Eriogonum brevicaule – Shortstem buckwheat
I’m excited to share the start of a new company that I believe will have far reaching and applicable impacts to the plant markets in the USA for years to come (cutting edge ideals that effectively lean towards the bleeding edge).
Native Roots LLC. is a company built on licensed technology from the University of Idaho, more specifically a decade of Dr. Stephen Love’s work. Dr. Stephen Love is a Professor of Horticultural Science and Community Horticulture Specialist.
The concept was formed innocently enough by Dr. Love’s interest and passion for native plants, which drove the ideas and subsequent funding for his research. He had noticed the native plants available to him in the traditional market place were not just limited in species type and quantity, but when purchased and planted were wildly unpredictable in his landscape.
This goes back to the commonly expressed sentiment about Natives being weedy in a landscape. He knew what he liked about the native plants he would encounter in the wilds of the western United States but when he tried to propagate from seed, the traits he admired would often be lost in transition from wild to urban application. As a result he embarked on a 10 year research and development project focusing on wild land collections from all over the western United States, including the hot deserts of the south to the sage step and alpine communities throughout the Rocky Mountains.
Erigeron glaucus – Seaside daisy
After much trial and tribulation roughly 350 species of native plants have been selected and “developed” for propagation and release into the market in 2014. Both retail and whole sale opportunities will exist depending on regional needs and interest. 10 species will be showcased in the release with 50 or so in the wings available for purchase in the inaugural year.
The showcase species include:
1. Erigeron glaucus – Seaside daisy
2. Eriogonum brevicaule – Shortstem buckwheat
3. Mirabilis multiflora – Colorado four o’clock
4. Monarda menthaefolia – Bee balm
5. Penstemon richardsonii – Richard’s penstemon
6. Penstemon stricktus – Rocky Mountain penstemon
7. Poa secunda – Big bluegrass
8. Potentilla thurberi – Scarlet cinquefoil
9. Salvia pachyphylla – Purple sage
10. Sporobolus wrightii – Big Sacaton
The genetic narrowing of these plants is what lends them to being predictable in a landscape environment. They are not hybridized plants and they certainly are not cross pollinated selections of Natives. The selections have simply been repeatedly culled and sorted for specific desirable traits.
Poa secunda – Big bluegrass
The development process put forward several parameters but in large part those traits consistently sought out include: low seed viability (to eliminate the spread of plants from seed i.e. Yarrow, Columbine), predictable habit, consistency with color and form, and duration of bloom. All species were selected specifically to be drought tolerant and the culling process focused on the harshness of the environment as a primary function of selection. These plants were watered only enough to match the average annual precipitation for the regions from which they came.
We know that the genetic narrowing of these plants is very fragile and the potential for second or third generation plants to break out of the desired mold is highly likely. The development and selection process that has gone into this project greatly reduces the potential for damaging or polluting the Native genetics in your area.
Potentilla thurberi – Scarlet cinquefoil
Native Roots, LLC offers a native plant pallet that maintains habitat function and connectivity while incorporating the predictable ascetic the buying public has been programed to expect.
This post originally published by Steven Paulsen on the Native Plants and Wildlife Gardens blog and received quite a spirited response. The following is Steven’s comment in reply to readers concerns of genetic narrowing and cultivars. Read the full blog post/comments here: “Native Roots”
Filed under: Nursery | Tagged: design, native plants, Native Roots LLC | Leave a Comment »
“Wow, I love a good conversation and a little debate. Moreover, I am happy to see so much emotion and vigor tied to the “Native” idea. A little more background and conversation is obviously necessary as well as some more education for many that have commented. Some might be more inclined to be supportive if they have enough of the back story and subsequently understand the inevitable end.
CSR, Inc (Conservation Seeding and Restoration, Inc) is the owner of the Native Roots (NR) intellectual property (IP) and has exclusive licensure of that IP. Why is that important? When the NR was put forward as a concept by the students and staff from the university of Idaho several years ago, the target buyers for the IP were not native plant propagation companies or restoration companies but rather large scale commercial operations that provide materials to box stores across the country. Why did CSR, Inc grab the technology at that time, as it truly does not fit into the CSR, Inc’s mold for restoration materials?
The answer is simple enough. The systems in place coast to coast are not dynamic enough in any way to keep these materials from being implemented in wild land situations. Public land managers and interested persons across the country are starving for materials that they can claim as Native thus these products/plants would be implemented in the wrong application/setting. Rather CSR, Inc. being involved from the start can carve out parameters in the “legalese” that dictate use and end users in a way that only private capitalists can.
I think it’s unfortunate to see so much disdain based on emotion rather than science. Many of the comments tie back to ideals not explored or founded, just felt and perceived. I understand the perception and the inclination to go there, as I too felt very strongly about the process used to narrow the genetics in these plants. Still, I find far more gain than loss in the use of Native Plants that you can literally trace back to the mother plant in the desert or on a hillside in the USA vs. the use of introduced species.
As for inclusions and use by native fauna, there will be a paper published in the next two years showing the absolute benefit of the NR production plots and the affiliation of native pollinators that frequent the site. For the record we have good data collected before the seed increase plots were put in as well. The explosion of use is something to behold. These plants are in no way intended to replace the idea of true native diversity but rather make available to the masses a product that allows the use of a native variety in a traditional setting.
The viability of a retail business model that has site specific genetics by region that are wild land collected is yet not feasible. CSR, Inc currently operates several nurseries that grow (ethically collected) wild land and private land collections for projects that are uniquely site specific. To imagine making the products available to the masses for use regionally is a pipe dream. The logistics are staggering in our current markets. In order to make a commercially available, diverse native product, the costs would be staggering and no one would be willing to pay the price.
All this to say, to have your cake and to eat it too, is at this time a stretch beyond what is logical or realistic. If we as a group of educated Native Plant users want to invite those that have interest to the party, we will need to create a palatable entry point for people to do so. This includes a price point, delivery of materials in a timely and predictable fashion, product diversity to fit the markets needs, and demands. This does not exist at a price point the masses can afford. Education is a huge component and will continue to be the foundation that native plants rely on for their implementation.
In short, crabs in a bucket come to mind with many of the comments put forward and I understand why. Ultimately though I have taken some responsibility in the process, to be involved and have some level of control rather than being victimized by large corporate ideals of taking advantage of an entirely untapped market that shows huge demand and promise.
If you choose not to get behind the Native Roots idea, please provide me a viable option/solution as all those provided up to now have been proven failures in the current market place. If we as educated players throw stones and avoid the realities of the capitalist ideas driving the demand based on opinion and emotion, we will ultimately be facilitating our own demise. I for one chose to participate and facilitate a venue that can provide options for education over the status quo.”