Rebuke Native Fundamentalism

As I've gotten older, I've moved to the center in most areas of life, including politics... What really irks me is extremism, whether it be religious, political, or in this case, environmental and/or horticultural.

I've long been a gardener in love with native plants. The "aura" and fantasy of a plant evolving in a pristine untouched pre-colonial era captivates us. And as we learn more and more about our environment and its threats we naturally begin to see "native" as beautiful and "exotic" as ugly and/or harmful.

But is there anything intrinsically better about a plant that evolved here as opposed to somewhere else? Yes, we all know the ecological impacts of non-native exotic plants- the monocultures, the loss of biodiversity... But these organisms are simply better at surviving. They are winning the evolutionary race, so to speak. But my purpose in writing this isn't to promote exotic plants, I'm interested in destigmatizing them and illuminating the fundamentalism of the native plant movement. I want us to see the beauty and value in all species, no matter where they grow. and

While it is true native plants provide the foundation of healthy ecosystems, they are in no way solely responsible for all benefits, nor are they the cure-all for a world increasingly transformed by climate change.

The topic of "native plants" is ubiquitous in horticulture right now. Pollinators too are all the rage. Yet in many of these talks and in popular reference articles and posters there is little to no mention of the ecosystem services provided by non-natives. It's as if these species are ecologically "inert" and have little or no value.

No doubt native species, especially our trees like oaks, hickories, cherries, etc.. serve as crucial host plants for so many of our native moths and butterflies, yet non-natives do provide nectar and even serve as host plants for many species. Almost all plants in the carrot family, even if they are exotic, can function equally well at providing food for black swallowtail caterpillars. And giant swallowtails can utilize non-native citrus as their host species. As a general rule, if a non-native plant is related to a host plant, it can also serve as an adequate food source. Of course, as in any area of life, the real story is complicated and doesn't fit neatly into any one belief system.

I also find it important to mention climate change and how that reality challenges our understanding of nature. For if a species evolved in a certain region, like for instance, our southern hardwood forests, it may not be adapted to the new climate that is forming due to unavoidable human-induced climate change. Simply stated, if a plant is no longer adapted to a certain environment, is it still native? I don't want to belabor this point, but we should be thinking about climate change and how it will reshape our natural environment and will upend the very definition of "native". When native plants no longer thrive in a place, should we be promoting them???

Another common perception that bothers me is the idea that native plants are inherently easier to grow than other ornamental crops. I'm often confronted with the statement"It's native, shouldn't it be easy to grow? or shouldn't it take care of itself?"

Yet if you visit native plant display gardens in central Georgia, I'm not singling out any garden in particular, you will get a very different impression. Often with the best intentions, organizations such as state and city parks create native plant display gardens. And while they look great for a season or two, they invariably become choked with weeds. Like any garden, native-only gardens require regular editing and intervention in order to look inviting and keep "thugs in check". Native plants are no more "maintenance-free" than any other plant.

But the myth persists and stems from the simple idea that if a plant evolved in a certain region, it is therefore supremely adapted to that climate and environment. The problem with this belief is that many show natives are endemic to very specific habitats that may be hard to replicate by the average gardener. Some examples of natives that average gardeners may find difficult to grow are, mountain laurels, lady slippers, wintergreen, pitcher plants, hardy orchids, gentians, etc.. Unless you live in a specific environment or can devote a tremendous amount of time and resources to replicating and sustaining certain niche habitats you probably won't have much success with these kinds of natives.

But there are many easy-to-grow natives, some so much so that can become garden thugs. Plants like: obedient plant (Physostegia) , Ruellia caroliniensis, spiderworts, native mints, Erigeron, blue-eyed grass, goldenrod, and cherrylaurel. Just as there are invasive "exotic" plants, so too are there many aggressive natives. All too often I see native display gardens and "meadows" overrun with native thugs like Verbesina and Solidago!

I advocate diversity in the landscape. Plant the plants that you love, and try to include plants that offer benefits to insects and other wildlife. Includes natives, but don't let your desire for native purism obscure your appreciation for all life, no matter its origins.