I would suggest a couple of succulents that tolerate and in fact prefer shaded conditions, and could probably get by on just once or twice a month irrigation. Aeonium canariensis subplanum(Aeonium 'Mint Saucer') is the name used by San Marcos Growers Nursery. This gets to 16 inches across, and is quite showy in mass or as accents. Crassula multicava is a smaller leafed succulent to 12 inches tall with deep green leaves, and blooms with pinkish white flowers in December/January. Very easy to grow, and roots easily from cuttings. Sedum dendroideum var praeltum has apple green succulent foliage and yellow flowers in spring, and is also quite tolerant of neglect. Asparagus densiflorus sprengeri compacta is another well behaved succulent type ground cover plant that takes neglect and full shade. Agapanthus 'Peter Pan' or 'Queen Anne' would also take these conditions. Myoporum parvifolium 'Dwarf Pink Form' is a low growing spreading groundcover that is dense enough to smother weeds once established, and is also pretty drought tolerant.

Ajuga spreads like a weed for me, except for A. Chocolate chips. It doesn't stop grass though and likes to make big clumps or grow into places where I don't want it. I'm wondering if the perfect groundcover exists. Acaena inermis 'Purpurea' is very pretty and spread well, doesn't make the barbed seed heads of the blue-green form, Acaena saccaticulpula Blue Haze. Both of these stay low and don't seem to die out like the other low ground covers I've tried. I find if I put some small rocks in the Corsican Mint it provides a moist microclimate that keeps it from dying out. My latest attempt is Dymondia margaretae. I just planted it so I'll have to see how it does. I'm also trying Vinca minor in a bed in the sun to see if it will survive as it stays low and looks good all the time.

I think corsican mint likes shade, but I planted mine in the sun and it died. It is a steppable and grows tiny little mounds that look sort of cool and smell fantastic.

Zack, I didn't post it because I hole heartedly agree with it. Again the "truth" might lie somewhere in the middle. I read "at" issues from many sides. The rancher manages 35,000 acres and I have found that controlling 17 acres is about making choices that have me riding a world where I do not control everything that comes my way. I can only imagine what the uncontrollable issues that he surfs. He has documented yellow star thistle patch and has found that it usually goes away after a decade if left alone. I found that surprising, even confusing. KR bluestem is a species that many people love to hate here in Texas. Yet I do see the butterflies going for their inflourescens during migration. I also see the native bluestem multiplying in the front field amongst them. It appears that on dry summers, it does not make much of an appearance or a very late one, giving the natives a chance to compete.. I know that I do not have the financial nor energy resources to dig them all out. Fire was said to control it but now they have back tracked on it. I am trying to keep it out of the valley where I have a delightful native community of Muhlenbergia s of different sorts. Nor do I want to poison everything out only to have the wind bring more to the empty soil. I was interested in the Monsanto angle of the board of directors mentioned in this Book review .It is more of the same thinking and written by David Theodoreopolis of J L Hudson Seedman fame, so he does have skin in the game and makes money selling possible invasive exotics AND natives. He is a controversial figure. I do find what he says about the fear of change valid and where do we stop the ecological clock since it is a forever changing thing. I just wish it would not change so fast. I have also and aesthetic concern about loosing some ground hugging spring ephemerals to the always land hungry bastard cabbage. Like I said, I do not agree with everything. that he says. I do find that much of the language used by some do or die native guys to be wishy washy as to what is a native and what is not. At the land conservationist meeting here in texas, there are 2 camps about the invasive grass KR Bluestem. 1 states it is a bad bad monoculture forming invasive that is good for nothing and and the other camp says it is a good land stabilizer and good at getting water to penetrate down to the water table. Another is that burr clover that was used as green manure and escaped. It grows in patches and I am tired of digging it up and it will improve my soil. My soil needs soil improvement desperately since invasively farmed cows have been overgrazing it for decades before I got here. Maybe it will disappear as it incorporates nitrogen into the soil.The soil washed away. I won't plant uncontrollable non natives because of the guilt if they escape issue. I prefer natives but I am a practical minded human when it comes to picking battles of whom I eradicate, where and how. The info keeps changing. I do not want to cause harm. But I do not know what is harm sometimes. My thinking is changeable about this subject. There is a lot on his site that is interesting. He uses Holistic land management ideas. He brings up that the removal of all herd animals off the grasslands and high deserts is harmful. .Balancing them is essential but these lands always had herd animals of sorts and many of the natural ones are gone and the niche is filled by cows. There is a connection between the desert tortoise populations and the herding of cows now. Desert tortoise populations have gone down where the removal of all cows have happened. Go figure. The politics of Rancher removal by the BLM is very troubling. Then they seem to give the rights of the land off to Uranium miners. Yes there is uranium under the Hammond's land. OOPS I didn't mean to open that can of worms.