Research Paper

Keeping Californian Flora Native

      Wildflowers have long been a huge part of California's history. The first of the Spanish galleons to sail the coast of California referred to the area as "la tierra del fuego" or the land of fire because of the poppy-covered hillsides. California's wildflowers were appreciated by those of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in writing. Paul Revere's grandson, Joseph Warren Revere, wrote in his book, A Tour of Duty (1849) about the incredible wildflowers of Southern California:

      In the plain itself, the richest and most brilliant wildflowers flourish in boundless profusion, and with a rank luxuriance which far transcends all the efforts of art. All colors, all shades of colors, all hues, all tints, all combinations are there to be seen; and the endless varieties bewilder the senses. Perennial incense ascends to heaven from these fragrant plains; and the size which some of these gorgeous wild-flowers attain, would seem fabulous to an eastern florist. (J. Revere)

      Less than 50 years later, two women would travel the area, writing a book about the incredible floral fields of California. Published in 1897, The Wild Flowers of California: Their Names, Haunts, and Habits drawn in ink by Margaret Warriner Buck and written by Mary Elizabeth Parsons was a field guide for the identification of the wildflowers. Because printing in color was cost-prohibitive at the time, the book was organized to group the flowers by color, leaving the hue up to interpretation by the reader. The New Year's Rose Day Parade was centralized on California's wildflowers. In 1903, the State Floral Society chose the poppy as California's native flower. These very flowers are becoming less and less populous as the years go by. So how can these wildflowers be understood and protected?

      First off, the term, "Native Wildflower" needs defining. "Native" used to refer to a species of plant means "A species that originated and developed in its surrounding habitat and has adapted to living in that particular environment"(lakes.grace.edu). A "wildflower" is a "flower of an uncultivated variety or a flower growing freely without human intervention"(Oxford English Dictionary). Put together, "native wildflower" can be inferred to mean a flowering species that grows uncultivated in an environment where it originated and developed.

      So how did researchers determine which plants were indigenous to California? The first documented people to come through the area were seafarers in the mid-1500s and the early 1600s, Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo and Sebastián Vizcaíno, respectively. Because they were on boats out to sea, they provided a limited description of the vegetation ashore. Because of that, the baseline knowledge stems mostly from the expedition of Gaspar de Portolá and Juan Bautista de Anza. They traveled from San Diego to San Francisco. In addition to their writing, the translation of Juan Crespí's diary was instrumental to the information collected during this time. Due to an order by a Spanish viceroy, requiring that the local materials be written about in full detail, they all had huge quantities of diary entries describing the local flora. Because of the extreme descriptive quality of their writing, it is quite easy to pinpoint not only what plants but exactly where they appeared. Most of the ones to keep journals when traveling the area were Priests and Clergy, who were typically the most educated at the time. Because of this, some of them even used scientific names such as Quercus suber (Cork Oak). Despite lots of correct, and ambiguous conclusions among these journals, once they moved into unfamiliar biomes such as mediterranean, their knowledge of the species of plants was limited, such as misidentifying California buckwheat as rosemary. Some of the travelers to go through the area were much closer to being true botanists, such as José Longinos-Martínez. Martínez visited California in 1792 on an expedition to survey medicinal plants. He was mostly assigned to Baja California, rather than "Alta" California (what is known as the state of California today). Because he was not focused on Alta California, his description of the local flora was limited, and not specific to any areas. Following Martínez, Jose Joaquin Arrillaga made extensive notes on the plants in Baja California. Arrillaga, who would later go on to be governor of California, made four trips across Baja California, one of which had a short stretch into San Diego.

      The consensus of the native flora of Southern California is that there were mixed pastures and brushland along with San Diego, and large flowering pastures from present-day Orange County to Ventura. In Carlsbad, Juan Crespí's diary (the one that was instrumental after it was translated) recounted abundant wildflowers, "It is a pleasure to see how the fields are abloom everywhere, and how fine their zacate is"(Crespí). He later wrote, "The entire way has been, like the preceding ones, very flowery"(Crespí). The interior valleys and mountains of southern California were described as having vast flowery fields. Anza wrote, "camp is surrounded by flower-strewn and pleasant valleys"(Anza). Alliums, Layia, and Elderberry were all identified correctly. Additionally, California Poppies were incorrectly identified as tulips, but it is very evident that it was, in fact, California poppies that were described.

      Between San Diego and San Juan Capistrano describe beach estuaries, cattail marshes, and sycamore and oak forests. The mesas between forests were covered in flower pastures in winter, which dried out to pastures in the summer. Dispersed amongst all this were patches of coastal sage scrub and chaparral. Along with these plants, came the first accounts of fires in the area, mostly burning pastures.

      In Santa Barbara, giant ryegrass was described as "grasses [that] were so tall that they topped us on horseback" by Crespí.. The Santa Barbara coastal plain was noted as being "green, verdant, and in bloom" on a return through the rainy season. Among the species described by Crespí (as biologically interpreted by Timbrook et al. in 1982) were Viola pedunculata, Dianthus, Lupinus, and Delphinium. Along the coast, samphire, larkspurs, and marigolds were all noted.

      Near Monterey and Carmel, referred to as "a most beautiful site and pleasing to the view, because it is so near the sea and in a country so charming and flower covered that it is a marvel"(Crespí). He also noted the California poppy during the late summer, a rarity, but possible because of the colder coastal climate. Just west of there, north of Soledad, bitter wild gourds, large wild grass clumps, wild grapes, and abundant rose of Castile bushes were described.

      Up north, on the peninsula, fennel, manzanita, and violets (most likely Viola pedunculata) were identified.. Towards the San Francisco Presidio were noted lilies and more violets.

      Towards Oakland, some sort of perennial mint and lilies were observed. Northern of there, near the Carquinez Strait, native americans gave the travelers cacomites which are a species of iris.

      Towards the east, in the East Bay, Between the accounts over the years, there were not any specific plants identified, but the agreement between them was that it was mostly barren grassland that was exceedingly dry in the summer.

      By the nineteenth century, most of the coastal pastures were dominated by wild oat (Avena fatua) and black mustard (Brassica nigra). In August of 1891, a UC Berkley Professor, Eugene W. Hilgard, gave a speech before the State Horticultural Society saying, "nearly every bad pest of the kind with which we have to contend in California has been imported. Among the worst, are the black and yellow mustard (Brassica nigra, B. alba), the common radish, large fennel, the chess or ryegrass, the plantain, meadowlark clover, tarweed, poison chickweed, American licorice (Foeniculum vulgari), and foxtail (Hordeum murinum)." Out of those species mentioned, the "farmers foxtail" (Hordeum murinum) was particularly inflammatory. In 1890, the Los Angeles Times reported on "sore eyed chickens," and irritation from "the seed of the foxtail grass." Forty-two years later, the State Highway Commission reported that the wild mustard was the "most common menace" because of how dry it can get. Around the turn of the 20th century, Bromus madritensis and B. diandrus, two species of brome, along with Avena barbata also known as barbed oats, and Brassica geniculata, a mustard, began taking over more rapidly. This was referred to as "the second wave" because these had been introduced years prior, but took off between 1880 and 1920.

      Unfortunately, in the fantastic photos of the areas surrounding the bay, only the trees are native. The grasses that are so pervasive are not native and are currently strangling or have already strangled the plants that were native to the area. The grasses seen are oats, bromes, barleys, fescues, and mustards that were all brought to California from The Middle East and Mediterranean Europe. These invasive grasses have diminished the population of native plants, increased the risk of wildfires, and lessened natural grazing areas. They have fought so hard against the native flowers of the area, that even the California Poppy is now less common, and is being protected and preserved. What is remarkable about this biological invasion is the incredible pace that these plants spread.

      The current conclusion is that California was mostly perennial bunch grassland. The change was rapidly worsened by drought and grazing midway through the 1800s. This conclusion is typically attributed to William Henry Brewer, who was one of the first to study the flora of the state. Specialists nowadays agree, specifically that Stipa pulchra (purple needlegrass) dominated valley grassland. L.T. Burcham wrote that, "associated with the grasses, . . . were . . . broad-leaved herbs with brightly colored flowers"(Burcham). Many studies describe "great masses of annuals" consisting of a few hundred species for more than generations.

      Some researchers believe in an annual forbs theory, rather than the bunchgrass theory. Rather than bunch grasses, forbs are an entirely different type of plant, "Technically, forbs are flowering, non-grassy 'herbaceous' plants, which means they produce seeds and have stems and leaves that die back at the end of each growing season" (dupageforest.org). This hypothesis is largely based on the accounts of the central valley being scarcely dotted with flora and the aforementioned name, as called by the Spaniards, "la tierra del fuego," or "land of the fire." A large part of this hypothesis is that California had a much larger wildflower population.

      Another theory is that the introduction of domestic livestock, mostly cattle, and occasionally horses and sheep, could have eaten native grasses while dispersing seeds quickly. Many\ of the biologists who believe in this theory also hypothesize that much of the replacement of native grasses was due to early American settlement and overgrazing. In the publication, A California Flora, Philip A. Munz and David D. Keck write about "Valley grassland" as "originally being covered with various bunch grasses such as Stipa (Nassella) pulchra, S. cernua, Poa scabrella (secunda) and Aristida divericata; now because of overgrazing largely replaced by annual species of Bromus, Festuca, Avena, etc"(Munz & Keck 1959).

      A separate explanation for the exotic species spreading was that these species were already pre-adapted for a dry climate, and during consistent droughts in the mid nineteenth century, they outcompeted the native grasses that were adapted for more moisture than they were getting. These exotic species were also very quick to reproduce, and used resources far more efficiently than the native grasses, competing with native perennials. In an interview with Anna Halverson, a guide at The Ruth Bancroft Garden, she said, "Oh yes we work with drought resistant plants here but some that are so well adapted that they can, and have, choked- or outgrown- native plants." Another piece of evidence for this theory is that these exotic grasses came to an area without the pathogens that kept them in check in their native habitat. Despite the native grasses having a much longer "shelf life" in which they can be in the ground without growing, the massive, overwhelming rate at which exotic grasses germinate upon the first rains of the season will still overtake the native grasses. Many of the native flowers wait for perfect circumstances such as rain in the preceding September and October, following which they bloom. A side effect of waiting for the perfect time to bloom is that when that perfect time does come, there is a "superbloom" in which massive amounts of wildflowers bloom consecutively; usually every decade or so.

      Despite the dispute between theories, one thing that scientists all agree on is that California underwent a massive change since the late eighteenth century. Because nearly all research is based on field studies for practical reasons, nobody is quite certain as to the exact way that these novel exotic plants spread across California. When asked, Ryan Cummings, a landscape architect who helps with wildflower protection projects in the California Bay Area, reminisced, "Oh yeah a few years ago-in 2016 I think- we drove down to Death Valley to see the superbloom there. One of the most beautiful things I've ever seen. Truly spectacular." Super blooms are the kind of occurrences to make headlines on the rare years that they do happen.

      The loss of the massive population of wildflowers becomes increasingly apparent as you look through old text. Charles Frances Saunders once said, "There is one California wildflower that every Californian, however unobserving, knows and loves, as the Briton his daisy or the Irishman his shamrock, and that is the native poppy or escholtzia. Poets apostrophize it; artists paint it and craftsmen work it into their handiwork; it is sown in gardens and tradesmen employ it as a mark for their brands of merchandise. Every spring millions of its blossoms are brought indoors and set in vases and bowls, where it illuminates the rooms of half of California with the glow of its imprisoned sunshine"(Saunders, In California, 102-103).

      Should Californians sit idly and observe the disappearance of the very thing that defined California, the sights described by travelers centuries ago, the pop culture icon that defined an era, and the greatest asset to California's flora? Seeing how quickly it has been taken over, and how it continues to disappear at an exponential rate, it is quite simply a citizen's moral duty to do what they can, when they can, to preserve California's native wildflowers. Because few species have gone extinct, and in occasional years, the seeds stored in the soil for years can still bloom, it is not too late. These occasional blooms can simultaneously remind us of the past, and leave us hopeful for a future of fantastic flora.

      So how can that future be saved or even made better than it would have been? The obvious first answer is to plant more of these wildflowers. Many people who set out to do this may go to a store and buy wildflower seeds and spread them about. This can work but it has a few drawbacks. First off, the seed packets cost money. Secondly, haphazardly spreading wildflower seeds will result in very few actually growing. The workarounds to these issues are actually pretty simple. Regarding the cost issue, the seeds of the wildflowers can be harvested by hand from existing plants. As long as the harvester knows what they are doing, the seeds from these flowers can be taken without damaging the plants. The other issue goes hand in hand with this workaround. The best way to figure out where wildflowers will grow is to find where some are already growing. If seeds were to be harvested from a flower, it is quick and easy to spread them in that local area. When spreading them, look for spots that have similar characteristics to where the plant the seeds were harvested from was growing. Whether that is under a tree, or near a stream, if a specific plant is already known to grow under specific conditions based on where it was found, it will not be hard to find other similar spots nearby.

      Another thing that can be done is to protect the flowers that are blooming. Refrain from picking or stepping on these flowers, and let them live their full cycle where they are. As tempting as it may be, if the flowers are picked, their spread will be greatly reduced. Rather than picking the flowers, take photos safely, and be aware as to not step on them. If one wishes to have their own wildflowers, they can plant a native wildflower yard. There are many locations across California that intentionally preserve or grow wildflowers, but visitors should always stay on trails and follow the signs and rules.

      Third, and most labor intensive, is to weed away invasive species. The invasive species that have taken over will realistically never be eradicated from California, but areas known to have wildflowers can be targeted, and weeded. It is not hard to find other people who would like to do the same, or already are. Try contacting a local park ranger office, or checking in with a local scout troop.

      California's history has been dictated by the flowers that dot its hillsides, and to let them disappear would be a tragedy. It is high time that California's citizens became more aware of these issues that plague the state's flowers and native flora. If people were conscientious of this when interacting with the great outdoors that California has to offer, then California can stay great for generations to come rather than slowly morphing into a new, unrecognizable, landscape. Bring back La Tierra Del Fuego.