Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: Native vs non-native.... all theory thread DESIGN PRINCIPLES

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Toby Hemenway <hemenway@jeffnet.org>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Native vs non-native.... all theory thread DESIGN PRINCIPLES
  • Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:47:59 -0600


on 8/29/00 3:18 AM, Judith Hanna at jehanna@gn.apc.org wrote:

> a balance affected by the the degree to which a functioning indigenous
> ecosystem is either still there, or can be recreated.

At risk of being repetitive, this is where I can't support the
native/non-native dichotomy. As I believe I've said before on this list, I
live on a hillside forested with 80-120 year-old "native" Douglas fir trees,
but amid these are a few huge, open-form oaks and madrones, 200-400 years
old. The oaks are remnants of a human-maintained oak savannah, maintained by
Indian burning for probably 5-10,000 years. When whites exterminated the
Indians and suppressed fires, the firs crowded out the oaks. So which is the
native ecosystem? Which do I try to recreate? Or do I go back to the
pre-human vegetation of 10,000 years ago, which was a post-glacial
birch/aspen forest, neither species being "native" any more?

In Australia, the bush is a human-made artifact created when humans moved in
40-80,000 years ago and began setting fires, eliminating the previous tree
cover. It's a terribly unstable landscape when not burned regularly, hence
the current species loss.

"Natives" only exist when we take a human-centered, 5-50 year viewpoint,
trying to preserve what was present when we arrived. I'm not saying we
should plant whatever we please, but the idea of some archetypal "native"
flora is a product of our minds, and not of nature. Native plants are
simply the species that happen to have arrived in a locale, found it
suitable, and crowded out the earlier inhabitants. If another adaptable and
appropriate species is brought by a human rather than by a bird or
tectonics, why should it be rejected? The more I look at restoration work,
the more arbitrary its choices appear--which is not a defect, just something
we should pay attention to. Most of this planet has been manipulated by
humans, and that needs to be kept in mind when we dream of "restoring" a
former flora.

Toby





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page