu-nities for young inner-city men andwomen ages 18 to 25. Representativesfrom the Friends of Los PeñasquitosCanyon Preserve, Erosion ControlTechnologies, and a senior ranger forLos Peñasquitos Canyon Preserve, su-pervised and assisted with the A-Jacksinstallation.

A small Bobcat or hand tools wereused to create the trench for the foot-ing of the A-Jacks. Once the trench wascompleted, A-Jacks were installed onthe site in a long, linked chain. A-Jacksweigh about 80 pounds each and hadto be fitted together exactly to ensureproper functioning. The installation,which took about one week, was sched-uled to take advantage of the dry sum-mer season when Lopez Creek doesnot flow. Needless to say, it was a la-borious process and the project team,including Urban Corps, maintained agreat attitude during the hot summer.

Now that the project has been com-pleted, City of San Diego staff and theFriends of Los Peñasquitos CanyonPreserve hope to preserve and enhancethe natural populations of willowymonardella in Lopez Canyon. Annualsurveys, started in 2000 (City of SanDiego 2000), are documenting the ef-fectiveness of the A-Jacks. These re-ports will be provided to the federaland state resource agencies and madeavailable to the public.

If our program is successful, in a fewyears additional habitat for willowymonardella will be created in LopezCanyon by the natural collection ofsediment on the A-Jacks. When thatoccurs, the Friends of Los PeñasquitosCanyon Preserve expect to plant ad-ditional willowy monardella in LopezCanyon to boost the population.

The City of San Diego staff wereable to videotape the installation of theA-Jacks and interview some of the keymembers of the project team. Thisvideo documents the work that went

WILLOWY MONARDELLA IN SOUTHERNWILLOWY MONARDELLA IN SOUTHERNWILLOWY MONARDELLA IN SOUTHERNWILLOWY MONARDELLA IN SOUTHERNWILLOWY MONARDELLA IN SOUTHERN

CALIFORNIACALIFORNIACALIFORNIACALIFORNIACALIFORNIA

illowy monardella (Mon-ardella linoides Gary ssp.

viminea (E. Greene) Abrams) is astate and federally endangeredplant species that is found alongdrainages within central andsouth San Diego County. It is a

perennialherb that blooms between June and August.This plant species is in the mint family(Lamiaceae) and has a pleasant spearmint aroma.

Habitat for willowy monardella is extremelylimited. This rare plant species is only found onterraces along natural drainage courses. As de-velopment has increased in San Diego County,willowy monardella has been threatened by

floodplain development, increased urban runoff, and invasion byweeds. Willowy monardella does not compete well with other plantsand can be choked out by weeds which invade the streamside terraces.In addition, sparse riparian habitat can turn into thick riparian wood-land with increased urban runoff, further decreasing habitat areas forwillowy monardella. Urban runoff can also erode the streamsideterraces where willowy monardella resides, washing the plant and itshabitat downstream. The latter example is what has occurred withinLopez Canyon.

Due to habitat degradation, this plant species is becoming in-creasingly rare. Only six known locations continue to persist, withthe largest population occurring on military land. Many popula-tions in upper Lopez Canyon, Soledad Canyon, and other canyonsthroughout San Diego have been extirpated. It is extremely impor-tant that all remaining popu-lations of willowy monar-della be protected and man-aged. Recent taxonomicwork by Andy Sanders andMark Elvin supports the re-classification of willowymonardella to its own spe-cies (Monardella viminea),with a new species Monar-della stoneana (Jennifer’smonardella) being describedfrom near the US-Mexicanborder (see Novon 13(4):426(2003)).

Willowy monardella (Monardellalinoides ssp. viminea), from LopezCanyon, San Diego County.

WWWWW


A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE MONARDELLA LINOIDESMONARDELLA LINOIDESMONARDELLA LINOIDESMONARDELLA LINOIDESMONARDELLA LINOIDES AND AND AND AND AND

M. ODORATISSIMAM. ODORATISSIMAM. ODORATISSIMAM. ODORATISSIMAM. ODORATISSIMA ALLIES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ALLIES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ALLIES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ALLIES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ALLIES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

into this project and provides a valu-able guide for anyone considering asimilar project. The video, titled the“Lopez Canyon Willowy MonardellaProtection Project,” is available fromthe City of San Diego.

Although this project underwent asignificant number of design changes,it was ultimately successful. One of themain reasons for its success is the in-corporation of volunteers into theproject. Without their assistance and

vision, this project might still be in thedesign and permitting stage. The hopeis that this project will stop the on-slaught of urban runoff on this sensi-tive plant species and stabilize theeroded terraces for future populations

he genus Monardella consists of approximately50 taxa of annual and perennial herbs that

are found throughout western North America withalmost all taxa occurring either partially or wholly inCalifornia. Monardella species vary mostly in theirvegetative characters (as opposed to floral charac-ters), notably pubescence and the size and shape oftheir leaves and bracts. Speciation in Monardellaseems to be driven, in part, by a combination ofisolation and vegetative and/or physiological adap-tation to local conditions (personal observation, M.Elvin and A.C. Sanders).

Many taxonomic problems exist in Monardella.The Monardella populations in southern Californiaare no exception. They appear to be very similarand it can be difficult to distinguish between thetaxa; however, they can be separated into naturalgroups based on a series of shared characters. TheM. odoratissima and M. linoides species groups areamong the most difficult to distinguish in the ge-nus. The taxa in these groups have regularly beenconfused in the field and herbaria, but can be recog-nized by small but consistent differences betweenthem.

Plants in the Monardella linoides species groupgenerally have narrow leaves (broadly linear) andherbage covered with a short dense pubescence.Their leaves have a winged petiole, an attenuatebase, and a consistently narrowish blade that ex-pands gradually to the widest point. The stems andleaves have a short dense pubescence in most cases,with mixed long and short dense hairs in a fewpopulations (e.g., M. robisonii). Monardella linoides isrepresented in southern California by a number oftaxa including several subspecies of M. linoides, M.robisonii, and M. viminea (a former subspecies of M.linoides).

Monardella viminea (willowy monardella) is awispy low growing non-rhizomatous perennial withstems that drape out from the center, which is howit got its common name. It grows on secondaryalluvial benches in ephemeral washes (drainages

with running surface water for 24 to 48 hours aftera rain) that cut through cismontane marine andalluvial terraces of central San Diego within 20 kmof the Pacific Ocean. Monardella viminea has arelatively sparse pubescence (especially comparedto the closely related M. linoides ssp. linoides) and isconspicuously and rather densely glandular on thestems and leaves. The leaves are broadly linear tonarrowly lanceolate with a length to width ratio ofbetween 7 and 10 to 1. The inflorescence bractsare conspicuously longer than the calyces. Monar-della viminea has a strong sweet scent of the sorttypically associated with Monardella.

Plants in the Monardella odoratissima speciesgroup generally have wide leaves (lance-ovate) andglabrous to sparsely pubescent herbage. Theirleaves have a distinct petiole, an acute base, and arelatively broad blade that expands quickly to thewidest point. The stems and leaves are generallyeither glabrous or sparsely pubescent to sparselyshort-villous. Monardella odoratissima is only repre-sented in southern California by the derivative taxaM. australis and the new species, M. stoneana (whichwas recently published in Novon 13(4)).

Monardella stoneana (Jennifer’s monardella) is alow, compact and non-rhizomatous perennial. Itgrows in intermittent streams that carry water forseveral weeks to months during and after the winterrainy season. It most often grows among boulders,stones, and in cracks of the bedrock of these inter-mittent streams in rocky gorges in the mountainsjust east of San Diego and into northern Baja Cali-fornia, Mexico. Monardella stoneana stems are ratherstout compared to the other species in the genus. Itis sparsely pubescent to almost glabrous and lessglandular than both M. odoratissima and M. viminea.Its leaves are lanceolate to lance-ovate with a lengthto width ratio of between 3 and 5:1. The inflores-cence bracts are noticeably rather small, of more orless the same length as the calyces. Monardellastoneana has a strong and pungent, minty scent.

—Mark Elvin

TTTTT


of willowy monardella. Although thedamage to the watershed will not beundone by this project, it will reducefurther sediment deposition down-stream and minimize erosion withinLopez Canyon.

Future projects included in theLopez Canyon watershed manage-ment plan can build off of this effortto improve the quality of this canyonand its habitats.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSACKNOWLEDGMENTSACKNOWLEDGMENTSACKNOWLEDGMENTSACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project was funded throughgrants from the California Departmentof Fish and Game Local AssistanceProgram and the Coastal ConservancyWetlands Recovery Project SmallGrant Program. Volunteer assistancewas also provided by the Friends of LosPeñasquitos Canyon Preserve, NRCS,and California State Parks.

REFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCES

Dobson, A.P., J.P. Rodriguez, W.M.Roberts, and D.S. Wilcove. 1997.Geographic distribution of endan-gered species in the United States.Science 275:550–553.

California State Coastal Conservancy.1985. The Los Peñasquitos LagoonEnhancement Plan. 90 pp.

City of San Diego. 2000. Summary ofmonitoring results for Monardellalinoides ssp. viminea. 8 pp.

Prestegaard, K.A. 1979. Stream andlagoon channels of Los Peñasquitos wa-tershed, California with an evaluationof possible effects of proposed urbaniza-tion. Masters Thesis, University ofCalifornia. Berkeley CA.

White, M.D., and K.A. Greer. 2002.The effects of watershed urbanizationon stream hydrologic characteristics andriparian vegetation of Los PeñasquitosCreek. Conservation Biology Insti-tute Report. Available at www.consb i o . org/ cb i /pd f / san_diego/penasquitos.pdf.

Keith Greer and Holly Cheong, City ofSan Diego, 202 C Street MS 5A, SanDiego, CA 92101. [email protected];[email protected]

Clockwise from top: Completed installation of the erosion control devices. • The A-Jacks should trap sediment, as well as protectthe alluvial terraces, allowing the devices to be partially buried from view in the future. • A-Jacks erosion control device. • UrbanCorps of San Diego installing A-Jacks around the alluvial terraces supporting willowy monardella.


POLLINATION BIOLOGY OF

THE CLUSTERED LADY SLIPPER

by Charles L. Argue

rchid flowers and their pol-linators provide many ex-amples of highly special-

ized relationships. The plants areoften fertile across species and evengeneric boundaries, and selection forreproductive isolation has led to theevolution of novel floral morpholo-gies and pollinator behaviors. Bi-ologists have devoted much effort tountangling the interactions betweenthese flowers and their pollen vec-tors. The most devious orchids arethose that produce no nectar or anyother floral rewards, employing in-stead some method of deceit. Thisgroup includes the lady slippers,where field and laboratory studieshave now disclosed much about thepollination process, the breeding sys-tem, and the factors that limit orotherwise influence fruiting success.

A recently studied example isthe rare clustered lady slipper (Cyp-ripedium fasciculatum Kellogg ex S.Watson). One of only three speciesof the genus native to western NorthAmerica, the clustered lady slipperis a small terrestrial orchid of cool,

O

Clustered lady slipper (Cypripedium fasci-culatum). Photographs by M.A. Carr.

seasonally dry mountain slopes ormoist stream terraces, where it oc-curs on various substrates, often inpartially to fully shaded coniferousforest. Small isolated populationsare scattered at elevations of 150-1,900 meters from Washington tonorthern California and east in themountains to Idaho, Montana,Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado. InCalifornia it is found in the CoastRanges and Sierra Nevada from DelNorte and Siskiyou counties southto Nevada County with historical

records from San Mateo, SantaCruz, and Santa Clara counties. Irecently (2003) made an extensivesearch for it in the Santa CruzMountains without success.

THE SEMITHE SEMITHE SEMITHE SEMITHE SEMI-TRAPTRAPTRAPTRAPTRAP

BLOSSOMBLOSSOMBLOSSOMBLOSSOMBLOSSOM

The flowers are not showy. Ashort rhizome produces 2–10 clus-tered aerial stems, each up to 25 cmtall with 1–8 musky-smelling, small,


Top left: Mountain lady slipper (Cypri-pedium montanum). • Bottom left:California lady slipper (C. californicum).Photographs by J. Game.

drooping, flowers closely spaced ina short arching raceme. Floweringbegins in the spring or early sum-mer depending on elevation and as-pect. All the flowers of an inflores-cence open in less than a week, andindividual flowers are usually re-ceptive for over two weeks. Thesepals and lateral petals vary in colorfrom purple-brown to yellowish-green and are lined with darker,brownish-purple veins. The lateralsepals are fused nearly to their tipswhile the dorsal sepal arches over anearly spherical, dull yellow-greenlip (slipper or labellum) mottledwith red to purple markings, espe-cially around its mouth (Figure 1).

This lip plays a critical role inpollination. Lady slippers have flow-ers of a type known as trap or semi-trap blossoms. They temporarilyimprison their insect pollinators andforce them to follow a prescribedsequence of behaviors in order toobtain their release. I, like others,have observed the pollinationmechanism in a number of out-crossing species, and it is the samein each. An insect of the appropri-ate size enters the lip through theobvious large opening at its top (Fig-ures 1 and 4). The slippery innersurface and the in-folded marginsprevent it from leaving by the sameroute. Even though insects havebeen reported to sometimes chewthrough the wall tissue, most find adifferent way out. A foothold is pro-vided by tightly packed, long hairs(trichomes) on the bottom of thelip. These lead along a pathway (inGerman, “haarstrassen”) toward es-cape holes at the base or heel of theslipper (Figures 1 and 4).

In its escape the pollinator mustpass two points where the passage-way is narrowed. At the first of theseit is forced to squeeze under andrub its back against the surface of

Figure 1. Clustered lady slipper flowerwith erect dorsal sepal • Figure 2. Col-umn, top view. • Figure 3. Column, sideview.

the stigma (Figures 3 and 4). Thesecond narrow passage is the exithole itself. One exit hole is locatedon either side of the base of theflower (Figures 1-4). An anther isso positioned beside each exit thatan insect of the proper size cannotforce its way out without contact-ing the anther and carrying away amass of sticky pollen on its back.

Figure 4. Diagrammatic longitudinalsection of clustered lady slipper flowerwith dotted line showing direction ofpollinator movement.


Since the vector contacts the stigmabefore the anther and usually doesnot reverse directions, it does notordinarily transfer pollen to thestigma of the same flower. Rather,pollination is accomplished whenand if the insect, upon escaping fromthe first flower, is subsequentlytrapped again, usually in a differentflower, and the escape procedure isrepeated.

Biologists are uncertain just whyinsects enter the flowers in the firstplace. In some cases the entry isinadvertent. The insects, exploringthe outer surface of the lip, tumbleinto the trap. In other cases entryappears quite deliberate. Some au-thors contend that insects may col-lect oil from the hairs on the insideof the lip. This has yet to be con-firmed. It has also been conjecturedthat small amounts of nectar arepresent or that the insects feed onthe hairs in the labellum. But it nowappears likely that the flower pro-vides no reward, and the insects aresimply deceived by false nectarguides, color, and the odor of theblossoms, which promise nectar orother enticements where none isavailable (e.g., Nilsson 1981 andreferences therein).

WHO POLLINATESWHO POLLINATESWHO POLLINATESWHO POLLINATESWHO POLLINATES

THE CLUSTEREDTHE CLUSTEREDTHE CLUSTEREDTHE CLUSTEREDTHE CLUSTERED

LADY SLIPPER?LADY SLIPPER?LADY SLIPPER?LADY SLIPPER?LADY SLIPPER?

Among species of lady slippers,reproductive isolation or preven-tion of hybridization is related, inpart, to the size of the flower. Morespecifically, the width of the en-trance and especially the diameterof the anther exit holes and the spacebetween the labellar floor and thestigma determine the size of theinsect involved in the pollination.The dorsal-ventral thickness of theinsect’s thorax may be of criticalimportance. In addition, Nilsson(1981) noted that the depth of thelabellum in the European yellowlady slipper (C. calceolus L.) must

exceed the length of the pollinatinginsect by a minimum of 3 to 4 mmor the insect can simply crawl backout through the labellar opening.All of these floral characters areclearly under strong selection pres-sure in relation to the primary pol-len vectors. In the clustered ladyslipper the anther exit holes are only2 mm in diameter, and the openingto the labellum is about 7 mm wide(Knecht 1996). Pollinator size isaccordingly restricted.

Recent studies in southwestOregon identified the pollinator inthis area as a tiny parasitic diapriidwasp in the genus Cinetus (Fergusonand Donham 1999). Female speci-mens of this yet to be identifiedspecies were collected carrying pol-len smears of the clustered lady slip-per on their backs. In one case, theinsect was captured emerging fromthe exit hole at the base of the label-lum (Ferguson and Donham 1999,Lipow et al. 2002). Although in-

conspicuous, purplish-brown flow-ers with a musky odor are also some-times pollinated by carrion-lovingflies, hornets, and beetles, no otherinsects were seen bearing pollen ofthis orchid. Moreover, maximumwasp activity matched the peak or-chid blooming time in May.Ferguson (pers. comm. 2004) hasnow monitored additional popula-tions of clustered lady slippers inCalifornia, Colorado, and Wyo-ming, and unidentified diapriids alsoshow up at all these sites eventhough none have, as yet, beenfound carrying orchid pollen.

POLLINATION ANDPOLLINATION ANDPOLLINATION ANDPOLLINATION ANDPOLLINATION AND

FRUIT SETFRUIT SETFRUIT SETFRUIT SETFRUIT SET

Studies of the breeding systemin the clustered lady slipper revealedthat the experimental transfer ofpollen within a single flower(selfing), among flowers in the same

European lady slipper (Cypripedium calceolus). Photograph by D. Lin, courtesy of theUniversity Herbarium and UC Regents.


raceme (geitonogamy), or betweenracemes of nonclonal plants (xeno-gamy or out-crossing) all producedhigh levels of fruit set. No fruit wasset when insects were preventedfrom reaching the flowers; no auto-gamy (i.e., no spontaneous self pol-lination) occurred in the absence ofa pollinator, and no asexual pro-duction of seeds occurred (no aga-mospermy) (Kipping 1971, Knecht1996, Lipow et al. 2002).

Moreover, there was no reduc-tion in fruit set in self-pollinated ascompared to cross-pollinated plants(Knecht 1996, Lipow et al. 2002).Although the pollination mecha-nism promotes cross-pollination,the clustered lady slipper reproducesvegetatively, and some transfer ofpollen among members of a singleclone undoubtedly occurs. A flow-ering period with many simulta-neously open flowers on each plantprovides ample opportunity for pol-len transfer among flowers of thesame raceme or among racemes ofthe same clone. Nonetheless, ge-netic studies of chemical variationwithin and between populationsimply that the primary mode of re-production is out-crossing (Aagaardet al. 1999). Either pollinationwithin populations is primarily ran-dom or survival of the products ofselfing is reduced by some meanssuch as inbreeding depression(Aagaard et al. 1999, Lipow et al.2002).

The levels of natural fruit set inthe clustered lady slipper are highlyvariable. Greenlee (in Lipow et al.2002) found that a population ofthis species in Montana’s BitterrootMountains averaged 0.72 fruits from2.55 flowers per flowering plant.Knecht (1996) reported that an av-erage of 32% of flowers producedcapsules in nine small populationsin Washington’s Wenatchee Moun-tains, and Kipping (1971) found47% of the flowers produced fruitat a site in Nevada County, Califor-nia. Lipow et al. (2002) recordedlevels of fruit set varying from 18%

in the White River National Forestof Colorado and 29% in the NezPierce National Forest of Idaho to69% in the Siskiyou National For-est of Oregon.

Fruit set was directly related topollination rates, and at the sitesexamined by Lipow et al. (2002),pollination rates were negativelyrelated to population size: the levelof fruit set at the Oregon site, wherethe population was small, much ex-ceeded that at the Colorado site,where the population was muchlarger and denser. A similar inverserelationship is common in otherspecies with non-rewarding polli-nation systems. Presumably, train-ing of the pollinator to the appear-ance of non-rewarding flowers ismore intense and more rapid inlarger, denser orchid populations(Lipow et al. 2002).

At the same time, the diapriidswere apparently not influenced byinflorescence size. The probabilityof a given flower producing fruitwas unrelated to the number offlowers present in the inflorescence(Lipow et al. 2002). However thesize of the inflorescence was posi-tively correlated with plant size,and larger plants, with a largernumber of flowers, had a higherprobability of absolute reproduc-tive success and had more resourcesto devote to fruit production(Lipow et al. 2002).

Fruiting success can be limitedeither by the quantity of stored foodavailable for allocation to capsuleand seed maturation or by pollina-tor visitation rates. In orchids re-quiring an external pollinator, lowlevels of pollinator availability oractivity may be indicated by a sig-nificant increase in fruit set amongflowers that are artificially handpollinated compared to those thatare left to be pollinated naturally(open pollinated). Lipow et al.(2002) demonstrated such a re-sponse in experimentally cross-pol-linated as compared to open polli-nated flowers in their Colorado and

Idaho populations. They conductedno self-pollination experiments inIdaho, but in Colorado self-polli-nation again produced a significantincrease in fruit set when comparedto open pollination. Knecht (1996)also observed significantly higherlevels of fruit set in hand-pollinatedflowers compared to open-polli-nated flowers at her study site ineast-central Washington. Hand pol-linations were not carried out onthe Oregon population, but the highlevel of natural fruit set observedhere suggests that fecundity in thispopulation might not be limited bypollinator visitation rates.

WHAT LIMITSWHAT LIMITSWHAT LIMITSWHAT LIMITSWHAT LIMITS

FRUIT SET?FRUIT SET?FRUIT SET?FRUIT SET?FRUIT SET?

Although more than a one-sea-son study is needed to establishwhether pollinators or stored nutri-ent resources or both are limiting(Primack 1996), the pattern notedby Lipow et al. in Colorado andIdaho and Knecht in Washingtonhas been frequently reported in otherorchids that rely on deception. Pos-sible adaptation to pollinator limita-tion in the clustered lady slipper isalso consistent with an observed de-crease in fruit set associated with areduction in pollinator numbers dueto fire and with the long receptivityof the flowers, which maximizes theiropportunity for pollination and mayreflect a dependence upon specific,relatively rare pollinators (Neilandand Wilcock 1998).

Many authors consider pollina-tor limitation to be evolutionarilyunstable. According to this view,natural selection should maximizereproduction within limits set bythe availability of resources with atrade-off between current reproduc-tion and future reproductive suc-cess and growth. Various strategiesto increase pollination success tothe level where resources are limit-ing should be favored and shouldspread through the population.


These might include a shift toasexual seed production or a modi-fication in floral anatomy that wouldallow spontaneous self-pollinationto occur in this already self-com-patible species. However, a transi-tion to asexual seed production isuncommon in orchids and accord-ing to Neiland and Wilcock (1998and references therein), may be in-

hibited because development of theembryo sac and placental cells doesnot begin until pollen has been de-posited on the stigma. The shift tospontaneous self-pollination, al-though not unknown, is also diffi-cult because it requires significantmorphological changes in the struc-ture of the flower.

An alternate possibility is thatflowers could develop which pro-vide a nectar reward. This mightreverse the negative reinforcementof repeated visitor behavior in non-rewarding flowers. Moreover, be-cause pollinators that visit unre-warding flowers are likely to samplea variety of other flowers in a searchfor nectar or pollen, the stigmas ofnectarless orchids are often morehighly contaminated with pollenfrom other species than are those ofnectariferous orchids, and pollen is

more often wasted through exportto the stigmas of plants from otherspecies. (Neiland and Wilcock1998). High levels of contamina-tion lead to reduction in viable seedproduction, probably lowering re-productive success in nectarless or-chids even more than estimated onthe basis of capsule production.

Although the presence or the

artificial addition of nectar does notalways mitigate pollinator limita-tion, it had a significant effect onboth pollen removal (male function)and fruit set (female function) inthe pink lady slipper (C. acaule Ait.)(Cochran 1986). Neiland andWilcock (1998) reported that aver-age fruit-set figures measuring therelative reproductive success ofnectarless and nectar-producing or-chids in North America were 19.5%and 49.3%, respectively, based onfruit to flower ratios. In the clus-tered lady slipper only the smallOregon population equals or ex-ceeds the average level of fruit pro-duction for nectariferous orchids.Four out of five of the remainingpopulations sampled fall within therange recorded for non-rewardingorchids (2.8-39.0%), including bothpopulations that showed increased

fruit production following hand pol-linations. Neiland and Wilcock be-lieve the adoption of nectar pro-duction might represent the mosteffective mechanism for overcom-ing the reproductive restrictions ofpollinator limitation. Why has thepredicted increase in individual re-productive success not resulted inthe spread or fixation of nectar pro-duction in any current lady slipperpopulation?

Data based on hand pollina-tions suggest that an increase infruit production can limit the re-sources available for subsequentgrowth, reproduction, and survival(e.g., Primack 1996 and referencestherein). Therefore, even thoughfruit production within seasons maybe pollinator limited, an increasein pollination rate might not sig-nificantly improve overall repro-ductive success because such an in-crease could have an adverse effecton lifetime fecundity.

Cochran (1986), however, be-lieves the effects of resource limita-tion are subordinate to pollinatorlimitation. Based on his calculations,two years of complete pollinationare equivalent to 10 to 20 years ofnormal fruit set, and long life spansand low mortality would, in time,permit resource-depleted individu-als to resume reproduction. Primack(1996) observed such recovery inseveral Massachusetts populationsof the pink lady slipper. In the clus-tered lady slipper individuals rou-tinely survive more than 30 years(Lipow et al. 2002), and some oldrecords indicate life spans of over90 years.

Calvo and Horvitz (1990) alsoconsider the costs of reproductionto be secondary to pollinator limi-tation. According to their demo-graphic model, increased fitness re-sulting from higher levels of polli-nation and fruit set would overcomethe relatively low cost of fruiting.Studies of reproduction in the or-chid Tolumnia variegata (Sw.) Braemwere consistent with these predic-

Clustered lady slipper. Photograph by J. Game.


tions (Calvo 1993). A statisticallysignificant reduction in futuregrowth and flowering was observedonly in plants subjected to a highpollination intensity treatment (viz.,all the flowers in the inflorescencewere pollinated resulting in a meanfruit set about 88 times greater thanin open-pollinated plants). Simula-tions revealed that the productionof only a few seedlings per fruitcould more than compensate thecost of fruiting and that thereforeselection for higher levels of polli-nation should be favored.

Calvo (1993) believes that thelow level of pollination and fruitproduction frequently observed inorchids lacking spontaneous self-pollination may be due to a lowcorrelation between fruit or seedproduction and seedling establish-ment. Selection for increased levelsof pollination would be ineffectivelylow if an increase in seed produc-tion was not translated into an in-crease in the number of reproduc-tive individuals produced in the nextgeneration (i.e. an increase in fit-ness). Under such circumstancespollinator limitation might be evo-lutionarily stable (Calvo 1993).

Knecht (1996) reported bothpollinator limitation and poor seed-ling recruitment in the clustered ladyslipper at her study site in east-cen-tral Washington. Plants producedan average of about 4,300 seeds percapsule, but few were able to estab-lish. Aagaard et al. (1999) speculatethat seedlings of this orchid mayonly become established in the ear-liest stages of forest succession. Theclusters of plants now observed oc-cupying mid- to late-successionalstages may represent asexually gen-erated descendents persistingthrough the production of rhizoma-tous clones, the apparently separateplants derived by dieback or frag-mentation of a branching rhizome.This growth habit and the probablelong life span of the clustered ladyslipper might permit some plants tosurvive a series of successional stages

until suitable habitat for the estab-lishment of seedlings becomes avail-able (Knecht 1996, Aagaard et al.1999). If so, management to pro-vide early successional habitat wouldbe required for the development ofnew colonies and the long-term sur-vival of the orchid.

The early succession hypothesisis interesting, but as Aagaard et al.(1999) point out, additional studiesare needed to clearly detail how newpopulations are established and todistinguish between clone membersand seedlings in plant clusterssampled from a range of succes-sional stages. Preliminary DNA in-vestigations now suggest that plantsmore than a few centimeters apartcan differ genetically and may bederived from seeds (Liston pers.comm. in Severs and Lang 1998).

Additional studies are alsoneeded on diapriid wasps. The rea-sons for the dramatic variation innatural fruit set (18–69%) are un-certain, at least in part becausediapriid wasp behavior is not un-derstood. Many species of Cinetusand other diapriids remain un-described. The identification andstudy of individual species and anunderstanding of their role in thepollination of this orchid across itsrange must await the constructionof a new key to this group, a taskthat has only recently been initi-ated at the Smithsonian (Ferguson,pers. comm. 2004). Once the base-line data are gathered, scientists willbe able to provide land managerswith better information on whichto base decisions affecting the longterm survival of this remarkablelittle orchid.

REFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCES

Aagaard, J.E., J.H. Richy, and K.L.Shea. 1999. Genetic variationamong populations of the rare clus-tered lady-slipper orchid (Cypripe-dium fasciculatum) from Washingtonstate, USA. Natural Areas Journal19(3):234–238.

Calvo, R.N. 1993. Evolutionary de-mography of orchids: Intensity andfrequency of pollination and the costof fruiting. Ecology 74(4):1033–1042.

Calvo, R.N. and C.C. Horvitz. 1990.Pollinator limitation, cost of repro-duction, and fitness in plants: Atransition matrix demographicapproach. Amer. Naturalist 136(4):499–516.

Cochran, M. E. 1986. Consequencesof pollination by chance in the pinklady’s-slipper, Cypripedium acaule.PhD Dissertation. The Universityof Tennessee, Knoxville.

Ferguson, C.S. and K. Donham. 1999.Pollinator of clustered lady’s-slipperorchid, Cypripedium fasciculatum,(Orchidaceae) in Oregon. NorthAmerican Native Orchid Journal5(2):180–184.

Kipping, J.L. 1971. Pollination studiesof native orchids. Master’s Thesis. SanFrancisco State College, San Fran-cisco.

Knecht, D. 1996. The reproductiveand population ecology of Cypripe-dium fasciculatum (Orchidaceae)throughout the Cascade Range.Master’s Thesis, Central Washing-ton University, Ellensberg WA.

Lipow, S.R., P. Bernhardt, and N.Vance. 2002. Comparative rates ofpollination of a rare orchid (Cypri-pedium fasciculatum). Intl. Jour. PlantSci. 163:775–782.

Neiland, M.R.C. and C.C. Wilcock.1998. Fruit-set, nectar reward, andrarity in the Orchidaceae. Amer.Jour. Bot. 85:1657–1671.

Nilsson, L.A. 1981. Pollination ecol-ogy and evolutionary processes insix species of orchids. Acta Univ. Ups.593:1–40.

Primack, R.B. 1996. Science and ser-endipity: The pink lady’s slipperproject. Arnoldia (Jamaica Plain)56:8–14.

Severs, J. and F. Lang. 1998. Manage-ment recommendations of clus-tered lady slipper orchid (Cypri-pedium fasciculatum Kellogg exWatson). Vol. 2. Available at: www.or.blm.gov/surveyandmanage/MR/VascularPlants /section9.htm.

Charles L. Argue, Department of PlantBiology, 250 Biological Sciences Center,University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN55108. [email protected]


GROWING NATIVES: CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE

by Glenn Keator

alifornia buckeye (Aesculuscalifornica) grows naturallyas a small tree to perhaps

30 feet high, with a broad, beauti-fully-rounded crown. Pinching backthe new shoots encourages it in-stead to bush out and create a largeshrub. Here is a fine plant for sea-sonal interest: silvery gray barkthat’s shown to advantage from fallthrough winter; fanlike, palmately-compound, apple-green leaves inspring and early summer; tightcandles of white to palest pink,sweetly fragrant flowers in May orJune; and curious, leathery, pearlike

seed pods with glossy brown seedslike chestnuts in fall. The flowersattract a wide variety of pollinatorsbut the nectar is said to be poison-ous to honey bees. It’s important tonote that buckeye seeds are not ed-ible even though they resemble theedible seeds of chestnuts (Castaneaspp.). The large seeds contain anabundant food reserve but shrivelquickly if not planted immediately;prompt planting assures easy ger-mination and vigorous seedlings.Growth is rapid for the first fewyears. Decent size for the shrub re-quires only a few years with abun-dant water and sun. Later, watercan be withheld or applied occa-sionally; some summer water as-sures leaves are retained longer.

California buckeye is adapted toespecially hot, dry summers onceits roots are well established. It can

be grown as a focal point in a smallgarden, yet it is also capable ofgrowing tall enough to provideshade for a one-story building. Italso can be pruned as a hedge orfoundation planting, or used in alarge container on a semishaded tosunny patio.

Two liabilities of planting thisin the garden are lots of leaf litterin fall, and poisonous leaves andseeds. This is not an appropriateplant where young children wan-der. In a large-scale garden, buck-eye can be grown to tree size andused as a companion with live oaks(Quercus agrifolia and Q. wislizenii),western redbud (Cercis occidentalis),and gray pine (Pinus sabiniana) for anatural effect.

Glenn Keator, 1455 Catherine Drive, Ber-keley, CA 94702. [email protected]

C

Clockwise from right: The strikinginflorescence of California buckeye(Aesculus californica). This flowering stemcan be up to one foot in length. Photo-graph by J. Hickman. • Fruits of theCalifornia buckeye, which are similar toall fruits in the horse chestnut family(Hippocastanaceae), to which this speciesbelongs. Photograph by Morin. • Flowersof the California buckeye. Photograph byJ. Hickman. Use of photographs courtesyof the University Herbarium and UCRegents.


DR. MALCOLM MCLEOD,

2004 FELLOW OF THE

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

by Dirk R. Walters

The members and officers of the SanLuis Obispo Chapter of the CaliforniaNative Plant Society (CNPS) nomi-nated Dr. Malcolm McLeod, age 81,to become a Fellow of the CaliforniaNative Society. Members of the nomi-nating committee included Dirk R.Walters, Bonnie Walters, JohnChesnut, David Chipping, MardiNiles, and Jack Beigle.

r. Malcom McLeod be-came an active member ofthe San Luis Obispo Chap-

ter shortly after his arrival in thecounty in the winter of 1973. Weare all richer for the contributionsthat he has made on behalf of Cali-fornia’s native flora by his work asan educator, rare plant advocate,author, and chapter leader.

Dr. McLeod was professor ofbotany in the Biology Depart-ment at California Polytech-nic State University from 1973until his full retirement in1993. In addition to generalbotany courses, he also devel-oped and taught a course innative plant materials for land-scape architecture and orna-mental horticulture students.As a result, a number of hisstudents joined the chapter,and later became active mem-bers and officers. Several en-tered the native plant nurseryand landscaping trade.

Since his early days as achapter member, Dr. McLeodhas held several offices andbeen a regular participant inchapter activities. He becamechapter president in 1976 andserved two one-year terms.Since then, Malcolm has

served wherever the chapter hasneeded him. Since 1973, on a yearlybasis, he leads at least one, and of-ten several, field trips. Malcolm will-ingly presents regularly scheduled(not to mention emergency) pro-grams at chapter meetings. At ourannual plant sale he assists plantpurchasers by staffing the Refer-ence Table. Since the early 1980she served on the chapter Scholar-ship Committee, which solicits andevaluates native plant study propos-als from Cuesta College and CalPoly State University students, forsmall cash awards. He has servedcontinuously on our photographiccommittee, charged with docu-menting the native plants of ourchapter area and maintaining theslide collection that has been devel-oping. Dr. McLeod has also served

as recording secretary in 1996 and1997, and accepted the task of chap-ter field trip chair for the year 2002.

The recitation of Malcolm’schapter activities is not completewithout the acknowledgement of hislifelong companion and wife, Sybil.She accompanied Malcolm on mostof his activities and excursions forthe chapter, and served many yearsas chapter historian. Upon Sybil’suntimely death in 2000, Malcolmtook over the historian’s job andcontinues it to this day.

During Dr. McLeod’s tenureas chapter president, he encour-aged and participated in the ad hoccommittee that planned and pro-duced the symposium/workshopentitled, Native Plants: A Viable Op-tion. At the symposium, Dr.McLeod presented the paper titled,

“Modern Uses of NativePlants.” He was the major con-tributor of information for theproceedings appendix on ob-taining, propagating, andgrowing native plants.

He also served on the edi-torial committee for the pub-lication resulting from theproceedings, Native Plants: AViable Option (CNPS SpecialPublication Number 3). In hisreview of the proceedings(Fremontia, April 1979) Mar-shal Olbrich wrote, “. . . un-usual in book reviews to givespecial praise to the appendi-ces, but three are of lastingimportance and usefulness:Malcolm McLeod’s ‘Anno-tated List of California Na-tive Trees and Shrubs withGarden Potential’ . . . ”

Dr. McLeod’s most signifi-

Dr. Malcolm McLeod. Photograph by M.L. Niles.

D


cant contribution to the chapter andstate organization has been his roleas chapter rare plant specialist, serv-ing as chapter chair from the early1980s through 1992. Dr. McLeodcombines three strengths for thepromotion of rare flora. First, dueto Malcolm’s wisdom and tenacity,we have benefited from the contin-ued recognition of individual spe-cies which were sometimes unrec-ognized or lost for decades, whiletaxonomic fashion has ebbed andflowed around them. Second, Dr.McLeod’s indefatigable survey andcareful documentation of rare popu-lations has provided a basis for pro-tection of landscapes rich in rarespecies throughout San LuisObispo. Finally, Dr. McLoed hasthe perspicacity to see the verysimple practical steps, whetherbuilding a barrier to motorcycles orrerouting a road, which proved cru-cial to protection of a rare plant.

In the spring of 1984, Malcolmtook a sabbatical from Cal Poly andvisited all of the localities whererare plants were recorded in ourarea, such as Arroyo de la Cruz,Surf, Calf Canyon, Black Moun-tain, Carrizo Plain, and Soda Lake.He involved at least 29 membersand other people on his excursions.One of his trips to Arroyo del laCruz included State CNPS person-nel, a trip now memorialized as thephotograph on the yellow holderused by our Society to display mem-bership application forms.

Dr. McLeod was always dili-gent in providing rare plant searchresults to the state office and theCalifornia Department of Fish andGame Natural Diversity Database.A paper, co-authored with Dr. DavidKeil, on rare plants of Arroyo de laCruz was presented at the StateCNPS-sponsored Rare Plant Con-ference in November 1986. Malcolmalso presented a paper on rare plantsuccesses in our area. The data gath-ered on these trips to places such asthe Hearst Ranch (i.e., Arroyo de laCruz) were to become the basis of

our chapter requesting removal ofseveral proposed home sites in theArroyo de la Cruz area of the HearstRanch Conservation Easement pur-chase by the state. It appears thatthis will be done.

His reports provided much ofthe raw data for several successfulrare plant listings. For example, inNovember 1986, Malcolm wrotethe status report for federal listingfor the Nipomo lupine, Lupinusnipomensis, which is now officiallylisted by both the federal govern-ment and the state of California asendangered. He was always eagerto keep the chapter membershipaware of progress of the rare plantprogram. He accomplished this viaa succession of general meeting pro-grams and articles in our chapternewsletter, The Obispoensis.

In the early 1990s, Malcolm,along with the help of members ofthe Photographic Committee, puttogether a 60-page notebook con-taining photographs and distribu-tion of all the list 1B plants in ourchapter area. Copies of this note-book were distributed to countyplanning agencies. Since steppingdown as Rare Plant Chair, he hascontinued not only as an activemember, but also in the role of se-nior advisor for the committee. Heis in the process of training a newgeneration of rare plant observers.

We relate a story told by Dr.McLeod’s Cal Poly Biology Depart-ment colleagues. When Malcolmstarted at Cal Poly, he refused toallow his assigned typewriter to re-main in his office because, as hesaid, “I do not type!” He told thestaff to give the typewriter to some-one else. Today, some 30 years later,he has mastered typing on a com-puter, as well as book and pamphletformatting. Malcolm has workedwith numerous chapter members tostrengthen our chapter’s outreachand education programs. In 2001,he was the lead author and pro-duced the Dune Mother’s Wild-flower Guide, published by State

CNPS and SLO chapter publica-tions committee and available fromState CNPS or central coast book-stores and gift shops. In 2004 Dr.McLeod produced the color 14-page pamphlet, Highway 58 Wild-flowers. In 1994, Malcolm providedmany slides, much of the text edit-ing, and the accompanying specieslist used for the creation of a 22–minute video entitled, Central CoastWildflowers. Publications that he iscurrently working on include oneon native plant communities andimportant species of the CarrizoPlain National Monument, and anupdate of the rare plants of SanLuis Obispo County notebooks, tobe published as a CD.

Dr. McLeod has also been anemissary of native plants in otherorganizations besides CNPS. Forthe last eight years he has been aca-demic advisor to our County’s fledg-ling botanical garden. This gardenplans to specialize in plants of thefive Mediterranean climates zones.Malcolm has encouraged them tostrengthen their California nativeplant holdings, conducted publicactivities at the garden, and pro-vided educational forums for itsmembers. Dr. McLeod has donemuch to further objectives ofCNPS; his recognition as a Fellowof this society is highly deserved.

Dirk R. Walters, 392 Christina Way,San Luis Obispo, CA 93405. [email protected]

Dr. McLeod at Coreopsis Hill. Photo-graph by M.L. Niles.


LETTERS

The following letters are in response tothe special issue on stewardship, Fremon-tia, Volume 32, No. 3 (July 2003).

Landmark IssueThank you for hitting me where I

live with your issue on stewardship andplant communities. The practice ofland care has always been more or lesscentral to people who lived for longon the land. The First People engagedin extensive landscape-scale manipu-lation of ecosystems, and the notionof the “Wilderness” was only the im-pression Europeans had from lookingwith untutored eyes at a tended gar-den. Peasant farmers, whose futureand past were tied to the land, wereinherently conservative. The US hasnot been well served by the availabil-ity of a frontier that permitted land

tenure to be a “skim the cream andmove on” experience.

Some of us now recognize we havereached the end of the frontier, andare regaining the perspective of thosewho were tied to the land. But thereare plenty of economists, elected offi-cials, and dreamers worldwide who areseduced by the frontier mindset.Growth is good, increased resourceextraction is good, technology willprovide replacements for exhaustedresources, and an increasing gross na-tional product will benefit everyone,whether the GNP per capita increasesor not.

Your Volume 32, Number 3 will bea landmark issue. Thoughtful readerswill be able to return to it time aftertime for years and gain new resolveto do “the best they can, with the re-

A Natural History of Ferns, byRobbin C. Moran. 2004. TimberPress, Portland, Oregon. 302 pages,145 illustrations, 26 color photos.Hardcover. Price $29.95.

sources they have, in the time theyhave, wherever they are.” I wish I’dinvented that phrase, but I have tocredit a child, born with AIDS inSouth Africa, who has now passed on.

Earle W. CummingsMilo Baker Chapter

A Good ReadI always love the way Fremontia

looks, but this is the first time that I’veread an issue from cover to cover. Thisissue is truly inspirational. Great job,Pete [Holloran, Convening Editor forthis issue]! I think every issue shouldinclude similar articles, or at least one.In my opinion, this is the most impor-tant message to get across and the bestway to bring more people into CNPS.

Marilyn SmulyanYerba Buena Chapter

BOOK REVIEW

This book is a cornucopia of 33 in-formative and entertaining essay-likechapters about the natural history offerns, arranged in six sections: TheLife Cycle of Ferns, Classification ofFerns, Fern Fossils, Adaptations byFerns, Fern Geography, and Ferns andPeople. It is intended for both gen-eral readers and fern specialists, and ithas a nine-page glossary for those un-familiar with the terminology. Over160 references are provided for thosewho wish to dig deeper.

A Natural History of Ferns is not aflora or identification key but picks upwhere field guides leave off. Thereader will be rewarded with a varietyof fascinating insights, of which a feware sampled here:

•Some ferns actually catapulttheir spores as a result of theforces acting when the sporecases split open.

•An estimated 5% of fern speciesworldwide can reproduce byforming buds somewhere ontheir roots, stems, or leaves.

•Ants live inside potato-likestems of a tropical fern (Solan-opteris) in a symbiotic relation-ship.

•Some tropical ferns adapt tolow-light conditions by beingiridescent.

•There are ferns that exist as tiny,perennial, filamentous or rib-bon-like gametophytes, repro-ducing through specialized budsbut never producing sporo-phytes (the familiar spore-bear-ing plants with roots, stems, andleaves).

The author is curator of ferns atthe New York Botanical Garden, andis also a writer and teacher. He inter-weaves his delightful stories withanecdotes from his own experience. Iagree with Oliver Sacks who wrote inhis Foreword that this book “is stimu-lating, enthralling, a beautiful com-panion for any fern lover.”

Guenther MacholSanta Clara Valley Chapter

Figure 50 of A Natural History of Ferns,whose caption reads, “Horsetails werenamed Equisetum (Latin equus, horse, andseta, bristle) because of their resemblanceto a horse’s tail.” Figure from RobbinMoran’s A Natural History of Ferns re-drawn from Alice Tangerini’s illustrationin O. Tippo and W.L. Stern (1977),Humanistic Botany.


MATERIALS FORPUBLICATION

Members and others are invitedto submit material for publicationin Fremontia. Instructions forcontributors can be found on theCNPS website, www.cnps.org, orcan be requested from FremontiaEditor, Linda Ann Vorobik,[email protected], or c/oUniversity and Jepson Herbaria,1001 Valley Life Sciences Bldg.#2465, University of California,Berkeley, CA 94720-2465.

FREMONTIA EDITORIALADVISORY BOARD

Susan D’Alcamo, Ellen Dean,Kathleen Dickey, Phyllis M.Faber, Holly Forbes, BartO’Brien, John Sawyer, JimShevock, Teresa Sholars, NevinSmith, Dieter Wilken, JohnWilloughby, Carol W. Witham,Darrell Wright

❏ 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!

❏ $20 Limited Income ❏ $35 Individual ❏ $45 Family/International ❏ $75 Supporting

❏ $100 Plant Lover ❏ $250 Patron ❏ $500 Benefactor ❏ $1,000 Mariposa Lily

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 allows 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

F R E M O N T I A

GOING NATIVE GARDEN TOUR

Elegant clarkia (Clarkia unguiculata) next to a bird bath ina Sunnyvale garden. Photograph by Agi Kehoe.

VISIT homegardens that

are water-wise, lowmaintenance, low onchemical use, birdand butterflyfriendly, andattractive. A varietyof home gardenslandscaped withCalifornia nativeplants will be opento the public.Various locationsthroughout Santa Clara Valley. Free admission; registration re-quired at www.GoingNativeGardenTour.com before April 16, 11 a.m.,or until the tour reaches capacity, whichever comes first. Lastyear’s tour attracted over 1,800 registrants. Space is limited; registerearly to ensure a place. For more information, [email protected].

www.GoingNativeGardenTour.com / [email protected]/o CNPS, 3921 E. Bayshore Rd. Rm 205, Palo Alto, CA 94303

SUNDAY, APRIL 17, 2005, 10 A.M. TO 4 P.M.


California N

ative Plant S

ociety2707 K

Street, S

uite 1S

acramento, C

A 95816-5113

Address S

ervice Requested

There is so much to do and learn,and so much fun to be had at the locallevel that it is possible to forget aboutall the work done (and fun had?) atthe state level of our Society. Uponhis departure from CNPS, MikeTomlinson provides an overview ofthe state organization and an intro-duction to the state programs ofCNPS. Look for in-depth articlesabout individual programs in the nextthree issues.

Two provocative articles follow,each with an ecological bent. In thefirst, authors Keith Greer and HollyCheong tell the story of managing forthe endangered willowy monardella(Monardella linoides ssp. viminea) in a

riverbed in the San Diego area. In thesecond, orchid expert Charles Argueprovides a detailed account of clus-tered lady slipper sex (i.e., pollinationin Cypripedium fasciculatum).

Glenn Keator shares his wisdom ongrowing native plants with a discus-sion of the California buckeye(Aesculus californica), and Dirk Waltersintroduces us to the society’s newestFellow, Dr. Malcolm McLeod. Con-gratulations, Malcolm! You and allCNPS Fellows stand for all thatCalifornia Native Plant Society mem-bers can be proud of in this, our40th year.

Linda Ann VorobikFremontia Editor

FROM THE EDITOR

ach of 2005’s four issues of Fre-montia celebrates the 40th anni-versary of the California Native

Plant Society (CNPS): each issue be-gins with an article about one fourthof the 32 chapters, followed by one ormore articles on the state programs.The article on chapters for this issueis introduced by CNPS President,Carol Witham, then progresses tosummaries of the state’s seven south-ernmost chapters, each written by oneor more representatives of that chap-ter. Upon reading them I wished Icould visit every one: attend a plantsale in LA; picnic with the South CoastChapter; or explore the desert withMojave Chapter members.

EN

onprofit Org.

U.S

. Postage

PA

IDO

akland, CA

Perm

it # 3729

Charles Argue, PhD, is a plant biologist specializing inthe study of pollen grains. His articles have appeared in theAmerican Journal of Botany, Canadian Journal of Botany, In-ternational Journal of Plant Sciences (Botanical Gazette), Grana,Pollen et Spores, North American Native Orchid Journal, andas chapters in a number of book-length publications.

Holly Cheong, a former biologist with the City of SanDiego’s Multiple Species Conservation Program, is nowan environmental planner for the Southern Nevada WaterAuthority.

Mark Elvin, a former wildlife biologist with the US Fishand Wildlife Service, is the senior botanist for Dudek andAssociates in San Diego, California.

Keith Greer is the deputy planning director and programmanager for the City of San Diego’s Multiple Species Con-servation Program.

Glenn Keator, PhD, is a freelance teacher and botanist atCalifornia Academy of Science, Strybing Arboretum, Re-gional Parks Botanic Garden, and Merrit College, andauthor of many books, including Introduction to Trees of theSan Francisco Bay Region.

Michael Tomlinson is now working at the Provost’s Of-fice of Advancement at UC Davis, but served from 2003-2004 as the Bulletin editor and the first development direc-tor for CNPS.

Dirk R. Walters, along with the nomination committeefrom the San Luis Obispo Chapter, is well-acquainted withour latest CNPS Fellow, Malcolm McLeod.

Carol W. Witham is a consulting biologist specializingin the endangered plants and animals of vernal pools.She is currently president of CNPS and founder ofVernalPools.org, a grassroots organization dedicated to sav-ing California’s vernal pool landscape.

CONTRIBUTORS

Documents

Vol. 33, No. 1 January 2005 FREMONTIA · 2018. 3. 30. · volume 33:1, january 2005 fremontia 1 a journal of the california native plant society fremontia $5.00 (free to members)