vol. 36, no. 4 • fall 2008 fremontia - cnps.org · tim thomas monterey bay . . . . rosemary...

F R E M O N T I AV O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8

JOURNAL OF THE CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

$5.00 (Free to Members)

VOL. 36, NO. 4 • FALL 2008

FREMONTIA

F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8

The California Native Plant Society(CNPS) is a statewide nonprofit organi-zation dedicated to increasing the un-derstanding and appreciation of Califor-nia’s native plants, and to preservingthem and their natural habitats for fu-ture generations.

CNPS carries out its mission throughscience, conservation advocacy, educa-tion, and horticulture at the local, state,and federal levels. It monitors rare andendangered plants and habitats; acts tosave endangered areas through public-ity, persuasion, and on occasion, legalaction; provides expert testimony togovernment bodies; supports the estab-lishment of native plant preserves; spon-sors workdays to remove invasive plants;and offers a range of educational activi-ties including speaker programs, fieldtrips, native plant sales, horticulturalworkshops, and demonstration gardens.

Since its founding in 1965, the tradi-tional strength of CNPS has been itsdedicated volunteers. CNPS activitiesare organized at the local chapter levelwhere members’ varied interests influ-ence what is done. Volunteers from the33 CNPS chapters annually contributein excess of 97,000 hours (equivalentto 46.5 full-time employees).

CNPS membership is open to all.Members receive the quarterly journal,Fremontia, the quarterly statewide Bul-letin, and newsletters from their localCNPS chapter.

VOL. 36, NO. 4, FALL 2008

F R E M O N T I A

Copyright © 2009

California Native Plant Society

STAFF (SACRAMENTO)Executive Director . . . . . Tara Hansen

Finance & Administration Manager .Cari Porter

Development Director . . . Jack TraceyMembership & Sales Coordinator . . .

Stacey FlowerdewConservation Program Director . . . . .

Greg SubaRare Plant Botanist . . . . Nick JensenVegetation Program Director . . . Julie

EvensVegetation Ecologists . Jennifer Buck,

Kendra SikesEducation Program Director . . . . Josie

CrawfordAdministrative Assistant . . . . . Anna

Ostrowercha

STAFF (AT LARGE)Fremontia Editor . . . . . . Bart O’BrienCNPS Bulletin Editor . . . . . Bob HassLegislative Consultant .Vern GoehringEast Bay Conservation Analyst . . . . .

Lech NaumovichWebsite Coordinator . . Mark Naftzger

PROGRAM ADVISORSRare Plant Program Senior Advisor . . .

Jim AndreVegetation Program Senior Advisor . .

Todd Keeler-WolfHorticulture Committee Chair . . . . . .

Christina LewisCNPS Press Co-Directors . . . . . Holly

Forbes, Dore BrownPoster Program . . . Bertha McKinley,

Wilma Follette

BOARD OF DIRECTORSBrett Hall (President); Carol Witham(Vice President); Brad Jenkins (Trea-surer); Lynn Houser (Secretary); AtLarge: Lauren Brown, Ellen Dean, JaneHicks, Arvind Kumar, Brian LeNeve,Vince Scheidt, Alison Shilling

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

CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY

MEMBERSHIPMembership form located on inside back cover;

dues include subscriptions to Fremontia and the Bulletin

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

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

CHAPTER COUNCILKevin Bryant (Chair); Larry Levine(Vice Chair); Laura Camp (Secretary);Board of Directors Representatives:Lauren Brown, Brian LeNeve

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

Steve McLaughlinChannel Islands . . . . David MagneyDorothy King Young (Mendocino/

Sonoma Coast) . . . . . Lori HubbartEast Bay . . . . . . . . . . Delia TaylorEl Dorado . . . . . . . Cindy PodsiadloKern County . . . . . . Laura StocktonLos Angeles/Santa Monica Mtns . . . .

Betsey LandisMarin County . . Carolyn LongstrethMilo Baker (Sonoma County) . . . . .

Liz ParsonsMojave Desert . . . . . . Tim ThomasMonterey Bay . . . . Rosemary FosterMount Lassen . . . . . . . Catie BishopNapa Valley . . . . . . . . . . John PittNorth Coast . . . . . . . Larry LevineNorth San Joaquin . . . . Alan MillerOrange County . . . . . Nancy HeulerRedbud (Grass Valley /Auburn) . . . .

Brad CarterRiverside/San Bernardino counties . .

Katie BarrowsSacramento Valley . . . Hazel Gordon,

Kristie HayduSan Diego . . . . . . . . Marty FoltynSan Gabriel Mtns . . . Gabi McLeanSan Luis Obispo . . . Lauren BrownSanhedrin (Ukiah) . . . . . . . . Geri

Hulse-StephensSanta Clara Valley . . . Kevin BryantSanta Cruz County . . . . Brett HallSequoia (Fresno) . . . . Paul MitchellShasta . . . . . Susan Libonati-BarnesSierra Foothills (Tuolumne, Cala- veras, Mariposa) . . Robert W. BrownSouth Coast (Palos Verdes) . . . . . .

Barbara Sattler, David SundstromTahoe . . . . . . . . . . Michael HoganWillis L. Jepson (Solano) . . . . . . . .

Mary Frances Kelly PohYerba Buena (San Francisco) . . . . .

Linda J. Shaffer

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

Phone: (916) 447-CNPS (2677) Fax: (916) 447-2727Web site: www.cnps.org Email: [email protected]

Printed by Premier Graphics: www.premiergraphics.biz

Disclaimer:

The views expressed by authors publishedin this journal do not necessarily reflectestablished policy or procedure of CNPS,and their publication in this journal shouldnot be interpreted as an organizationalendorsement—in part or in whole—of theirideas, statements, or opinions.

CALIFORNIA NATIVEPLANT SOCIETY

Dedicated to the Preservation ofthe California Native Flora

Bart O’Brien, Editor

Bob Hass, Copy Editor

Beth Hansen-Winter, Designer

Kathryn Blassey, Editorial Assistant

Brad Jenkins and Jake Sigg,Proofreaders

F R E M O N T I A 1V O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8

THE COVER: A rosy day dawns over Punta Colonet in Baja California, Mexico. This view, taken from the south, is from whatwould be the center of the proposed new mega-port facility that would severely impact this unique coastal outpost of Californiaflora. Photograph by Alan Harper.

CONTENTSTHE THREATENED BIOLOGICAL RICHES OF BAJA CALIFORNIA’S COLONETMESA by Kevin B. Clark, Mark Dodero, Andreas Chavez, and Jonathan Snapp-Cook . 3

Colonet Mesa is a little known peninsula halfway between Ensenada and San Quintin thatsupports some of the most robust populations of endangered species and habitats within theCalifornia Floristic Province. Over one hundred vernal pools are scattered within a matrixof Mártirian sage scrub, maritime chaparral, and coastal dune vegetation communities.While Colonet Mesa has long been a hidden gem for botanists, it is now threatened by amega-port project that would transform the entire region.

THE CORYPHANTHAS OF CALIFORNIA by Stephen Ingram .......................... 11

California’s three species of Coryphantha, the pincushion cacti, are beautiful but easy tooverlook, and all are listed by CNPS. Based on three species profiles from the recentbook, Cacti, Agaves, and Yuccas of California and Nevada, author-photographerStephen Ingram shares some of the human and natural history associated with thesesmall cacti.

MEET HARWOOD’S WOOLLY- STAR (ERIASTRUM HARWOODII )by Sarah J. De Groot ................................................................................................ 15

How do new species get recognized? The author tells the story of one such plant that didn’tfit into the existing botanical hierarchy. Eriastrum harwoodii is currently recognized asa rare endemic species of California.

PROPAGATION OF MATILIJA POPPY (ROMNEYA COULTERI )by Kathleen Navarez ................................................................................................ 18

It has long been part of horticultural dogma that our beautiful Matilija poppy cannot bepropagated from vegetative stem cuttings. This resourceful author describes her newsuccessful method to reliably propagate this plant from an unusual type of stem cuttingknown as a mallet cutting. Follow these step-by-step instructions and clonally grow moreof your favorite selection.

NEW CNPS FELLOW—KEN HIMES by the Santa Clara Valley ChapterBoard of CNPS.......................................................................................................... 20

From his first participation at a “member’s night” slide show meeting in 1983, Ken Himeshas been a most welcome fixture of the Santa Clara Valley Chapter of CNPS. Over theyears he has shared his extensive knowledge and enthusiasm for California native plantsfar and wide.

BOOK REVIEWS ........................................................................................................................23

UPDATE ......................................................................................................................................25

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR ...........................................................................................................26

2 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8


THE THREATENED BIOLOGICAL RICHES OF BAJACALIFORNIA’S COLONET MESA

by Kevin B. Clark, Mark Dodero, Andreas Chavez, and Jonathan Snapp-Cook

n the Pacific coast of BajaCalifornia, about 65miles south of the portcity of Ensenada, lies

the small village of Colonet. Whilethe town itself is nondescript, justbeyond it lies a point named PuntaColonet that contains a little known

mesa harboring one of the mostbiodiverse sites on the west coast ofNorth America. For years, the unin-habited Colonet mesa has been ex-O

Flowers at dawn, Punta Colonet. The abundant cream-colored flowers of tidy-tips (Layia platyglossa) carpet the land, with the sun stillbelow the horizon behind the Sierra de San Pedro Mártir. Photograph by Alan Harper.


rival the ports at LosAngeles and LongBeach, would include abreakwater, 10 to 20berths, roads, housing,public buildings, andinfrastructure such aspower generatingplants.

The governmentalso proposes a 180-mile rail line to the bor-der, and an airport spe-cializing in cargo ser-vice. To support theproject, a new port citywill be home to 250,000residents by 2025. Theexact footprint of theproposal has not beenreleased, but the entiremesa would be directlyor indirectly affected bysuch a massive project.While the news hasbeen filled with discus-sions of the economicbenefits of the proposedport, little has beenmentioned of thethreats the projectposes to the rare spe-cies located in the area.

As a relatively un-disturbed mesa locatedright along the coast,Colonet mesa offers anexample of what muchof southern Californialooked like 200 years

ago. The mesa is comprised of a pla-teau about 6 miles wide and 10 mileslong that has been uplifted about300 feet over the adjacent sea.Washes and gullies have eroded por-tions of the mesa into short, steepcanyons, while the southern end ofthe plateau ends in an abrupt verti-cal drop into the sea.

The vernal pools on Colonetmesa are unparalleled in northernBaja or Alta California. Larger thanthe great pools on the Santa RosaPlateau in Riverside County, and asvaried and rich in species composi-

tion as all the remaining pools insouthern California combined, thesepools are truly a wonder to behold.The number of pools likely totalsover 100, and two of the vernal poolsare over half a mile in diameter,while another approaches eight-tenths of a mile. Many of the poolshave yet to be explored, but thosethat have been have revealed anamazing diversity of endemic andrare taxa, including several on theU.S. list of endangered species.

The mesa supports the largestknown population of endangeredSan Diego button-celery (Eryngiumaristulatum var. parishii [Apiaceae]).The pools also support the largestknown population of the endangeredOrcutt’s grass (Orcuttia californica[Poaceae]). The threatened spread-ing navarretia (Navarretia fossalis[Polemoniaceae]) is also found inhealthy populations, as is the en-dangered San Diego ambrosia (Am-brosia pumila [Asteraceae]). Otherrare taxa on the mesa include thelittle mouse tail (Myosurus minimusvar. apus [Ranunculaceae]), Califor-nia adder’s tongue (Ophioglossumcalifornicum [Ophioglossaceae]),and a local endemic called the ver-

The vernal pool tarplant (Centromadia perennis) is foundin its largest populations on Colonet Mesa. Photograph byMark Dodero.

ABOVE: Map showing the location of PuntaColonet, Baja California. • RIGHT: A 300-foot cliff over the Pacific Ocean dominatesthe south end of Colonet Mesa. Photographby Mark Dodero.

plored by small numbers of bota-nists and naturalists, but has other-wise escaped much notice from thescientific community.

Recently, however, in responseto the overcrowded ports in theUnited States, and at the urging ofU.S. import companies, the Mexi-can government and the Baja Cali-fornia state government, along withprivate industry have proposed amassive port complex in a bid tosatiate American consumers’ de-mand for imported goods. The port,which planners hope will one day


nal pool tarplant (Centromadia per-ennis [Asteraceae]). The endangeredSan Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinec-ta sandiegoensis) also inhabits thepools, as well as hosts of other cope-pods, ostracods, and tadpole shrimpthat remain to be explored.

Reptiles and amphibians foundon the mesa include the western

spadefoot toad (Spea hammondii),coast horned lizard (Phrynosomacoronatum), and the endemic BajaCalifornia whiptail (Cnemidophoruslabialis). Birds breeding on the mesainclude the threatened Californiagnatcatcher (Polioptila californica),cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brun-neicapillus), burrowing owl (Athene

TOP: Riparian channels on the mesa support many of the same rare and unusual speciesas are seen in vernal pools. Photograph by Alan Harper. • LEFT: California adder’s tongue(Ophioglossum californicum). Photograph by Mark Dodero.


cunicularia), and sage sparrow (Am-phispiza belli). From the cliff faceone can watch a resident pair ofperegrine falcons (Falco peregrinus)cruise back and forth just below. Inaddition, numerous waterfowl andshorebirds are attracted in the springto the large vernal pools. Arthropodshave been little explored on themesa, but species becoming rare insouthern California are still com-mon here, including the Sonoranblue butterfly (Philotes sonorensis).

Caption

Surrounding the pools on themesa are species-rich upland veg-etation communities includingMártirian coastal succulent scrub,maritime chaparral, and stabilizedcoastal dunes. Also adding to thisdiversity of upland habitats on themesa are geologic formations suchas gabbro clay lenses, Pleistocenebeach ridge formations (similar tothose found at Del Mar and TorreyPines in Alta California), and volca-nic rock intrusions. These diversehabitats support their own rare taxasuch as the threatened San Diegothorn-mint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia[Lamiaceae]) that has three largepopulations on the mesa, and therare Nuttall’s lotus (Lotus nuttalli-anus [Fabaceae]) in the dunes.

Several species such as dwarfbrodiaea (Brodiaea terrestris ssp. ker-nensis [Themidaceae]), ashy spike-moss (Selaginella cinerascens [Selagi-nellaceae]), and prostrate spine-flower (Chorizanthe procumbens[Polygonaceae]) reach the southern

extent of their distribution on themesa. An endemic buckwheat (Erio-gonum fastigiatum [Polygonaceae])is also found here, as well as the Bajagooseberry (Ribes tortuosum [Gross-ulariaceae]). The list of rare taxa

In a wet year, this, the largest vernal pool on Colonet Mesa, is over a kilometer across. Theemergent vegetation in this pool is predominantly the vernal pool tarplant (Centromadiaperennis), which is endemic to the region. Photograph by Alan Harper.

San Diego thorn-mint (Acanthomintha ili-cifolia) grows on clay soils. Photograph byAlan Harper.


continues to grow. At least two un-described species of Dudleya (Cras-sulaceae) have also been found onthe mesa, and with further explora-tion, other undescribed taxa arelikely to be found among the di-verse habitats.

One of the most spectacular fea-tures of Colonet Mesa is not actu-ally on the mesa at all. Stare off intothe ocean below the 300-foot cliff,and within a few minutes duringthe right season you are likely to seea spout of water not far offshore.Gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus)make a very close approach to thecoast in this location, and duringtheir migrations you are likely tosee several per hour while gazing atthe sea. They are so close you feel asif you are in a small aircraft rightabove them as they cruise by. His-torically, gray whales kept close toshore along Alta California as well,but over the past several decades

the bulk of the migration has shiftedoffshore, possibly in response to in-creased ship traffic. Of course, es-tablishing a freeway of daily cargoship traffic at a future Colonet portthat directly crosses the gray whale’smigratory route will only invite di-saster, as whale strikes would beinevitable. What will this new im-pact have on the gray whale popu-lation that hugs the shoreline here,many with young calves in tow?And what effect will it have on thevibrant ecotourism industries inthe communities surroundingScammon’s (Ojo de Liebre) and SanIgnacio Lagoons, which rely onhealthy gray whale populations tol-erant of viewers in small boats?

The proposed port project atColonet represents a threat to allthe unique biological features of theregion. Any planning for the areashould be done in active consulta-tion with conservation groups tohelp minimize the loss of BajaCalifornia’s biological diversity inthe Colonet area. As planners dreamof a multi-billion dollar mega-port,conservationists can insist on amega-national park that preservesthe unique coastal resources of themesa. The recently completed con-servation agreement to conserve San

LEFT: The lighthouse at Punta Colonet issurrounded by high quality coastal succu-lent scrub vegetation. This formerly wide-spread characteristic plant community ofthe region is now threatened. Shaw’s agave(Agave shawii), huge live-forever (Dudleyaingens), and golden-spined cereus (Bergero-cactus emoryi) appear in the foreground ofthis image. Photograph by Alan Harper.

Ignacio Lagoon and the same graywhales that pass Colonet can serveas inspiration. Ecotourism gener-ated by preserving sensitive naturalresources will add economic diver-sity to the region and maintain abetter quality of life for the futurecitizens of the area by leaving muchneeded open space. While economicdevelopment is important for thelocal residents and the country,without proper planning a uniqueand one of the most and biologi-cally rich locations in all of BajaCalifornia will be lost.

CLOCKWISE FROM TOP LEFT: The endemic BajaCalifornia whiptail lizard (Aspidoscelislabialis). Photograph by Mark Dodero. • Adragonfly rests on a spikerush (Eleocharissp.). Photograph by Alan Harper. • TheSonoran blue butterfly (Philotes sonorensis)has several Dudleya species to use as hostplants on the mesa. Photograph by AlanHarper.

1 0 F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

A number of biologists havemade contributions to our knowl-edge of the resources at ColonetMesa over the years. A few inparticular who we would like tothank include Scott McMillan,Brenda McMillan, Kim Marsden,Bruce Hanson, Alan Harper of Terra

With the Punta Colonet lighthouse in the distance, the low-growing mosaic of coastal scrub vegetation is viewed from an old stabilizedsand dune. Such minimally disturbed large swaths of flat coastland are now rarely seen. Coastal sagebrush (Artemisia californica), andgolden-spined cereus (Bergerocactus emoryi) are clearly seen in the foreground. Photograph by Alan Harper.

Peninsular, Horacio De La Cuevaof Centro de Investigación Cientí-fica y Educación Superior de En-senada (CICESE), and to VinceMartinez of RECON Environmen-tal, Inc. for preparing the Colonetmap for this article.

Kevin B. Clark, Clark Biological Services,7558 Northrup Dr., San Diego, CA, 92126.

[email protected]; MarkDodero, RECON Environmental, Inc.,1927 Fifth Ave., San Diego, CA [email protected]; Andreas Chavez,Dept. of Biology, U. of Washington, 24Kincaid Hall, Seattle, WA 98195. [email protected]; Jonathan Snapp-Cook, Carlsbad Fish & Wildlife Office, 6010Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad,CA 92011. [email protected]

F R E M O N T I A 1 1V O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8

THE CORYPHANTHAS OF CALIFORNIAby Stephen Ingram

alifornia boasts an im-pressive diversity of Cac-taceae, with 42 species,varieties, and named

natural hybrids. Chollas (Cylindro-puntia), prickly-pears (Opuntia), andthe colorful hedgehog cacti (Echino-cereus) command most of thisfamily’s notoriety due to their rela-tive abundance and high visibility.But the diminutive pincushion orbeehive cacti in the genus Coryphan-tha, which are often overlookedwhen not in flower, deserve a closerexamination.

Many California botanists andcactus enthusiasts know our nativepincushion cacti as varieties ofEscobaria vivipara, as treated in TheJepson Manual (Hickman 1993) andThe Jepson Desert Manual (Baldwinet al. 2002). The International Cac-taceae Systematics Group recognizesEscobaria as a valid genus, and Ed-ward Anderson in The Cactus Family(2001) treats our taxa as distinct spe-cies of Escobaria. However, the Floraof North America (Zimmerman andParfitt 2003) does not recognizeEscobaria as a separate genus, andtreats the three varieties of E. viviparaas species of Coryphantha. Since thesoon to be published second editionof The Jepson Manual will follow thisnewer treatment (B. Parfitt, personalcommunication), now is a good timeto get to know these small, benign,and beautiful cacti.

Coryphantha is actually an ear-lier name for Escobaria that was usedby most California botanists (e.g.,Dawson 1966, Benson 1969, Munz1974) prior to publication of TheJepson Manual. In fact, even earlier,these species had been treated (as asubgenus) in the genus Mammillariaby renowned botanist and physician,George Engelmann, who describednumerous species of cacti. Mammill-aria, our other genus of small, globu-

lar cacti, can be distinguished mostreadily from Coryphantha by thepresence of hooked spines and a ringof flowers below the stem tip. The(sub)genus Escobaria differs from themain group of Coryphantha in hav-ing pitted seeds and flowers withfringed outer tepals. The genus nameCoryphantha comes from the Greekwords, koryphe, for head, and anthos,for flower, alluding to the stem-tipposition of its flowers. Coryphantharanges from Cuba through Mexicoand north into 15 western U.S. statesand southern Canada. Of the 55 to

75 species of Coryphantha known,only three species are found in Cali-fornia. One of these species is en-demic to California, and anotherspans more than 20º in latitude, oc-curring from Mexico to Canada. Allthree are of conservation concern toCNPS. Unlike most of our nativecacti, coryphanthas lack hooked orbarbed spines, and can be cautiouslytouched.

Coryphantha alversonii, alsoknown as cushion foxtail cactus, isan especially attractive, perky littlecactus with handsome pinkish flow-

C

Three species of cacti in the genus Coryphantha are found in California. This one, inhabitingclassic Joshua tree woodland habitats, is Coryphantha vivipara. All photographs by theauthor.


ers, which stand erect from the topsof the narrow barrel-shaped stems.Its pink flowers have spreadingtepals with dark pink midveins andpaler margins, and white, widelyspreading stigma lobes. The 7 to 18central spines are dark-tipped,straight, relatively stout, and notbarbed. Cushion foxtail cactus of-ten produces multiple stems that aregenerally taller, 5 to 27 cm. (2 to10.6 in.), and more robust thanCalifornia’s other two Coryphanthaspecies.

Cushion foxtail cactus was firstdescribed in 1894 by American bota-nist and educator, John M. Coulter(1851-1928), who named this spe-cies in honor of its collector, AllenH. Alverson (1845-1916) of San Ber-nardino, California. Alverson was ajeweler and mineralogist who also

traded in cacti and succu-lents. He collected cushionfoxtail cactus in 1892 (whencollecting cacti without apermit was legal) near

Twentynine Palms, close to present-day Joshua Tree National Park.Coulter’s comments about cushionfoxtail cactus noted that: “The cov-ering of stout bushy interlockingspines is like that of var. deserti [nowCoryphantha chlorantha, desert pin-cushion], but the black and reddishcoloration gives a decidedly differ-ent appearance. On account of thisappearance of a reddish-black brush,the plant has been popularly called‘foxtail cactus’ ” (from Baxter 1935).

Coryphantha alversonii is en-demic to California, and occupiesthe transition zone between thesoutheastern Mojave and northernColorado deserts. The only debat-able occurrence outside California,a collection cited by cactologistLyman Benson (1969, 1982) fromMohave County, Arizona, is appar-ently due to a misidentified frag-ment of a different species of Cory-phantha. Cushion foxtail cactus canbe found at elevations between 610and 1,525 meters (2,000 and 5,000feet), from the Little San BernardinoMountains east to the Big MariaMountains, Riverside County. It islocally abundant throughout muchof the middle and lower elevations

of Joshua Tree National Park and isfound on alluvial fans, desert pave-ment, and other gravelly, rocky ar-eas. Although cushion foxtail cac-tus can be locally common, it is notwidespread, and has a distributionthat is disjunct from all other Cory-phantha species. Coryphantha alver-sonii is on CNPS List 4.3, meaning ithas a limited distribution, but a lowdegree of threats.

Coryphantha chlorantha, prob-ably better known as Escobariavivipara var. deserti from The JepsonManual, goes by the common nameof desert pincushion. This specieswas first collected east of St. Georgein southern Utah and named Mam-millaria chlorantha by George En-gelmann. Its species name comesfrom the green flowers (from theGreek words, chloros for green andanthos for flower) on the dried spec-imen from which the original de-scription was based. However, mostpopulations have dull orange to yel-lowish-green flowers. In additionto the different perianth color, Cory-phantha chlorantha can be distin-guished from our other two Cory-phantha species by its narrower pe-rianth and more erect stigma lobes.The white to gray, dark-tipped spinesare interlaced and mostly obscurethe 7 to 15 cm. (2.8 to 6 in.) tallstems.

Desert pincushion cactus hasbeen treated as a variety of the vari-able beehive cactus (Coryphanthavivipara, listed below) because itshows vegetative similarities to thatmore widespread species. In the ab-sence of flowers, this species can bedifficult to distinguish from beehivecactus. Both species resemble a spinyball, although the green tubercles(protuberances tipped with spines)of desert pincushion are barely vis-ible through the dense covering ofspines. Desert pincushion can alsobe distinguished from beehive cac-tus by its more numerous (usually20 to 30) ashy-gray, overlapping ra-dial spines. In addition, desert pin-cushion is often perched in cracks

Three views of cushion foxtailcactus (Coryphantha alversonii):a mature plant, young colorfulspines, and beautiful pinkblossoms.


of limestone dolomite, while bee-hive cactus usually protrudes fromdecomposed granite.

Based on the ashy appearance ofdesert pincushion cactus (due to itspale, interlaced spines) and its oc-currence on dark dolomite rocks,one might expect this species to havea high heat tolerance. Indeed, ex-perimental research shows thatdesert pincushion cactus can with-stand a temperature of 64ºC (147ºF)(Smith et al. 1984). This heat toler-ance is similar to that of Californiafishhook cactus (Mammillariadioica) and higher than several chol-las and prickly-pears examined inthe same experiment. Its dense cov-ering of pale radial spines helpsdesert pincushion cactus reflect ex-cessive heat.

Coryphantha chloranta is virtu-ally restricted to limestone-derivedsoils and rocks and can often befound growing on dolomite out-crops with Clark Mountain agave(Agave utahensis var. nevadensis).This species occurs from 500 to atleast 1,700 meters (1,640 to 5,600ft.) in elevation and grows in pin-yon-juniper woodland, Joshua treewoodland, and other plant commu-nities of eastern Mojave Desertmountains. It ranges as far north-west as Death Valley National Park’sFuneral Mountains and souththrough the Kingston, Clark, andIvanpah Mountains of California’seastern Mojave. Desert pincushioncan also be found in southern Ne-vada, southwestern Utah, and north-western Arizona. It has recently beenadded to CNPS List 2.2, because itis considered to be rare or endan-gered in California but more com-mon elsewhere, and is fairly threat-ened in California.

Coryphantha vivipara, or beehivecactus, has been known as Escobariavivipara var. rosea in The JepsonManual. It was first collected by theEnglish naturalist and explorer Tho-mas Nuttall “near the Mandan townson the Missouri” (North Dakota) in1811. The range of beehive cactus

stretches from Sonora, Mexico toSaskatchewan, Canada—more than20º in latitude—making it Califor-nia’s most cosmopolitan cactus. It isalso the most widespread and vari-able species of Coryphantha, withnumerous common and varietalnames assigned to it by botanistsand horticulturists. George Engel-mann wrote of beehive cactus: “Theextreme forms are certainly very un-like one another, but the transitionsare so gradual that I can not drawstrict limits between them” (fromBritton and Rose 1919-1923). LymanBenson recognized seven varietiesin The Cacti of the United States andCanada (1982), two of which arenow treated as separate species andthe others treated as synonyms ofCoryphantha vivipara. But Bensondid acknowledge that further studywas needed to delineate these vari-able cacti.

Beehive cactus has solitary orclustered stems 7 to 18 cm. (2.8 to 7in.) tall, and prominent tubercles.Beehive and desert pincushion cactiare very similar vegetatively, but bee-hive cactus has fewer radial spines(12 to 18) than desert pincushioncactus (16 to 33). It has reddish-pink tepals without contrasting mid-veins, and white, spreading stigmalobes, in contrast to the less spread-ing, dull orange to yellow tepals, anderect stigma lobes of desert pincush-ion. It is more commonly found ongranitic alluvium in California, whiledesert pincushion cactus is nearlyalways found on limestone. Beehivecactus occurs at higher elevations1,500 to 2,500 meters (4,900 to 8,200ft.) and farther north than cushionfoxtail cactus.

As expected for a cactus thatgrows from the eastern MojaveDesert to the badlands of North Da-kota, beehive cactus has to withstandboth extremely hot and subzero tem-peratures. Throughout its range, bee-hive cactus can tolerate summer-time ground-surface temperaturesover 64ºC (140ºF) and survive afreezing temperature of -22ºC (-8ºF)

if it has time to acclimate to coldweather (Nobel 1994).

Although Coryphantha viviparais an extremely widespread species,within California it is more restrictedthan our other two coryphanthas,occurring only in eastern San Ber-

Desert pincushion cactus (Coryphanthachlorantha) has pale greenish-yellowflowers. In California, this species isrestricted to the eastern Mojave Desert.


nardino County. It is listed by CNPSas 2.2, meaning it is rare or endan-gered in California but more com-

mon elsewhere, and is fairly threat-ened in California. Beehive cactuscan be found in the Mojave National

Preserve inhabitingsagebrush scrub,Joshua tree wood-land, and pinyon-ju-niper woodland, ei-ther in the open orunder the cover ofprotective shrubs.The well-camou-flaged beehive cactusoften appears like aknobby, spine-cov-ered ball half sub-merged in the coarse,granitic sand. Duringthe late spring, how-

ever, its gorgeous pink flowers standout in contrast to its pale brownsubstrate, signaling to any bees inthe vicinity.

REFERENCES

Anderson, E.F. 2001. The Cactus Fam-ily. Timber Press, Portland, OR.

Baldwin, B.G., S. Boyd, B.J. Ertter, R.W.Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H.Wilkin, eds. 2002. The Jepson DesertManual: Vascular Plants of Southeast-ern California. University of Califor-nia Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles,CA.

Baxter, E.M. 1935. California Cactus:A Complete and Scientific Record ofthe Cacti Native in California. Ab-bey San Encino Press, Los Angeles,CA.

Benson, L. 1969. The Native Cacti ofCalifornia. Stanford University Press,Stanford, CA.

Benson, L. 1982. The Cacti of the UnitedStates and Canada. Stanford Univer-sity Press, Stanford, CA.

Britton, N.L., and J.N. Rose. 1919-1923.The Cactaceae. 4 volumes. CarnegieInstitution of Washington, DC.

Dawson, E.Y. 1966. The Cacti of Cali-fornia. University of California Press,Berkeley, CA.

Hickman, J.C., ed. 1993. The JepsonManual: Higher Plants of California.University of California Press, Ber-keley and Los Angeles, CA.

Munz, P.A. 1974. A Flora of SouthernCalifornia. University of CaliforniaPress, Berkeley and Los Angeles,CA.

Nobel, P.S. 1994. Remarkable Agavesand Cacti. Oxford University Press,New York, NY and Oxford, UK.

Smith, S.D., B. Didden-Zopfy, and P.S.Nobel. 1984. High-temperature re-sponses of North American cacti.Ecology 65:643–651.

Zimmerman, A.D., and B.D. Parfitt.2003. Coryphantha. In: Flora ofNorth America Editorial Committee,eds. Flora of North America North ofMexico 4:220–237. Oxford Univer-sity Press, New York, NY and Ox-ford, UK.

Stephen Ingram, 140 Willow Road, SwallMeadows, CA 93514. [email protected]

Beehive cactus (Coryphantha vivipara) in full bloom.

The cryptic coloring and low habit of a young beehive cactus(Coryphantha vivipara) enables it to disappear into thedecomposed granite soil where it grows.


MEET HARWOOD’S WOOLLY-STAR(ERIASTRUM HARWOODII )

by Sarah J. De Groot

the three species under which it wasplaced.

HABITAT AND RANGE

Eriastrum harwoodii inhabitssand hills in the deserts of San Ber-nardino, Riverside, and San Diegocounties. It is not found on very ac-tive dunes, but at every site where Ihave found it, there is still some sandblowing around, so the habitat wouldbe characterized as semi-stabilizedsand dunes. Usually other duneplants are also present, for example,desert lily (Hesperocallis undulata),birdcage evening primrose (Oeno-thera deltoides), big galleta grass(Pleuraphis rigida), and pink sandverbena (Abronia villosa). Withinthese dune sites, E. harwoodii plantstend to be scattered, and sometimeswidely so, but if one walks aroundlong and far enough, quite a fewplants can be found.

These dune sites are not par-ticularly common throughout thedeserts. At present E. harwoodii isknown from about a dozen sites,and this led to its being placed onthe California Native Plant Society’sList 1B.2 (fairly endangered in Cali-fornia and elsewhere; see http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi). However, it may ap-pear rare simply because it has notbeen collected very often, which wasprobably because it was not wellknown.

HOW TO RECOGNIZE IT

Basically, it is the tallest, woolli-est, white- or cream-flowered Eria-strum you will find on sand dunesor in areas of loose, semi-stabilizedsand. It flowers in early April or may-be late March, depending on how

much winter precipitation the areahas received and how fast the weatherwarms up in the spring.

One species that might be con-fused with E. harwoodii is E. diffusum,since in California E. diffusum oftenhas small white- or cream-coloredflowers as well. In my experience,E. diffusum does not have as muchwool on the bracts, leaves, and stemsas E. harwoodii. Also, stems of E.diffusum are often brown, and leavesusually have several lobes. In con-trast, stems are usually tan in E.harwoodii, and leaves are entire orhave two lobes near the base.

Another species that may befound in sandy areas is E. eremicum.This species is easily distinguished

lthough it is endemic to Cali-fornia, Eriastrum har-woodii is a plant you maynot have met before. It is

a small desert annual, not often col-lected, and it is not recognized inThe Jepson Manual (Hickman 1993).Let me explain.

Eriastrum harwoodii (in thephlox family, Polemoniaceae) wasfirst described as Gilia filifolia Nutt.var. harwoodii by Thomas Craig, anundergraduate student of PhilipMunz at Pomona College in Clare-mont, California. The specific epi-thet honors R.D. Harwood, a collec-tor around California in the early1900s. The very first publication ofthis name was in Craig’s senior the-sis (1934a), although this thesis isnot widely known, and the usualreference cited is the subsequentpublication in the Bulletin of theTorrey Botanical Club (with a fewchanges; Craig 1934b). The type lo-cality is “sandy desert, 1200 ft.,Blythe Junction [Rice], RiversideCounty.” The type specimen, Munzand Harwood 3589, is housed at thecombined herbaria of Rancho SantaAna Botanic Garden and PomonaCollege (RSA-POM herbarium asPOM 7622).

The name then went through anumber of changes in position, ashas happened often for most speciesof Eriastrum . Jepson (1943) placedit under Hugelia diffusa; Mason(1945) moved it to Eriastrum diffus-um; and Harrison (1959, 1972) lo-cated it in Eriastrum sparsiflorum.So the subspecies harwoodii had beentreated under three different spe-cies: filifolium, diffusum, and spars-iflorum. Recently, David Gowen(2008) elevated this taxon to thespecies level, which makes sense inthat harwoodii never really fit any of

Eriastrum harwoodii plant at Rice, RiversideCounty. All photographs by the author.

A


by its large, blue, bilaterally sym-metric flowers and leaves with manylobes (two to seven).

INTERESTING FEATURES

I have observed a few traits inE. harwoodii that I have not seen inother species of Eriastrum. One in-

teresting feature of E. harwoodii is itslong roots. Long roots are quite com-mon among sand dune plants, whichneed to send roots deep in order tostay in one place as sand blows aroundthem. These roots are longer thanroots in other species of Eriastrum,and probably represent an adapta-tion to the sand dune environment.

Also, I have noticed many plantslean toward the east, which is awayfrom the prevailing wind. This maybe a consequence of only the wind,or it may also be a result of sandpiling against the stem predomi-nantly on one side of the plant.

Lastly, you do not need to beeither a morning person or a nightowl to observe the flowers of Eria-strum harwoodii. The flowers usu-ally do not open up before 9 a.m.,and often close around 5 p.m.

Now you have heard about E.harwoodii, maybe you will get tomeet a live plant out in the desertthis spring.

REFERENCES

Craig, T. 1934a. A revision of the sub-genus Hugelia of the genus Gilia. Se-nior Thesis, Pomona College.

Craig, T. 1934b. A revision of the sub-genus Hugelia of the genus Gilia.Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club61:385-396, 411-428, t. 23.

Gowen, D. 2008. New taxa following areassessment of Eriastrum sparsi-florum. Madroño 55(1):82-87.

Harrison, H.K. 1959. Morphologicaland Taxonomic Studies in the GenusEriastrum. Ph.D. Dissertation, Uni-versity of California, Berkeley, Cali-fornia.

Harrison, H.K. 1972. Contributions tothe study of the genus Eriastrum 2.Notes concerning the type speci-mens and descriptions of the spe-cies. Brigham Young UniversityScience Bulletin, Biological Series16(4):1-26.

Hickman, J.C., ed. 1993. The JepsonManual: Higher Plants of California.University of California Press, Ber-keley and Los Angeles, California.

Jepson, W.L. 1943. A Flora of Califor-nia 3(2):167.

Mason, H.L. 1945. The genus Eria-strum and the influence of Benthamand Gray upon the problem of ge-neric confusion in Polemoniaceae.Madroño 8(3):77-78.

Sarah J. De Groot, Rancho Santa AnaBotanic Garden, 1500 N. College Ave-nue, Claremont, California 91711. [email protected]

TOP: Close-up view of Eriastrum harwoodii flower. • BOTTOM: Eriastrum diffusum can beeasily confused with Eriastrum harwoodii.


Typical habitat of Eriastrum harwoodii at Rice, Riverside County.


PROPAGATION OF MATILIJA POPPY(ROMNEYA COULTERI )

by Kathleen Navarez

n October 2004, I was cutting backMatilija poppy (Romneya coulteri)in my garden in Ben Lomond. Cali-fornia. The material was healthy,

with vigorous lateral branches, andI thought there was not any reasonwhy these stems should not root. Iknow literature says otherwise, butmy propagator’s instincts took over.I gathered up the pruned branchesand brought them to CabrilloCollege’s Environmental Horticul-ture Center, where I work as a horti-culture instructor.

To lessen the chances of the cut-tings rotting, I cut the pencil-sizelaterals at an angle above and belowthe axil, leaving the main part of thestem attached. This is commonlyreferred as a mallet cutting.

The tip of each stem cutting wasremoved, so that the length of eachcutting was 6 to 8 inches, and eachcutting had 4 to 5 leaves attached. Igently scraped the base of eachcutting’s primary leaf axil (the basalaxil at the mallet) thereby wound-ing the adventitious buds at thatlocation. I further prepared the cut-tings by dipping them in dilutedClorox (1 tsp:8cups water), and thenrinsed them with fresh water.

I applied Dip’N Grow liquid root-ing concentrate at a rate of 1:5. Istuck the cuttings, in groups of three,in 4-inch pots prepared with a cut-ting mix of 3 parts perlite to1 partsifted peat moss. I added RootShieldto the cutting mix at the rate of 3tbs. per cubic foot of mix. I preparedtwo trays of 25 4-inch pots andplaced them in the greenhouse on amist bench set at 15 seconds of sprayevery 20 minutes and with bottomheat set at 70 degrees Fahrenheit.

After one month, most of theleaves had dropped off the cuttings,but you could easily see the newbud growth. After 2 months, nearly90% of the cuttings had rooted. Ipotted them into individual 2-inchliners using Sunshine Mix #4 andRootShield (at the rate of 3tbs. percubic foot of mix), then placed themback in the greenhouse on the samemist bench with bottom heat for 1to 2 weeks. After that period of time,

the liners are then moved from themist bench to a greenhouse benchwith 70 degrees bottom heat. Twomonths later, the rooted plants wereready to pot up directly into three-gallon pulp pots, which I then setoutside in a shade structure. In otheryears, we have potted the youngplants into plastic gallon-sized con-tainers.

In May of 2005, we sold our firstcrop at our spring plant sale. Mostof the plants were in bud, and somewere even blooming! I have sincegrown three crops successfully andteach this technique in our propaga-tion class.

Kathleen Navarez, Cabrillo College, Hor-ticulture Department, 6500 Soquel Drive,Aptos, California 95003. [email protected]

I

A rooted mallet cutting of Matilija poppy,ready to be potted up into a 2-inch linerpot.

ABOVE LEFT: A pruned stem of Matilija poppyis the source of several cuttings. • LEFT: Asingle mallet cutting is shown in rela-tionship to the original pruned stem. Allphotographs by the author.


CLOCKWISE FROM LEFT: Treating the cuttings with the rootingcompound Dip ’N Grow. • Young rooted cuttings are beginningto grow. • Successfully grown plants in 1-gallon pots, ready tobe sold and planted in the garden.


NEW CNPS FELLOW—KEN HIMESby the Santa Clara Valley Chapter Board of CNPS

walking encyclopedia and anengaging teacher on thetrail, Ken Himes has en-chanted and educated

countless Californians on the waysof native flora, and encouraged oth-ers to support this flora and itsthreatened habitat.

A member of Santa Clara ValleyChapter, Ken Himes was named as aFellow of the California Native PlantSociety in December 2006. Chaptermembers have fond memories of Kenthrough the years on a trail or in ameadow, describing the native floraand ecology in vivid detail, and inhis distinctive voice.

How do people fall in love withnative plants? In many cases, a se-ries of lucky events, chance meet-ings, and a willingness to be open todifferent ways of seeing things. Andso it was in Ken’s case. While Kenwas born and raised in San Fran-cisco, he spent the weekends andsummer vacations of his childhoodwith his family at a cabin in theredwoods in rural San Mateo Coun-ty. He recalls an uncle pointing outwestern azalea and other nativeplants near Pescadero Creek. Yearslater, Ken earned an Associate’s de-gree from the City College of SanFrancisco in Horticulture, and gradu-

ally learned more about gardeningand plants—but not necessarily Cali-fornia natives.

EARLY INFLUENCES

Transferring to Cal Poly San LuisObispo in 1967 provided the turn-ing point in Ken’s appreciation ofnative plants. The San Luis ObispoCNPS Chapter sponsored a talk byLedyard Stebbins on biological is-lands, which had an inspirationaleffect on Ken’s view of native plantsand habitats. Following this talk,Ken had the opportunity to tourRobert Hoover’s personal garden in

A

Ken Himes in the Sierra Nevada on a CNPS backpacking field trip in 2004. All photographs by Kathy Korbholz.


San Luis Obispo, and see nativeplants such as Dudleya abramsii ssp.bettinae in cultivation. Up to thistime, Ken had experienced little useof natives in horticulture, and wasmore familiar with the showy culti-vars favored in San Francisco. But astime went on, more serendipitousevents spurred Ken’s connectionswith the California flora.

In 1970, Ken left for Europe,where he worked and toured until1973. A visit to Kew Gardens inLondon furthered his appreciationfor California’s heritage, with memo-rable specimens of Aesculus califor-nica and Sequoiadendron giganteumon display. Returning to Californiain 1973, Ken soon after began workat the City of Belmont’s Parks andRecreation Department, where hecontinued to work until his retire-ment in June, 2003. As fate wouldhave it, Ken’s first supervisor, JimRaymond, in Belmont was a nativeplant enthusiast who furthered Ken’sinterest in local botany and ecology.Ken’s work included purchasing na-tives for the local parks, and plan-ning a nature trail through the oakwoodland community at Twin PinesPark in Belmont.

CNPS

While purchasing plants forTwin Pines Park at the East BayChapter’s fall 1974 plant sale, Kenjoined CNPS. He gradually becameinvolved in plant sales and otheractivities. His interest grew steadily,and finally came into full bloom inApril of 1980 when Ken set out on aself-styled sabbatical. Loading up his1963 Dodge pickup with campinggear, his dog Lupine, and all thenative plant books he could pack,Ken hit the road on what wouldturn out to be a three-and-a-halfmonth long odyssey exploring thewild places and native plants of Cali-fornia, crisscrossing the state fromas far south as Santa Barbara all theway to southern Oregon. To thisday Ken is still able to draw on the

experience from that adventure, of-ten remembering the precise loca-tions of some of California’s mostspecial plants and places, despite nothaving been back in the intervening30 years!

Returning to the Peninsula, Kenstarted to participate in local CNPSfield trips, but what really intriguedhim was collecting specimens forthe Santa Clara Valley Chapter Wild-flower Show. By 1985, this interestbecame official as he was appointedby then chapter President BartO’Brien to his first chapter boardposition, Chair of the WildflowerShow. Ken went on to hold nearlyall Santa Clara Valley Chapter of-ficer positions, including Treasurer,Vice President, and President (1987-1989); and to chair nearly all chap-ter committees, including FieldTrips, Photo Group, Invasive Re-moval, Books Sales, and Programs.

EDGEWOOD ANDBEYOND

In addition to these many contri-butions to the chapter, Ken’s primaryefforts in the last 20 years have beenfocused on Edgewood County Parkand Preserve in San Mateo County.In the early 1980s, the Santa ClaraValley Chapter began efforts to pro-tect the various special habitats, in-cluding significant serpentine grass-lands, at what would eventually be-come the park. Ken, who lives just afew miles from the site, was a staunchsupporter of, and advocate for, thepark since the very beginning.

In 1988, Ken helped start theEdgewood Park docent program, andhas worked with that program con-tinuously: sharing his vast knowl-edge of the park with the public dur-ing docent walks, and handing downthat knowledge to other docents

Ken signing in on the trail at Saddlebag Lake, near Yosemite in September of 2004.


through the Docent Training Pro-gram. In 1996, Ken joined theinvasives removal program at thepark, eventually assuming leadershipof the effort a few years later. UnderKen’s stewardship the program hasexpanded greatly over the years, withdramatic increases in acreage andthe number of species being treated,the number of volunteers involved,and overall volunteer hours contrib-uted per year. These efforts includeregular weeding parties up to threetimes per week throughout the year,since a weeding permit was first ob-tained in 1989.

As part of this effort, Ken over-saw the creation of the yellowstarthistle mowing effort at Edge-wood, and turned it into a rigorousscientific program using test plotsand other methods. Annual grassesand teasel were also targeted, andnew invasives were not allowed toget a foothold. Through carefulrecordkeeping, monitoring, and col-laboration with San Mateo CountyParks, Ken and his team have con-tributed a significant dataset to in-vasive plant research and weed con-trol. Ken and his colleague, chaptermember Paul Heiple, presented theresults of their work to the Califor-

nia Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC)in 2004, and have made presenta-tions about the program to numer-ous other groups as well. Beyondthe science, Ken has also greatly in-creased awareness of, and participa-tion in, conservation efforts, includ-ing helping to establish volunteerprograms with local high schoolsthat have resulted in the contribu-tion of thousands of additional vol-unteer hours at the park.

Ken has led hundreds of day andcamping trips, both locally andthroughout the state, for Santa ClaraValley, Yerba Buena, and other chap-ters. Along with Bart O’Brien, Kenrevitalized the chapter’s field tripprogram in the 1980s, and contin-ues to volunteer as a leader. Some ofKen’s favorite destinations includeSan Bruno Mountain, MontaraMountain, Pulgas Ridge, Edgewood,Jasper Ridge, Butterfly Valley, SnowMountain, Bear Valley, Mount Pinos,Smith River, and the White Moun-tains. With his prodigious memoryand an encyclopedic knowledge ofthe state’s flora, Ken can identifythousands of plants, patiently ex-plaining to his listeners their indi-vidual characters and differences.

Many view Ken’s heartfelt dedi-cation to education, outreach, andmentoring as his most importantcontribution toward conservation.Education is a cornerstone of hisapproach to life, and he integratesboth learning and teaching into justabout everything he does. He is atrue naturalist and ecologist, and is amodel for nature lovers at all levels.It isn’t uncommon for Ken to pause

along a trail or meadow to discussthe flora and end up surrounded byothers who have happened along,friends and strangers alike, all en-thralled by his engaging manner andextensive knowledge. Whether de-scribing the smallest details of a plantor the broad ecological relationshipsof regional geography and climate,Ken is able to bring the listener intothe topic, making complex conceptsaccessible and helping listeners feelthey are active, contributing partici-pants in the discussion.

SUMMATION

Ken’s work with CNPS has madehis knowledge available to thegreater community. His early atten-dance at the lecture by LedyardStebbins on biological islands foundresonance later in his ongoing fieldtrips and conservation endeavors atEdgewood Preserve and San BrunoMountain, two of the Peninsula’smost well-known “islands” that arenow surrounded by urbanizationand threatened by development.

Best of all, Ken does not simplyshare his knowledge and experiencewith others as occasion allows, butactively, eagerly, and generouslyseeks out ways to do so. Whether itbe through his work with high schoolstudents at Edgewood, or the manytrips he has led, or his presentationsand lectures (drawn from his ownextensive photographic library ofthousands of slides) to various CNPSchapters and other groups, or hismentoring of other chapter membersto help them learn and grow intochapter leaders, Ken is passionateabout passing on his knowledge andexperience to future generations. Hisenthusiasm and ability for helpingothers to know, appreciate, and pro-tect the native flora of our state makehim a treasure not just for our ownchapter, but for CNPS as a whole.

Santa Clara Valley Chapter of CNPS, 3921East Bayshore Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303.www.cnps-scv.org/

The most complete offering of bulbsnative to the western USA available

anywhere, our stock is propagated atthe nursery, with seed and plants from

legitimate sources only.

Telos Rare BulbsP.O. Box 1067

Ferndale, CA 95536www.telosrarebulbs.com

TelosRare Bulbs

Ken Himes at Pinnacles National Monu-ment in 2008.


BOOK REVIEWS

Terrestrial Vegetation of California,3rd Edition, Barbour, Michael G.,Todd Keeler-Wolf, and Allan A.Schoenherr, editors. University of Cali-fornia Press, 2007. 712 pages. $80.00hardcover.

This is not the sort of book thatyou sit down and “read” but it is nev-ertheless a landmark publication cov-ering California vegetation. Althoughheavy on academics there are also landmanagement and conservation impli-cations.

The list of contributors reads likea Who’s-Who among the leaders inthe field of California vegetation stud-ies. They may not be the inventors ofvegetation classification but they surelyare the collectors and analysts of thosedata that put California at the fore-front of this field. I must also add thatthese contributors are, or will be, theteachers of those who will follow intheir footsteps. In this regard, I espe-cially tip my hat to lead-editor MichaelBarbour who is now passing along in-sights gathered by his former students,as well as others, who assembled theabundance of new information con-tained in this, the third edition of thebook he helped pioneer back in 1977–with typed manuscripts, no less. I won-der how many of today’s readers re-member typewriters?

In the very first paragraph of thepreface to the first edition, it says “. . . en-thusiasm for the project was infec-tious, and it carried the two year manu-script preparation period through tocompletion with little discord andmany pleasant memories of a sense ofcommunity among California ecolo-gists.” I dare say, the new edition car-ries forward that tradition–on laptopcomputers, no doubt.

Here is a collection of irrefutableevidence that has, and will continue tohave, influence on management andcourt decisions relating to California’sland use management practices. Thisis well and good and is an importantcontribution. But, Chapter One espe-cially catches my attention because itcaptures the history of the coming to-gether of widely-scattered private andpublic land management agencies to-

ward the concept of “reading off thesame page.” Hidden away between thelines of this chapter are only hints ofthe lead role that the California NativePlant Society played in arriving at thewonderful cooperative efforts existingtoday.

In the 1980s and 1990s, high-energy CNPS members applied theirtalents, and their concerns, from dis-appointment to disappointment, tominor success, to eventual successin creating an atmosphere allowingagency workers to include native plantneeds within their official duties. Thiswas accomplished in spite of disinter-ested, “stick-in-the-mud” administra-tors who did not want their employ-ees being distracted. This, positive andunrelenting energy came from folkslike Ledyard Stebbins, Jean Jenny,Alice Howard, Bill Critchfield, LarryHeckard, among a long list of others.Many of these people achieved recog-nition within CNPS and set the scenefor where the Society is today. Someof the readers will also remember con-tributions of the “Natural Areas Break-fast, Chowder, and Marching Society”that would from time to time gather atSpenger’s Fresh Fish Grotto restau-rant in Berkeley to cement the bondsof mutual interest across administra-tive boundaries.

CNPS never gave up on its infor-mation-gathering and lobbying efforts,herding together reluctant membersof the “establishment” like stray cattle,resulting in today’s continuing pro-gress, growing pool of knowledge, andinsightful decision making. The Cali-fornia Natural Diversity Data Base andthe Interagency Biodiversity Council,along with CNPS’s undisputed exper-tise in rare plants are examples ofthis.

While I am at it, I want to espe-cially praise co-editor Todd Keeler-Wolf for being the right person at theright place at the right time. His wholeacademic and administrative careerseemed to point him in this direction.He is the major constant administra-tive factor on the job through plusesand minuses of changing administra-tions and budgeting circumstances.Thus he is on hand to provide specialinsights to this book.

But I must look beyond ChapterOne and recognize the collective knowl-edge represented in this book. Hereare data and background supportingthe field guides we carry in our back-packs. Here is authoritative knowledgeto help resolve many of the fine pointsof administrative and legal disputeshinging on field biology. Here are datato guide tomorrow’s students.


Here is a book that many will findbelongs on their bookshelf.

Norden H. (Dan) Cheatham

The Ladyslipper and I, Autobiogra-phy of G. Ledyard Stebbins, by G.Ledyard Stebbins. (Monographs in Sys-tematic Botany from the Missouri Bo-tanical Garden, Volume 109.) MissouriBotanical Garden Press. 2007. VictoriaC. Hollowell, Vassiliki Betty Smocovi-tis, and Eileen P. Duggan, eds. $35.00hardcover. 173 pages, 25 photographs.

Dr. G. Ledyard Stebbins, Jr. (1906-

mate portrait of the many life passionsthat Ledyard embraced and is writtenin a delightful story-telling fashiontypical of his oratory and teaching style.One disappointment is the brevity inwhich a few personal tragedies wereaddressed, but despite being the hubof academic and social circles, Ledyardwas a private person.

The first several chapters tell of anearly interest in nature fostered byprivileged and indulging parents andLedyard’s own curiosity and intellect.One of the most insightful of Ledyard’schildhood stories is his recollection ofboat trips with his parents at the age offive to admire bog plants that the wholefamily venerated. Subsequent years andchosen vignettes cover the awkward-ness associated with growing up maleand not athletically inclined, but high-light a counterpoint growth in his con-nection with nature with numerousexplorations in Seal Harbor, Pasadena,Colorado Springs, and Santa Barbara.Ledyard’s account of a 1924 crosscountry auto trip with a boardingschool companion in a modified ModelT exemplifies his lifelong passion fortravel and adventure.

The chapters dealing with Ledyard’slife as an undergraduate and graduatestudent at Harvard show a young manlearning about himself and his trueinterests in life despite them being dis-appointing to his family. These recol-lections also reveal the sometimes hos-

2000) led a life full of passion forbotany, teaching, mountain climbing,classical music, and politics. He madevast scientific contributions and is con-sidered the founder of evolutionarybotany. Many contemporary botanistslearned plant evolution from Varia-tion and Evolution in Plants, FloweringPlants: Evolution Above the Species Level,and Chromosomal Evolution in HigherPlants—those who learned plant evo-lution in Dr. Stebbins classroom usu-ally caught his contagious passion forbotany.

Ledyard made considerable con-tributions to the conservation of plantsin California through his associationwith and leadership within the Cali-fornia Native Plant Society (CNPS). In1968, he started a card file of plantswith limited distribution which even-tually evolved into the Rare Plant Pro-gram that maintains and publishes theCNPS Inventory of Rare and Endan-gered Vascular Plants of California, thedefinitive source of rarity informationfor California plants (http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi).He served as president of CNPS from1966 to 1972 and was made a Fellowof the organization in 1976.

The Ladyslipper and I is an enchant-ing autobiography by this legendaryfigure and serves as a who’s who of theearly contributors to our current stateof knowledge about plant evolution.This autobiography provides an inti-


UPDATE

THEN AND NOW—FORMER FREMONTIACOVER PHOTO

When chaparral is viewed prima-rily as fuel and not understood as avalued ecosystem, it is threatened bypoor land management practices. Onthe cover of the Fall 2007 issue ofFremontia, a remarkable stand of man-zanita chaparral was featured (located

in the Trabuco District of the Cleve-land National Forest). The area wasclearcut by the US Forest Serviceshortly thereafter in an attempt to re-duce “fuel” around a tree plantation.The plantation was established in 1956with a mix of Coulter pines (Pinuscoulteri) and a “frankenpine” hybrid(Pinus x attenuradiata, a cross of Mon-terey pine [Pinus radiata] and knob-cone pine [Pinus attunuata]). Coulterpines are native to the area and have

adapted to living within the chaparralplant community by having serotinouscones that open when exposed to fire.Being surrounded by chaparral is theirnatural condition.

In the recent USFS land manage-ment plans for Southern California,forest types were carefully distin-guished and management strategieswere offered for seven different foresttypes. Yet when it came to chaparral,different types were not distinguished,

tile disagreements that can occur be-tween academics with different per-spectives and theories. These chaptersare interspersed with scientific stud-ies, nature explorations, travel adven-tures, and punctuated with personaland intellectual milestones. Highpoints included publication of his firstpaper, attending an internationalbotany congress, and eventually gain-ing his Ph.D. from Harvard.

Chapter 12 begins the long andcolorful story of Ledyard’s researchcareer. He describes his research set-backs with the same honesty as hismany breakthroughs and epiphanies.You can hear his delight in the recol-lections of relationships with col-

leagues—local and international—that resulted in ongoing collabora-tion and lifelong friendships. Follow-ing receiving tenure in 1948, he shiftedhis research focus to California nativeplants and California grasslands, andin 1950 he transferred from Berkeleyto Davis to head a new Department ofGenetics.

Several chapters are a synthesis ofwhat he learned over the years andhypothesis for future studies.

Throughout his career, Ledyardtraveled the world in search of speci-mens for his genetic research on grasses.Following his retirement in 1973, hespent some time teaching and travelingas well. His autobiography is thoroughly

sprinkled with accounts of travels bothnear and far, unusual botanical discov-eries, and mountain climbing adven-tures with his oldest son, grandsons,and many friends. He climbed MountDana in 1986 at the age of 80.

This autobiography is a wonder-ful, personal account of a passionate,adventurous gentleman and a truescholar. A must read for anyone whoknew Ledyard, studies botany, or isinterested in the early stages of evolu-tionary botany.

Carol W. Witham

This book review was first published inHarvard Papers in Botany 13(2):301-302. 2008.


los or Ceanothus, as well as chaparral-associated forbs like Cordylanthus,Horkelia, Antirrhinum, Streptanthus ,Calochortus, etc. For example, the rareCeanothus masonii, known only from arelatively small section of chaparral onthe Bolinas Ridge north of Mt.Tamalpais, is rapidly being lost to theintrusion of Douglas-fir and othermixed evergreen tree species. In thesame areas, Arctostaphylos virgata isalso largely gone or in serious decline.Similarly, not far away, Arctostaphyloshookeri ssp. montana, a serpentine en-demic, is also losing ground rapidly asthe invading forests kill off the sun-requiring manzanita. Associated withthis manzanita are other rare plants,like serpentine reed grass (Calama-grostis ophitidis), Oakland star tulip(Calochortus umbellatus), Streptanthusglandulosus ssp. pulchellus, and S.batrachopus. The list could go on andon. There are Arctostaphylos bakeridying due to chaparral being convertedto Douglas-fir forests near Occidental,A. stanfordiana ssp. decumbens beingshaded out in Santa Rosa and DryCreek sites, A. densiflora struggling inits Vine Hill preserve due to increasingshade from oak and Douglas-fir alongthe county road right-of-way nearSebastopol, and Ceanothus divergensand C. confusus losing out in manysites in Sonoma and Napa counties.All these chaparrals and rare plantsare suffering due to lack of fire whichpermits tree species to rapidly colo-nize the chaparral communities, pre-vents renewal, and increases pathogenloads for many sensitive species.

So while these and other speciescould theoretically suffer from too manyfires, their health, in fact their verylives, are suffering today from notenough fire. That is because these plantsare adapted to fire, and the lack of ithas catastrophic consequences in termsof their preservation. It seems to methat every plant and plant associationthat we know of has an average (orideal) fire frequency, based primarilyon the prehistoric patterns of fire in

CHAPARRAL“MISCONCEPTIONS”

I would like to take issue withsome of the statements that RichardW. Halsey made in the lead article inFremontia 35(4):2-7, on Californiachaparral, especially on page 4 underthe heading of “Misconceptions.” Hestates that two of the “wrong” assump-tions that many folks make concern-ing chaparral are that “chaparral needsto burn to remain healthy,” and that“chaparral is adapted to fire.” Whilehe makes a very valid point concern-ing too frequent fires resulting in theconversion of chaparral into weedygrasslands, the converse is also truefrom my observations. If chaparral doesnot burn frequently enough, it is con-verted into woodland. Chaparrals werecreated by fire patterns that need to bemaintained to preserve their very na-ture, and the ideal frequency woulddepend on which taxon one is inter-ested in maintaining.

Maybe it is extremely different inSouthern California, and most of mynearly 30 years of observation havebeen in Central or Northern Califor-

nia, but I could easily show him, oranyone, dozens of places where chap-arral has been eliminated by aggres-sive tree seedlings (all native) that rela-tively quickly turn a diverse chaparralcommunity into a dark forest of Dou-glas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Cali-fornia bay laurel (Umbellularia califor-nica), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia),tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), andmadrone (Arbutus menziesii). Manypeople have hiked on Mt. Tamalpaisin Marin County and walked into darkDouglas-fir/mixed evergreen wood-lands, only to see large stretches ofdead skeletons of manzanita, ceano-thus, toyon, chaparral pea, etc., thatpersist in the now unsuitable habitatfor these chaparral species. This is com-mon throughout the Bay Area in manysites, public and private. The lack offire–at least until the next fire comesthrough–has completely eliminatednearly all chaparral species in someplaces. Given this widespread phenom-enon, how can he maintain that this ishealthier than being renewed by fire?

More important to conservation,many of these chaparrals contain (orcontained) rare species of Arctostaphy-

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

and a vegetation management plan wasnot developed for any of them. It is

time to start treating chaparral as thevalued ecosystem that it is.

Richard W. HalseyThe California Chaparral Institute


these areas. When these fire patternsdo not occur, or occur too frequently,something loses out and the vegetationshifts to plants that favor the new pat-tern. It also seems that if we want topreserve rare species in the wild, thenthose rarest elements need to be givenpriority, and the vegetation needs to bemanaged to favor those species or elsewe could lose them. And although afire may remove an encroaching forestand stimulate the regeneration of “lost”plant taxa from the seed bank, this isnot a sure thing, and it seems veryconceivable that some plant taxa couldbe lost forever given enough time ofinappropriate habitat conversion.

I have nothing against trees, but Itruly love chaparral, as unfriendly as itcan be to the human body. But all thetrees that move into and alter chapar-ral in our area are common specieswithout even a hint of rarity. We needto prioritize our conservation efforts,and since there are whole suites of rarespecies from chaparrals, we need tokeep the forest areas out of our chap-arrals. This can be done manually withsome success, but fire was the naturalprocess that originally accomplishedthis effect.

I think one of the crucial differ-ences of Northern compared withSouthern California chaparrals is thatmost of our northern chaparrals—andthis is increasingly evident toward thecoast—are adjacent to and/or sur-rounded by woodland communities ofvarious components. These woodlandsdominate, whereas the chaparral areasare “carved out of” this more predomi-nant arboreal community. Thus thewoodlands can very easily and rela-tively quickly move into the chapar-rals. The converse is not viable; i.e.,the sun-loving chaparral elements cannot effectively move into the wood-lands. And as mentioned previously,many trees, especially Douglas-fir, coastlive oak, and California bay laurel areprolific seeders with a high degree ofseedling survival, barring any limitingcontrols, a role previously played byfire. Now it seems that Douglas-firwoodland is destined to take over allcoastal regions of Northern Califor-nia—not only chaparral, but also grass-land, coastal scrub, oak savannah, etc.Even as one moves into the interior,where Douglas-fir and coast live oak

do not occur, other elements, includ-ing madrone, blue oak, canyon liveoak, interior live oak, and the previ-ously mentioned bay laurel are effec-tive at moving into chaparrals. Evenchaparral-associated conifers, such asknobcone pine (Pinus attenuata) andSargent or McNab cypresses (Cupressussargentii and C. macnabiana) will even-tually shade out most chaparral-lovingplants when their canopies close inand eliminate sunlight.

In conclusion, although I realizethat Richard Halsey probably knowsmore about chaparral than I ever will,I do not see how he can support thosestatements referred to earlier as mis-conceptions, since to me they are ob-vious truths, repeated again and againin almost every chaparral I have ob-served. I too love “old growth chapar-ral” and have reveled in its beauty, buthere it does not stay as chaparral: it isinexorably displaced. Much like lowislands in a rising sea, they are all tooeasily inundated and obliterated.

Roger Raiche

AUTHOR HALSEY REPLIES

I would like to thank Roger Raichefor responding to my article on thechaparral in the Fall 2007 issue ofFremontia. He provides a rare exampleof someone who does not blindly el-evate the value of forests above allelse. Too frequently, shrubs are seenas merely an “understory” that gets inthe way of what people often thinkshould exist, namely, wide open for-ests or grasslands unencumbered bysuch things as chaparral. Raiche’s per-spective is refreshing, especially dur-ing a time when large areas of nativeshrublands are being destroyed in thename of “fire safety.”

Regarding Raiche’s criticism of mystatements concerning misconceptionsabout the chaparral’s relationship tofire, it is important to make a distinc-tion between natural and managedlandscapes. The encroachment of treesinto the chaparral plant communitiesthat Raiche refers to is a natural pro-cess. Lightning-caused fires that wouldgenerally remove these trees are rela-tively infrequent in the San FranciscoBay Area. For example, over the pasthalf-century, the frequency of light-ning-caused fire in Alameda County

has been 1.8 fires per decade for every250,000 acres (Keeley 2005a). How-ever, if the desire is to maintain orexpand a particular plant community,artificially adding fire to a managedlandscape could certainly achieve sucha goal. But it is important to rememberthat applying such a treatment canhave unintended consequences. Pre-scribed fires have escaped into sur-rounding communities with devastat-ing results and have led to the elimina-tion of the very plant communities thefire was intended to encourage. Still, iflocal citizens want to restore a chapar-ral area currently overwhelmed by


other vegetation, using fire on a lim-ited basis is a reasonable approach.

When I wrote that chaparral doesnot need to burn, I was trying to counterthe common misconceptions thatchaparral is capable of handling anyfire return interval and needs to burn“frequently” to maintain its ecologicalhealth. Yes, many chaparral plant spe-cies require fire to stimulate seed ger-mination, but fire at the wrong time orthe wrong frequency can seriouslycompromise the ecosystem. We knowfire will eventually occur, regardlessof our efforts to stop it. For the mostpart, we do not need to speed up theprocess. The danger of being impa-tient and artificially adding fire to alandscape is that the next set of flamesmay return sooner than the chaparralsystem can tolerate, leading to its ex-tirpation. Continued climate changeand increasing human populations willlikely increase such risk.

Raiche’s observations are most rel-evant for certain areas in northern Cali-fornia where forested systems can tem-porarily succeed chaparral systems. Hissuggestion that some elements of chap-arral ecosystems “could be lost forevergiven enough time of inappropriatehabitat conversion” if fire does notoccur, is certainly an important con-cern that should be investigated. Wedo know, however, that there is a posi-tive relationship between longer firereturn intervals and robust chaparral

recovery (Keeley 2005b). In addition,the seeds of many chaparral plant spe-cies can remain viable in the soil for acentury or more. Areas where livingspecimens of ceanothus have long sincedisappeared and only scattered skel-etons of manzanita remain frequentlyexplode with seedlings of these spe-cies in the post-fire environment. Ifnot negatively influenced by trees inthe manner Raiche describes, old-growth chaparral stands typically re-main viable plant communities andimportant natural resource treasures.Unfortunately, such details are lost onmany policy makers and members ofthe public, leading them to believesimplistic notions about the ecologi-cal role of fire and thinking chaparralis resilient no matter when or howfrequently the flames come to visit.

A striking example of the ecologi-cally destructive potential that fire pos-sesses can be seen while drivingthrough Riverside County along In-terstate 15 or 215, or along State High-way 60 between Moreno Valley andBeaumont. Separating an occasional,struggling patch of sugar bush, sage,or chamise will be miles of invasive,non-native weeds. Much of the pre-European settlement landscape sur-rounding Thousand Oaks and SantaMaria was probably covered with Cali-fornia sage scrub rather than the non-native grasslands present today. Thismay well offer a vision of the future for

shrublands in many parts of the stateif fire frequency continues to increase.

While there are definite differ-ences between chaparral in southernand northern California, what appearsto be consistent is the lack of appre-ciation for native shrublands and thetendency for some to blame nativeplant communities for wildfire dam-age. This was demonstrated after theMartin fire in Santa Cruz last year.CNPS, “environmentalists,” and“brush” in the Bonny Doon Ecologi-cal Preserve were falsely blamed forthe fire’s wrath. This presents a chal-lenge to all of us who love the naturalenvironment and native plants in par-ticular. We must help the public un-derstand that the best way to createfire-safe communities is to adapt tothe fire-prone environment in whichwe live rather than trying to forcenature to adapt to us.

Richard W. Halsey

REFERENCES

Keeley, J.E. 2005a. Fire history of theSan Francisco East Bay region andimplications for landscape patterns.International Journal of Wildland Fire14: 285-296.

Keeley, J.E., A.H. Pfaff, and H.D. Safford.2005b. Fire suppression impacts onpostfire recovery of Sierra Nevadachaparral shrublands. InternationalJournal of Wildland Fire 14: 255-265.

Your Membership Helps Preserve and ProtectCalifornia Native Plants and Their Habitats

Free Wildflower poster with new membership!or more than 40 years CNPS has been a leader in habitat protection, conservation, and promoting the useof native plants in landscaping and home gardens.

As a member of CNPS, you play a key role in our ability to promote the conservation of native plants throughscience, education, advocacy, horticulture and land stewardship. So much of what we do depends on thestrength and commitment of our members!

On the local level, your membership and involvement contributes to strong chapters that provide regulareducational programs through monthly meetings and field trips, as well as support for local conservationefforts. Find your local chapter on the map to see what field trips and events are going on in your area!

For a limited time, CNPS is offering a special incentive to new members! Join online at the $45.00 member orhigher levels and we’ll send you one of three of our beautiful wildflower posters: Wildflowers of the Desert,Wildflowers of the Coast, or Wildflowers of the Redwood Forest.

F

F R E M O N T I AV O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8

� 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

Join Today!

Please make your check payable to “CNPS” and send to: California Native Plant Society, 2707 K Street, Suite 1, Sacra-mento, CA 95816-5113. Phone: (916) 447-2677; Fax: (916) 447-2727; Web site: www.cnps.org.; Email: [email protected]

� Enclosed is a matching gift form provided by my employer

� I would like information on planned giving

CNPS member gifts allow us to promote and protect California’s native plants andtheir habitats. Gifts are tax-deductible minus the $12 of the total gift which goestoward publication of Fremontia.

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

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

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

(CONTRIBUTORS: continued from back cover)

MATERIALS FORPUBLICATION

Members and others are invitedto submit material for publica-tion in Fremontia. Instructionsfor contributors can be foundon the CNPS website, www.cnps.org, or can be requested fromFremontia Editor, Bart O’Brienat [email protected] or c/oRancho Santa Ana Botanic Gar-den, 1500 N. College Ave.,Claremont, CA 91711.

Fremontia Editorial AdvisoryBoard and reviewers

Susan D’Alcamo, Ellen Dean,

Kathleen Dickey, Phyllis M.

Faber, Holly Forbes, Pam Muick,

John Sawyer, Jim Shevock, Jake

Sigg, M. Nevin Smith, Linda Ann

Vorobik, Carol W. Witham

Stephen Ingram is a writer and photographer, and past president of the BristleconeChapter of CNPS. He is the author of the recent book, Cacti, Agaves, and Yuccas ofCalifornia and Nevada. To view his photography, visit www.ingramphoto.com.

Kathy Korbholz is a health care professional and an amatuer nature photgrapherwho has been a frequent hiking companion of Ken Himes. Many of her wild-flower photographs can be seen at http://photos.friendsofedgewood.org.

Kathleen Navarez is a horticulture instructor at Cabrillo College in Aptos, Cali-fornia, and is an active member of the International Plant Propagators Society.Kathe has a deep interest in the genus Salvia, and is very involved with collectingand growing sages from around the world.

Roger Raiche is owner/partner of the design-build landscape firm of Planet Horti-culture. For 23 years Roger was in charge of the Native Plant collection at theUniversity of California Botanical Garden at Berkeley. There he revamped and ex-panded the collection, did extensive fieldwork, discovered new taxa—three of whichwere named in his honor—and selected about two dozen native cultivars.

The CNPS Santa Clara Valley Chapter Board of Directors prepared and wrotethe article on Ken Himes as a group effort. The primary contributors to this effortincluded the following board members (listed alphabetically): Judy Fenerty (formerchapter president and current past president), Drew Shell (former chapter vicepresident and current San Mateo County conservation chair), Georgia Stigall(former chapter president and current new member outreach chair), and JeanStruthers (former chapter president and current nursery manager).

Jonathan Snapp-Cook is a US Fish and Wildlife biologist at the Carlsbad officewhere he works on conservation of federally listed plants and vernal pool species.

Carol W. Witham is a former state president of CNPS and is currently vice presi-dent of the CNPS Board of Directors. She is a member of the Fremontia editorialboard and is frequently one of our proofreaders. Carol is an expert on California’svernal pools and their conservation.

F R E M O N T I A V O L U M E 3 6 : 4 , F A L L 2 0 0 8

California N

ative Plant S

ociety2707 K

Street, S

uite 1S

acramento, C

A 95816-5113

Address S

ervice Requested

Nonprofit O

rg.

U.S

. Postage

PA

ID

A.M

.S.

CONTRIBUTORS

FROM THE EDITOR

he cover story of this issue takesus to the breathtaking beauty ofBaja California’s Punta Colonet,

an area that is fast changing due toboth local agricultural interests andthe proposed mega-port project thatwould forever ecologically damage theregion. If you have the opportunity tovisit this coastal paradise, do so atyour earliest convenience as there isless of it to see every year. I am espe-cially pleased that we are able to fea-ture such stunning images of this areaby such talented photographers as AlanHarper and Mark Dodero.

We are treated to a view of Cali-

fornia’s Coryphanthas by noted authorand photographer Stephen Ingram.His new book, Cacti, Agaves, and Yuc-cas, published by Cachuma Press, ishighly recommended for everyone in-terested in these fascinating Califor-nian plants.

A fairly recently recognized newelement of California’s desert flora,Eriastrum harwoodii, is described andillustrated by Sarah DeGroot.

“Matilija poppy cannot be grownfrom stem cuttings.” That longstand-ing conventional wisdom has been putto rest by intrepid plant propagatorKathleen Navarez. Follow her instruc-

tions and you will be growing moreplants for your friends and plant sales.

Ken Himes is one of the mostrecently named CNPS Fellows. Hislengthy term of service, in many ca-pacities, to the Santa Clara ValleyChapter is celebrated in this articleauthored by many of his friends.

Rounding out this issue are twobook reviews, a surprising visual up-date to the cover image of our recentspecial chaparral issue, and a pair ofletters that convey vital informationon the management of California’schaparral plant communities.

Bart O’Brien

T

(continued on inside back cover)

Andreas Chavez is a predoctoral student in the biology de-partment at the University of Washington. He is a memberof the San Diego Chapter of CNPS and has been involved inseveral floral and faunal surveys in northwestern Baja Cali-fornia.

Norden H. (Dan) Cheatham is probably best known for theCheatham & Haller habitat classification system that wasdeveloped, with Professor Robert Haller, in the 1970s foruse by the University of California Natural Reserves Systemand served as a forerunner of vegetation classification sys-tems in use today.

Kevin B. Clark is a former board member of the San DiegoChapter of CNPS. He has conducted research on endangeredspecies and the effects of habitat fragmentation on diversity.He recently completed six years with the US Fish and Wild-life Service and is now a consulting biologist.

Sarah J. De Groot is a Ph.D. candidate at Rancho Santa AnaBotanic Garden, where she is currently working on the sys-tematics of the genus Eriastrum. She is a native SouthernCalifornian from the Escondido area, and has always had astrong interest in plants.

Mark Dodero is a restoration biologist at RECON Environ-mental, Inc. His restoration work focuses on rare and sensi-tive plants, animals, and habitats. He also coordinates withNGOs in Baja California, to further conservation efforts southof, and across, the border.

Richard W. Halsey is the director of the California Chapar-ral Institute, a research and educational organization fo-cusing on the ecology of California’s shrubland ecosystems,the dynamics of wildland fire, and the importance of na-ture education.

Alan Harper is a conservationist and photographer whoworks in both capacities in the California Floristic Provinceportion of Baja California, Mexico. Some of his photogra-phy can be viewed at www.alanharper.com.

vol. 36, no. 4 • fall 2008 fremontia - cnps.org · tim thomas monterey bay . . . . rosemary...

Documents