Garden Rant

Dilemma: Finding a Nonprofit you can Trust

Issues related to money and nonprofit organizations are popping up all over the place - whether it's politicizing their grant-making or taking money from unsavory corporations.  In that latter category and receiving almost no attention in the mainstream media (with one exception) is the National Wildlife Federation's partnership with Scotts Miracle-Gro (one link of many here on the Rant) and in the same week, news of the Sierra Club no longer taking money from the natural gas industry, from which it's gotten 25 million bucks over the years! That would be the same industry that promotes the much-hated-by-environmentalists practice of fracking.  The Sierra Club had endorsed fracking over the years, until (finally) a new CEO pulled the plug on that source of millions and went clean.

So the hero of this piece is the Sierra Club's CEO Michael Brune, who when he got that job in 2010 made the decision to turn down an additional $30 million from the industry and offered this explanation:

We need to be unrestrained in our advocacy …The first rule of advocacy is that you shouldn’t take money from industries and companies you’re trying to change.  Source.

As Paul Tukey pointed out in more of his excellent reporting on this issue, that's the opposite of the tack taken by the NWF's CEO in claiming that in taking money from Scotts, they could help it become a better company.  Right.

But as Paul also pointed out, there are consequences to turning down tainted money, which in the Sierra Club's case amounted to a quarter of its yearly operating income.  The Club had to reduce programs and lay people off.  

Funding Options for Nonprofits

So where should nonprofits get their funding, anyway?  Not by stepping up their onslaught of direct mail, thanks very much.  Many critics of the NWF complain of their excessive fund-raising and lord only knows what portion of their operating budget goes to fund-raising. (More on that below.)

How about partnering with companies whose products and practices don't directly contradict the mission of the nonprofit?  The Wilderness Society seems to have this figured out - by the look of their list of corporate partners and the policies they have in place for accepting corporate money.  (In my Googling the Wilderness Society I found this report condemning its "socialist origins".  See, just not capitalist enough!)

That small list of benign companies and strict standards contrasts not just with the NWF, mind you, but even more starkly with the list of "companies we work with" proudly displayed by the Nature Conservancy.  Companies like Monsanto, Dow Chemical and BP, among others.  Oh, yeah!  (Never mind the occasional bad publicity.)

How to Judge a Nonprofit

Think I know?  I just know what doesn't work - those Good Housekeeping-type ratings of nonprofits according to what percentage they spend on program versus administrative and fund-raising.  NWF's fund-raising is reported to be just 14 percent - really? 

My cynicism about these reported and trusted numbers comes from experience, a bad one.  I once worked (briefly) for a nonprofit whose executives instructed us underlings to lie about our activities on the forms nonprofits submit, so that administrative and fund-raising work magically turned into programmatic work. On top of which, a lawyer hired to help them improve their program percentage set up an operation whereby clothing was donated to the nonprofit, which turned around and donated it again, the effect of which was to boost their program-related numbers without ever handling the clothes. And I see from their current Better Business report that they supposedy spend an astonishing 93% of their funds helping the homeless, and only 7% on admin and fund-raising.  Reversing those numbers would come closer to the truth.

Nice to get that off my chest.  Moving on...

Money-Giving Options for Nature-Lovers

Over on the Ecosystem Gardening blog, Carole Brown continues her reporting on the backlash against the NWF by compiling other ways readers can get their gardens wildlife-habitat-certified without having to pay the NWF for the privilege (and pay more for a sign).  She found three national or North American organizations that fit the bill as substitutes for the NWF.

Even better, she suggests going local - by giving to nature centers and any number of conservation groups "right in your own backyard." 

These small environmental organizations are often struggling to get by on a very small budget of donations. They are able to do amazing things with very little money.

I couldn't agree more with her suggestion or the assertion that our dollars go farther with these small, local groups than the large national ones.  (For example, they probably don't pay their CEOs super-sized salaries.)  There are at least a dozen good conservation groups in my area, and if I want to recommend backyard certification I can just send people to the University of Maryland's "Bay-Wise Yardstick" program.  It's not only free but in my opinion, its more science-based literature is superior to the NWF's.

Carole goes on to recommend giving of your time, too.  And that's always going to be local.

Think Scotts will Change?

While Carole's post ends with a rallying cry to get Scotts to "clean up its act", I'm way too cynical (or just too old) to think that boycotting Scotts would change the company in any way.  There are plenty of reasons to avoid their products, and I do, but thinking it'll cause Scotts to have a "come to Jesus" experience is not one of them.

Money photo credit. Scotts graphic by Carole Brown.

What’s the point of a snowdrop when there’s no snow?

For me, snowdrops are simply the first indicators that spring—and a much more interesting display—is on the way, and I think one of the nice things about them is that they often appear as if by magic during a partial thaw. But if I lived in England and belonged to some wacky snowdrop-worshipping cult, I might feel differently. There, where it is usual for them to bloom in February, annual snowdrop galas are held and single bulbs of unusual varieties like “Green Tear” and “E. A. Bowles” go for $500 each. I’m no snowdrop connoisseur; I have nivalis, nivalis “Flore Pleno,” and elwesii, and that’s good enough for me.

In Britain, as they are here, the snowdrops are early; they started in December and were forming carpets by January according to garden writer Monty Don. Early February snowdrops are the norm in the UK, but not in Buffalo, where I usually see them in March. Gardeners throughout the Northeast are getting their early spring blooms in late winter; in Philadelphia, some have already seen tulips come and go.  The groundhog may have predicted 6 more weeks of winter, but if it is 6 more weeks of the gray, dull winter that wasn’t, at least we'll have some unexpected flowers to enliven it.

Drunken Botanist: The Website

 

It'll be at least a year-possibly more--before my new book is actually printed and in my hands.  But it's never too soon for a website, right?  So here it is:  TheDrunkenBotanist.com, named after my forthcoming book of the same title, which is due out in 2013, probably in spring.

I do hope you'll bookmark the site, subscribe to the RSS feed, give it a link-back now and then, etc.  And if you've got any booze + plant news, ideas, questions, recipes, etc you'd like to share--well, you'll know where to find me.

Cheers!

The Brand New USDA Hardiness Map: Already Out of Date?

Meet David W. Wolfe, Cornell plant scientist and expert on the impacts of climate change on agriculture. Wolfe is also the author of an absolutely delightful book about the soil, Tales from the Underground: A Natural History of Subterranean Life, that ought to be required reading for all gardeners.

In the 2011 Timber Press title The New American Landscape: Leading Voices on the Future of Sustainable Gardening, Wolfe wrote the chapter on gardening and climate change. This week, I called him up to ask about the new USDA hardiness zone map, after I looked up my own zone and got a result that in no way corresponds with current reality. Zone 5a?  Maybe 20 years ago, but not now. (For more about the map, see Elizabeth's post here.)

Q: The old zone map was based on a 13-year average of winter minimum temperatures from 1974 to 1986. The current map is based on a 30-year average that reaches all the way back to 1976. In a time of rapid winter warming, how does looking at this longer time scale make any sense?

A:  First, hats off to the USDA for doing a new map.  We haven't had an official one since 1990 and a lot of nurseries and commercial growers have been waiting a long time for a new map. Why the USDA chose a 30-year average, I don't know. It means we can't really compare it to the past map.  

And since the spans overlap, a good percentage of the data in the new map was already in the old map. This dampens the perception of change.

Of course, there is the argument that looking at a bigger swath of time is more reliable. On the other hand, we know we are on a trajectory, so a longer time span will dilute more recent changes. A 15 year-map would have been preferable in my opinion.

That said, the map still shows a significant shift towards higher average minimum winter temperatures in the Northeast and Ohio, as well as other places.  The map corroborates changes we are seeing in the living world, as plants bloom earlier, as insects appear earlier, as their ranges move northwards.

For conservative gardeners, this map is fine.

Adventuresome gardeners, on the other hand, would probably prefer something else. In fact, in 2002, the New York Botanical Garden planted a test garden in the Bronx of plants hardy only to a zone warmer than its zone on the 1990 map. These plants are all doing fine.

Q: Though I'm delighted that warming winters make similar experiments plausible in my own yard, your chapter in The New American Landscape makes it clear that climate change is not all fun and games.  We're all probably aware that warmer winters mean new pests, but you mention other effects, such as "de-hardening" during winter warm spells.

A: Well, when you say "pests," your readers probably think of insects, but warmer winters are also really great for deer. Without a long period of snow cover when they can't feed, they have better survival rates, produce more young, and are likely to want more food from your garden.  

About "de-hardening": The buds and stems of perennial plants go through a physiological hardening process so they are protected from winter damage. If they "de-harden" during a warm spell, then the threshold for winter damage is at a higher temperature. In the winter of 2003-2004, we had a very warm December in upstate New York and then cold temperatures in January. It caused millions of dollars' worth of damage to new plantings of European wine grapes  It wiped them out down to the ground. In late winter, a warm period can cause a premature leafing out and frost damage.

Many perennials also have a chilling requirement that may not be met in future, so they may not be able to produce a good amount of flowers and fruit. Apples, for example, have a long winter chilling requirement: 1200 hours with temperatures below 45 degrees. So do our native Concord grapes. On the other hand, European wine grapes, Vitis vinifera, have much less of a chilling requirement.  We may be growing more of those.

Q:  In The New American Landscape, you recommend "cautious exploration" with less hardy plants on the part of gardeners.  Why not wild experimentation? 

A: Actually, gardeners can lead the way here, figuring out how we can take advantage of the opportunities offered by a warming climate, because it's not their entire livelihood at stake, as with farmers.  Maybe we need VIctory Gardens in a new context, that of climate change.

Speaking of the NWF...

...as we have this week, I've been meaning to share this little gem from Dear Abby. It's so rare that she gets a gardening letter!  

Dear Abby,

I have very nice neighbors who believe in leaving the wild and natural growth on their property. They have posted a sign that claims it to be a “certified natural habitat.” They never weed or cut anything back. At first, it was cared for, but now it has become an eyesore.

I have tried to grow border plants to hide the mess, but nothing seems to help. I believe it affects the value of our home. My husband doesn’t want me to say anything for fear of hurting their feelings. We don’t live in a rural area where this might be more acceptable.

Signed,

Thorn in Our Side

Abby's response begins, "Dear Thorn, Who certified your neighbors' yard as a 'natural habitat?'"

Yes, who indeed?

Just for fun, why don't you be Dear Abby for a day, and write your answer to Thorn in Our Side?  You can read Abby's full response here.

 

My Chicken Gardening Dilemma

Please excuse the dismal condition of my backyard.  It is winter, after all,  In a few months, the perennials will be in flower and the whole thing will be quite cheerful.  But here's my problem--and if you've got an idea, you might win a book, so read on:

I've been growing very little in the way of vegetables the last few years, in part because I travel too much to take care of them, and in part because the chickens free-range and will either eat or dig up whatever I plant.  But this year, inspired by Michele's fantastic book, I am determined to make more of an effort.  I've got a timer for irrigation and I'm prepared to use it.  Now I just have to figure out how to keep the chickens out of the veggies.  In addition to the six raised beds you see here (placed roughly where they will go--more clearing and adjusting to come), I'll put a straw bale garden back there along the fence, next to the run.  That's always been an easy place to exclude the chickens, because I only have two sides to worry about.  (video on my straw bale experiment here, btw.)

So!  I need help.  I need to figure out how to keep the girls out of my vegetable beds.  Fortunately, there's a new book devoted entirely to the subject of gardening with chickens:  Jessi Bloom's Free Range Chicken Gardens, just out from Timber Press. Everything you want to know about gardening with chickens--including how to keep them away from poisonous plants, a subject close to my heart--is here.

And yes, as you can see, I blurbed the book.  So--you know.  I already know I like it, and I've already read all of its good advice and studied the very pretty pictures.

Now it's your turn!  What's your advice for me?  Short of fencing off half the yard, how can I keep the girls out of my raised beds?  What would you do for something short like lettuce as compared to something tall like cherry tomatoes?  My two smaller Ameraucanas can fly--at least a little--and they can squeeze into some pretty narrow gaps. So how do I keep them out but make it easy for me to get in? 

(And by the way, I don't really need a wooden structure around a vegetable bed.  I just thought that would make it easier to attach chicken wire or whatever.  I could even go taller than the boards, making them all straw bale beds.)

Post your suggestions, or just make a comment, and feel free to link to something you've tried or you like. Or ask your own chicken/garden question.  Next week, we'll have Jessi on to offer her ideas, respond to your comments and questions, and choose a winner!

Oh, and by the way--Jessi's doing a bunch of events, primarily on the West Coast, but she'll be in Maryland, too.  Check out her schedule here.

Also, there's a contest going on at Timber to win a chicken garden start-up kit.  Check that out.

 

Kudos to GrowWrite! and Michael Nolan

Have you seen the first issue of GrowWrite!?  It's the online magazine for garden communicators that hit the web recently to much acclaim and kudos for its editor, Michael Nolan.  He'd previously served as editor of Garden Writers Today and when that was shuttered by its publisher (Cool Springs Press) a friend asked Michael, "You're not done with this, right?"  He agreed and proceeded to make GrowWrite! happen.

I was so impressed with the premiere issue, I had to find out more about it.  A phone call with Michael later, I can report that it's his first magazine project, will be published monthly, and that the goal is to pay all its contributors (actual pay, not the free ads the first contributors were paid with).  So, advertising is being pursued - with the lure of a highly targeted audience and a multiplying impact - so that this magazine can practice the professional treatment of garden communicators that it advocates.

I also learned that in future issues, GrowWrite! will cover food, too.  There's more and more cross-over between food and garden writing, so why not include that (huge) audience, too?

Another professional practice Michael is employing is including disclaimers that describe the exact nature of any financial connection the magazine may have with a product that's mentioned, including sales commissions on purchases readers make by clicking through (popular "affiliate agreements").  There's been some acrimony among gardenbloggers about money issues and I love Michael's approach - following the law by disclosing (something he sees plenty of blogs not doing) but DO make a buck where it's appropriate.  No shame in needing to make a living!  Again, I see this as a model for how other communicators might handle this sticky wicket.

Something else I particularly like about the first issue is this page honoring people in our world who died in the last year.  It'll be a regular feature.

What you may not know about Michael 

• When he calls himself an urban gardener, that's no stretch.  He's gardened in cities all over the U.S. (NYC, Atlanta, Philly, etc) first as a child in a constantly relocating family and later as a constantly relocated member of the Air Force.  (Who knew?)
• How can he look so young and claim to have been gardening for over 30 years?  Because he started gardening at the age of five and is now all of 39 (though complaints of arthritis and gray hair have already begun.  Really!)
• He's spent time in a Buddhist monastery and today calls himself a "sitting Buddhist".  What type?  Loosely Tibetan.  On Facebook he lists his religion as "compassion".  And on the garden writers Facebook group he started the popular meme of announcing good news every Friday.
• He's ghost-written about not just gardening but the environment more broadly, and also food.  And that's all he would tell me about that.
• His favorite T-shirt says 'Composters make shit grow' but I couldn't get him to send me a photo of him wearing it for this post.  Michael, it's not too late! Here it is!
• He's always been bothered by the stigma that gardening is just for women, until he moved not long ago to Alabama.  Turns out, gardening crosses the gender divide there in that agriculture-dominated region.  For men living in other parts of the country his message is "Chicks dig gardeners," and who among us can argue with that?

Message to Rant Readers

Contact Michael if you'd like to contribute, or have a topic you'd like the magazine to cover.  Also send along suggestions for the calendar of food- and garden-related events that will start in the next issue.  Here's the website for his writing, speaking and graphic design work, which includes contact info for him.

Ta da! Welcome to 6a

Now that the controversy of Scotts and the NWF has come to a more or less satisfactory close, let us turn to the newly released USDA zone map. It may not be as scorching a topic, but I think it has plenty of interest—especially since this map has been so long in the making.

I remember nurseryman Tony Avent talking about the new zone map when I interviewed him in 2007.  Back then, it seemed like it was almost ready to announce. First Avent talked about the botched zone redo of 2003: "That map was not accurate. It got rid of half the zones [the a's and b's]. It was easier to use, but it was wrong. Chicago would have been zone 6." After that first map (which Avent says was created by a consultant the USDA sent off to make a map so he'd "stop bugging them"), the UDSA called together a new committee (of which Avent is a member), and decided on a 30-year average of temps rather than a 20-year average, which would have created too dramatic a shift. An early plan to have a, b, and c zone gradations rather than just a and b was put off for a future revision.

And now, more than five years after we had that conversation, the map he was discussing is finally out. What took so long? The process was a comedy of errors in many ways, according to Avent—read the whole story on his website—but basically they had to go back to the drawing board a couple of times. They’re happy with the results, despite the delays, because the new map is much more functional than previous versions, as well as incorporating the subtle a and be gradations. Their map has all the pretty colors we’ve come to expect, but this time it’s clickable; you can zoom in on your area to get a better look at the color gradation to figure out exactly where you fall, you can check by zip code, and there's more data available however you check.

There’s also already criticism. I have heard comments that the 30-year average was chosen to minimize the effects of global warming, and the USDA seems to have anticipated this with the following statement included in the map’s accompanying narrative:

Climate changes are usually based on trends in overall average temperatures recorded over 50-100 years. Because the USDA PHZM represents 30-year averages of what are essentially extreme weather events (the coldest temperature of the year), changes in zones are not reliable evidence of whether there has been global warming.

Others think the USDA doth protest too much. In a WaPo AP story, a Boston professor remarks, "“People who grow plants are well aware of the fact that temperatures have gotten more mild throughout the year, particularly in the winter time," and one of the creators of the 1990 map states "the latest version clearly shows warmer zones migrating north." Whether the map is reliable evidence of climate change or not, even its own narrow standard indicates that the coldest days are not as cold as they were. Which NOAA will officially confirm in July. It seems like the rabbit's out of the hat on this one.

FWIW, my zone did change. I have gone from 5b to 6a, which I checked by comparing this with the one on the National Gardening Association site—still the 1990 one. The Arbor Day map has me between 5-6. After a decade-plus of gardening, however, I generally choose plants based on what I think will happen to them on my property, often not even looking at the zone on the card. (When I do, it can be surprising; some nurseries have been selling zone 6 plants here for years.)

The thing is, there are so many things besides technical hardiness that have an impact on plant survival. I trust a good nursery (of which we have many) to sell what should survive in my locality. But I fret about too-damp soil, too much shade, root competition, and—of course— my own ineptitude. I deal out death with abandon, regardless of zone hardiness. Zone maps are not for the likes of us, really. They provide guidelines for gardeners just starting out, innocents who cherish hopes that the illiterate plant world pays any attention to rules, zones, and fine print.

I have to be honest. This confirmation that Buffalo is slightly balmier than was previously thought might lead to a few changes. I won't be planting palm trees, but maybe I won’t baby the macrophylla hydrangeas as much.

Have you played with this map yet? Has your garden moved, compliments of the USDA?

Rant on the Road: Newport News, VA

I'm off to the Mid-Atlantic Horticultural Short Course, one of those horticultural gatherings that ends up being a who's who of botanists, entomologists, garden writers, and industry people.This year, Thursday's programming includes a whole day for home gardeners focused entirely on bugs.  Imagine my excitement.

If you're going to be there, I hope to see you! 

February 1-2, 2012
Mid-Atlantic Horticulture Short Course
Newport News, VA

NWF Abandons its Deal with Scotts

Citing the supposedly unexpected guilty plea by Scotts, the National Wildlife Federation has announced that it's severing ties with Scotts. In not mentioning the overwhelming condemnation of the deal by their supporters, NWF leadership has chosen to behave dickishly even in defeat.

Groundcovers that can replace lawns in Landscape Architecture Mag

I've regularly praised Landscape Architecture Magazine, but I'm really loving it this month because of Linda McIntyre's article about alternatives to lawn. She's promoting the Lawn Reform Coalition's new searchable Flickr group for groundcovers that can be used en masse to replace lawn.  (And yes, that's my own lawnless former garden in the top two photos.)

In related news, the Association of Professional Landscape Designers has recently joined the Coalition in sponsoring this new project and we expect lots more helpful photos will be added to the Flickr group after their thousands of members are made aware of it.

Beautiful No-Mow Yards - we have a winner!

Our winner, chosen at random, is Kris Peterson in Rancho Palos Verdes, California.   Congrats to her and thanks to all the 157 people who entered to win. 

The book will be available in early February but can be ordered now from Timber Press, from any online bookseller or your local bookstore, if you still have one.