Look who I found giving talks and webinars for the Wild Ones national website – Larry Weaner – horticulturist, top designer of meadows in the Eastern U.S.  That’s where I found two videos with Larry – Native Landscaping 101 and an interview about the Wild Ones design he made for Washington DC. (Wild Ones commissioned all-native designs for 27 cities.)  

I’m a long-time fan of Larry – not so much because I’m interested in meadows (obviously) but because in the world of ecological landscaping, no one is more knowledgeable. Maybe that’s because he speaks not as an advocate but as someone with tons of experience as a do-er. Someone with clients to whom he’s accountable. There’s never a hint of dogma or agenda about him. So refreshing!

How to find the most adaptable plants – the generalists

Something I’d never heard of – have any of YOU? – is a method for choosing the most adaptable native plants, which he recommends for disturbed sites. (Which is most sites in cities and suburbs, I imagine.) He says it’s easy – just put a native plant name and “Coefficient of Conservation” into a search engine and you’ll find a number from 1 to 10, with 1 being the adaptable generalists. “These values, ranging from 0 to 10, are used in the Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) to assess the quality of natural plant communities.” Source. High values (7-10) indicate species that are typically restricted to high-quality, relatively undisturbed natural areas. Larry recommends 3 or lower for disturbed sites.
 
I followed his instructions for packera aurea and learned it’s a 6. Since it performs well in my yard, maybe the soil isn’t so bad!

Beyond the problem of disturbed sites, climate change is now forcing us to focus on adaptability. Lots more extreme weather events, and not just drought.

So I wonder – where are the lists of native plants by their coefficient of conservatism to help gardeners, especially new ones, succeed with native plants? I see only a couple of them online. (Here’s one for someplace in Wisconsin.) 

BUT Larry adds that “if a specialist is adapted to your condition you should always choose it, because they are the most threatened.” 

Next, choose by degree of competitiveness or sociability – a new-to-me concept in plant choice

The black-eyed Susans in my back garden are obviously more competitive than purple coneflower, which I’ve learned is short-lived, needing bare ground for its seeds to establish. Otherwise, no more coneflower. There used to be about a dozen of them here.

Next, Larry says that “Of the suite of plants that are adaptable to your region and yoursite, consider how competitive the plants need to be. For weed suppression and low maintenance use very competitive plants because they are more suppressive of weeds.”  Though “If my goal is diversity, I will hold off on the more competitive plants.”

In this context “competitive” means spreading aggressively. Another term for this – “sociability” – is often used, with lower numbers again indicating clumpers that don’t bully other plants.

To achieve this, we must research our weeds! “You need to understand each particular weed and its vulnerability.” Starting with – are they perennial, annual or biennial? (But how do we know what’s available in the trade?)
 
To reduce or eliminate the use of mulch, Larry recommends that “When plants are small and getting established, you can seed some short fast-growing annuals to cover the area.” Two that he suggests are dotted mint and black-eyed Susan. 
 
And here’s an honest assessment: “Gardens aren’t low maintenance just because you put a lot of native plants in it. It’s because you considered all these factors.” No short-cuts!

So THIS is matrix planting for weed suppression 

All these plant choices then create a matrix planting, which is the design technique that prominent designers all seem to be using and promoting these days. Per Larry: “From a maintenance standpoint, it’s a multi-layered ground plane of dense, intermingled grasses, ferns and perennials. They’ll suppress far more weeds than isolated plants in a sea of mulch ever will.” (I also refer you to Dr. Jared Barnes‘ new blog post about matrix planting, with excellent photos.)

Is it really for regular DIY gardeners?

But here’s my question, for Larry or anyone else promoting this technique: Isn’t this just for relatively large landscapes designed by professionals, and not so much (or at all) for the smaller, amateur gardens that most of us actually have? Here’s why I ask:
 
One, because of all the site prep, research, and honestly, experience needed to pull it off.  And note that the “suite” of plants that pass all the tests Larry talks about doesn’t include the colors we might want in our gardens or any other aesthetic criteria.
 
On this point, I happened to watch another video recently – one by etymologist Doug Tallamy, whom Larry calls, with a grin, the “most influential person in horticulture today.” Tallamy’s advice to people starting out in native-plant gardening – unless they’re already gardeners – is to hire someone who knows how to do it! Alternatively, you *might* be able to learn enough to do it yourself through a summer-length course. Another honest assessment!
 
Two, the purpose of matrix design is weed suppression – I get it – but for small gardens, can’t we just weed as usual? As Larry says, with a typical suburban/urban yard it’s “pretty easy to keep weeds out, but if I’ve got acreage it’s gonna be very difficult. No one is gonna go out and hand weed acres.” And “If you turn your lawn into a garden, now you’re asking the plants to do the work of weed management or suppression.”
 
Three, I know I’m not the only gardener who’d prefer not having to step on ferns and sedges in order to get to plants that need my attention, who prefers stepping on wood chips. The kind of gardener who wants to be able to see the weeds, which we have lots of because we didn’t start our garden by killing all the vegetation.

More on weeding and other tasks  

I didn’t expect Larry to instruct us in conventional gardening practices, especially for Wild Ones, and he doesn’t. “Much of what we do runs counter to traditional horticultural practices, at times even diametrically opposed to it.” He likes to match the plant to the soil rather than changing the soil to match the plants. So – no tilling, no topsoil, no fertilizer, no compost added.  Makes sense to me!
 
To avoid disturbing soil, he cuts instead of pulling out weeds by the roots, making exceptions for deep-rooted thugs like mugwort and Japanese knotweed, which he says have to be sprayed or dug up completely. 
 
Hmm. Lately I’d started cutting weeds, especially the ones still popping up in my flagstone patios, 14 years since their installation. But wait – Larry says it’s “only effective if the weeds are under a ground layer. If it’s sitting in a bed of mulch, the weed will pop back up because it’s getting light and there’s no competition.” So on my sunny patios it may never work? Damn!
 
Neighborhood aesthetic

In Medfield, Massachusetts, a 20,000-sf landscape was designed by Betty Sanders using 90-95 percent native plants. Photo by Neal Sanders.

Another advantage to listening to Larry and other do-ers is their experience with clients.  Most of whom have have neighbors or local yard ordinances. 
 
So it’s no wonder that Larry says: “You don’t need to diminish the ecological valuable landscape in order to make it attractive. I’m not a restoration designer. I’m in restoration ecology but I never threw away garden design.” So he’s “working for aesthetic experience, as well as habitat and environmental benefits.”
 
He even believes that beauty helps the environment! “In a relatively dense neighborhood everybody sees everybody else’s front lawn. So if you plant a landscape that is unkempt and overly wild and has tremendous wildlife value but to most people looks unattractive, then your neighbors are not going to do what you’re doing because they don’t like it.  If it’s beautiful, they will be much more likely to adopt that landscape and the ecological influence will be multiplied.”
 
For front yards, “In meadow compositions we use plants that are relatively short, not big and tall and ungainly. Another key thing is there are spots on the edges that are single species.” And near the front of the house in particular, the garden shouldn’t be “too wild.” 

Another view of the Medfield, Massachusetts landscape was designed by Betty Sanders using 90-95 percent native plants. Photo by Neal Sanders.

Things we don’t hear often enough 

It’s about eco-regions, not states

Plants don’t care what state you’re in. It’s only their eco-region that matters in choosing plants. (As I ponder how many eco-regions there must be in California, I’m almost shocked that state lists are relied on for anything.)  

Shrubs

In nature, habitat is maximized when the three legged habitat stool of meadow, shrubland, and woodland are all present…Of the three types of habitat that should be in every garden, the shrubland thicket is the one that usually gets left out. It’s a key component of any wildlife friendly landscape.When thicket forming shrubs are planted in dense masses, they provide refugee for birds, seeking shelter from predators that are too large to fit between those tightly clustered stems.

Lawn

I’m not one to demonize lawn.

A qualifier to starting small

Almost everyone suggests we start our garden by tackling just one part of the yard first. Larry disagrees, saying it’s best to design the whole garden at once, rather than in stages, so that the design will be cohesive. Then it’s fine to install in stages, which could proceed by area or by plant type, starting with the trees.