Technical Abstract: Developers of native plant materials for wildland restoration may operate under either the evolutionary paradigm, which seeks to emulate natural genetic patterns, also referred to as genetic identity, or the resource paradigm, which emphasizes empirical performance. We contend that both paradigms are legitimate and need not be mutually exclusive. Anthropogenic influences have caused many ecosystems to cross thresholds to less desirable states, such that a domesticated nature approach may be more realistic than re-creation of the original ecosystem. When domesticated nature is the objective, an emphasis on empirical performance, in conjunction with geographical origin, is a plausible dual rationale for choice of restoration plant material. We suggest that genetic manipulation of cross-pollinated populations can be performed in a "restoration-appropriate" fashion to develop plant materials for modified environments that 1) establish populations that persist and reproduce, 2) contribute to the repair of ecosystem structure and function, 3) reflect generalized historical evolutionary patterns, and 4) adapt to selection pressures of contemporary evolution.