Many invasive plants are still being sold at garden centers(smithsonianmag.com)
smithsonianmag.com
Many invasive plants are still being sold at garden centers
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/worlds-worst-invasive-weed-sold-us-garden-centers-180978481/
110 comments
Different weeds have different strategies. There is one that specializes in wildfires (cheatgrass): it has a large root system and burns very easily, so it "awaits" to be burned: no one but their root system survives the fire, so it can grow out quickly again after the fire.
Based on driving through lots of rural NC, SC.. kudzu will win. Hands down.
Whichever one wins, you and your neighbors lose.
Careful you don't get arrested for running a plant-fighting ring.
Throw English ivy in there too
My (late) parents had all sorts of ivy in their garden for about 40 years (that I know about) with few problems. Ivy is great for birds - home for insects for them to eat, berries to eat too, and places to nest.
Ivy may be great, but if it isn't native then it can be bad for the local ecosystem. I've got some in my backyard and it smothers everything else except the pine trees (and even those three ivy would eventually take down) I just finished removing the blackberries. The ivy is next and then maybe the holly
Mum and Dad had ivy, blackberries and holly. It all seemed to work out OK for them. And other smaller plants like borrage and grape hyacinth. But of course, YMMV. And it was a big garden.
Unkillable.
My street is lined with Norway Maple and barely any seedlings at all come up.
The Siberian elm next door and oak down the street end up with many more seedlings in the yard than the maples.
I can see it being a different situation in a yard adjacent to a stand of more natural trees though.
The Siberian elm next door and oak down the street end up with many more seedlings in the yard than the maples.
I can see it being a different situation in a yard adjacent to a stand of more natural trees though.
Some Norway Maple cultivars are more invasive than others. The main problem with them though is that they release allelopathic chemicals from their roots which inhibit the growth of other native plants, trees, and fungi.
The previous owners planted a bunch of them on our acreage here and they're also really annoyingly brittle vs the native maples. They get damaged in storms easier. I'm constantly cleaning up from them.
I'm currently resting my legs on a coffee table made from the trunk of one that came down in a burst storm some years ago. It's a soft maple but quite nice for wood working.
Just biding my time until the natives I planted next to them grow up a bit more and then I will take them all down and get them milled up.
I'm currently resting my legs on a coffee table made from the trunk of one that came down in a burst storm some years ago. It's a soft maple but quite nice for wood working.
Just biding my time until the natives I planted next to them grow up a bit more and then I will take them all down and get them milled up.
I lost a number of shrubs planted under one before I thought to look that up. I am plotting its demise even now.
Add Oriental Bittersweet, Black Swallow-wort, English ivy and Chinese Wisteria to this list and you've got my back yard. The winner every year is the Wisteria. It cannot be killed.
I'm waging a constant war on my property with Oriental Bittersweet. It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with... it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear... and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead.
My parents, on the other hand, thought it might be fun to plant a little bamboo patch about twenty years ago. They now have an entirely uncontrollable forest of the stuff.
My parents, on the other hand, thought it might be fun to plant a little bamboo patch about twenty years ago. They now have an entirely uncontrollable forest of the stuff.
A friend of mine lived in a house where the previous owner had struggled with bamboo. In some frantic, mad, last ditch effort they mixed some concrete and poured a half-assed slab over the bamboo stubs.
This did not at all work, as the bamboo grew back and broke through the concrete as needed, effectively becoming an armored rootball of hate.
This did not at all work, as the bamboo grew back and broke through the concrete as needed, effectively becoming an armored rootball of hate.
Don't forget the gorse:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulex
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulex
This stuff is all over scotland where I am - it's like nature's barbed wire
Gorse is a man made problem. The result of wrong fire management that in fact is the result of bad farming. Needs fire to sprout.
Remove fire and cattle and Ulex will slowly retreat and dissapear
Remove fire and cattle and Ulex will slowly retreat and dissapear
Oddly, one of the most common invasive plant around Seattle is Scotch Broom. That stuff cannot be controlled.
Where I grew up too (NE Scotland). It does smell very nice every now and then then, like coconut
A favourite in the golf community (I grew up in Hopeman - east of Inverness)
My money is on Kudzu
Underrated comment
(And that’s saying a lot considering its upvotes lol)
(And that’s saying a lot considering its upvotes lol)
Russian Hogweed [1] [2], which the Russians actually bred and initially controlled, is a huge problem over there. Interesting plant, which burns you if you get the sap on your skin (reacts to sunlight), so you can't just go chopping them down willy nilly. And even if you do, it grows back. They have to be destroyed methodically. They grow at an incredible rate and dominate whatever is around them.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/03/opinion/sunday/russia-hog...
[2] http://www.russiaknowledge.com/2020/07/14/the-day-of-the-gia...
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/03/opinion/sunday/russia-hog...
[2] http://www.russiaknowledge.com/2020/07/14/the-day-of-the-gia...
The seeds spread during floods and can last 15 years before sprouting. What a nightmare. We’ve got it down river, not much in my town. I’d actually love to see it in person.
The specific strain is Heracleum sosnowskyi (often called Sosnowsky's soup in native languages) - it's not the same as Giant Hogweed, but both cause similar burns. It's not just a problem in Russia but throughout many former-USSR countries.
It wasn't bred, but discovered in Sakartvelo, after which it was intentionally spread throughout the USSR to be used to produce animal fodder (feed) as it grows fast. The seeds are easily spread by rivers and can lay dormant for a long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heracleum_sosnowskyi
It wasn't bred, but discovered in Sakartvelo, after which it was intentionally spread throughout the USSR to be used to produce animal fodder (feed) as it grows fast. The seeds are easily spread by rivers and can lay dormant for a long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heracleum_sosnowskyi
More commonly (at least in the UK) known as "giant hogweed" - they are very toxic and unpleasant.
Giant Hogweed: https://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/39809.html
I didn't know this plant would burn you. I've seen a lot of it around the Pacific Northwest. It grows like crazy and is really tall.
If it is giant hogweed, the invasive plants people in the area usually appreciate it if you let them know.
On the other hand, poison hemlock looks pretty similar, and although it is a non-native weed, it isn't noxious enough that the county will send someone out to destroy it. In my experience it's a little more common than hogweed.
On the other hand, poison hemlock looks pretty similar, and although it is a non-native weed, it isn't noxious enough that the county will send someone out to destroy it. In my experience it's a little more common than hogweed.
> poison hemlock looks pretty similar
Well that may be it. There's a place up in Umpqua called Hemlock Lake. There's definitely a lot of hemlock out there too. But I wouldn't trust myself to differentiate, but can say that some of the really big plants looked exactly like the pictures you linked.
Well that may be it. There's a place up in Umpqua called Hemlock Lake. There's definitely a lot of hemlock out there too. But I wouldn't trust myself to differentiate, but can say that some of the really big plants looked exactly like the pictures you linked.
My HOA recently approved an environmental stewardship policy and plan. Among the requirements: plant natives first. You'd have thought the people supporting the plan were proposing to kill members' grandchildren. The rhetoric was unreal for such an issue that no one had ever really thought about.
It doesn't help that local hardware stores and the biggies sell fewer natives than non-natives.
Both the policy and the plant sales significantly matter here: we are in Virginia a stone's throw from the Chesapeake Bay. Doing right by the environment (plants, wildlife, water) is important in its own right but the beauty of the environment is also why so many people moved here to retire.
It doesn't help that local hardware stores and the biggies sell fewer natives than non-natives.
Both the policy and the plant sales significantly matter here: we are in Virginia a stone's throw from the Chesapeake Bay. Doing right by the environment (plants, wildlife, water) is important in its own right but the beauty of the environment is also why so many people moved here to retire.
I recently visited Kennebunkport, Maine (yes, the fancy town where the Bush family lives), and they apparently had some kind of wildflower initiative that was incentivizing people to grow native wildflowers instead of the typical manicured mulched gardens I see in the northeast. Not only was it more beautiful than the usual, but it seemed to enhance the quaintness of the place (especially given how overrun by tourists it was).
People are ridiculous. So afraid of change!
People are ridiculous. So afraid of change!
> My HOA recently approved an environmental stewardship policy and plan. Among the requirements: plant natives first.
It’s quite possible that people were objecting to the general expansion of powers/policies of the HOA and the “environmental stewardship policy” rather than this specific clause. (I’m not the type to willingly buy in an HOA area, so I can sympathize, even if I’m fine with this one clause.)
It’s quite possible that people were objecting to the general expansion of powers/policies of the HOA and the “environmental stewardship policy” rather than this specific clause. (I’m not the type to willingly buy in an HOA area, so I can sympathize, even if I’m fine with this one clause.)
> I’m not the type to willingly buy in an HOA area
The problem is that there's a hard trade-off between private property ownership and walkability. If you want to live somewhere where you can walk and bike to restaurants, houses inherently need to be close together. And when houses are closer together on smaller lots, there is more value to having communal property, and to keeping private property cohesively managed. In short, the more walkable a neighborhood you want to live in, the more game theory pushes you toward forming HOAs, co-ops, etc.
The problem is that there's a hard trade-off between private property ownership and walkability. If you want to live somewhere where you can walk and bike to restaurants, houses inherently need to be close together. And when houses are closer together on smaller lots, there is more value to having communal property, and to keeping private property cohesively managed. In short, the more walkable a neighborhood you want to live in, the more game theory pushes you toward forming HOAs, co-ops, etc.
We’re in a part of Cambridge, MA with relatively small lots. I’ve supported every neighbor’s application for a permit or variance, even when I really didn’t like the aesthetics of what they were building.
I don’t think it’s my place to care what windows you have, what color your door is painted, if your hedges are trimmed to the regulation height, or whatever other ridiculous policies HOAs can dream up.
There’s a sidewalk out front. If you don’t like the look of my house, I invite you to look at something else while you walk past; I’ll do the same.
I don’t think it’s my place to care what windows you have, what color your door is painted, if your hedges are trimmed to the regulation height, or whatever other ridiculous policies HOAs can dream up.
There’s a sidewalk out front. If you don’t like the look of my house, I invite you to look at something else while you walk past; I’ll do the same.
This makes absolutely no sense to me. Every great walkable neighborhood built before the mid twentieth century (in other words 99.9% of them) have no HOA.
As a matter of fact, I wound say the exact opposite. The HOA is more likely going to keep out the bars, cafes, restaurants, and groceries that actually make a neighborhood walkable.
As a matter of fact, I wound say the exact opposite. The HOA is more likely going to keep out the bars, cafes, restaurants, and groceries that actually make a neighborhood walkable.
> You'd have thought the people supporting the plan were proposing to kill members' grandchildren.
That's crazy, considering that policy is likely adding an absolutely insane amount to everyone's property values. When NYC re-landscaped The Highline to make it exclusively native plants, property values in the area literally went up 10x.
I live in a HOA, and the first thing I did when I moved in was to dig up all the forsythia along our driveway and replace them with grafted pawpaws. Planting nice trees is the only home improvement you can make where you can spend $50 and add $100,000 to your property value. The returns are literally like getting a chance to go back to 2011 and buy Bitcoin.
That's crazy, considering that policy is likely adding an absolutely insane amount to everyone's property values. When NYC re-landscaped The Highline to make it exclusively native plants, property values in the area literally went up 10x.
I live in a HOA, and the first thing I did when I moved in was to dig up all the forsythia along our driveway and replace them with grafted pawpaws. Planting nice trees is the only home improvement you can make where you can spend $50 and add $100,000 to your property value. The returns are literally like getting a chance to go back to 2011 and buy Bitcoin.
> When NYC re-landscaped The Highline to make it exclusively native plants, property values in the area literally went up 10x.
Any source on this?Because it seems like Highline-adjacent properties probably would’ve seen a pretty good ROI over the past 10 years regardless of what plants were up there.
> Planting nice trees is the only home improvement you can make where you can spend $50 and add $100,000 to your property value. The returns are literally like getting a chance to go back to 2011 and buy Bitcoin.
Any source on this one? I work with arborists and even they’re not quite so gung-ho on promoting this kind of return. And $50 is getting you a sapling that’s going to take (maybe) decades to maximize any return.
Any source on this?Because it seems like Highline-adjacent properties probably would’ve seen a pretty good ROI over the past 10 years regardless of what plants were up there.
> Planting nice trees is the only home improvement you can make where you can spend $50 and add $100,000 to your property value. The returns are literally like getting a chance to go back to 2011 and buy Bitcoin.
Any source on this one? I work with arborists and even they’re not quite so gung-ho on promoting this kind of return. And $50 is getting you a sapling that’s going to take (maybe) decades to maximize any return.
https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/the-high-line-s-halo-.... Talks about an apartment that went from $350,000 to 3.15M.
As a more general principle, try to buy any good pawpaw cultivar. If you look peacefulheritage.org, which is probably the top grower in the country, they go one sale 1 day a year and completely sell out in 20 minutes. You need to license the same software that people use to scalp PS5s to even have a chance to buy one. There literally isn't any consumer product on the market that has this high of an asymmetry between supply and demand.
If you go to the estates of any wealthy families, e.g. the Rockefeller estates or the Getty estates or whatever, the one thing they all have in common is really nice trees. Picking out trees for the new Apple campus was the last thing Steve Jobs did before he died. If it's an exaggeration to say that being able to buy nice trees is the entire point of having money, it's probably not by much.
As a more general principle, try to buy any good pawpaw cultivar. If you look peacefulheritage.org, which is probably the top grower in the country, they go one sale 1 day a year and completely sell out in 20 minutes. You need to license the same software that people use to scalp PS5s to even have a chance to buy one. There literally isn't any consumer product on the market that has this high of an asymmetry between supply and demand.
If you go to the estates of any wealthy families, e.g. the Rockefeller estates or the Getty estates or whatever, the one thing they all have in common is really nice trees. Picking out trees for the new Apple campus was the last thing Steve Jobs did before he died. If it's an exaggeration to say that being able to buy nice trees is the entire point of having money, it's probably not by much.
> Talks about an apartment that went from $350,000 to 3.15M.
$350K in 1997 to $3.15M in 2016. Probably hard to find a property in lower Manhattan that didn’t appreciate like that.
> If you go to the estates of any wealthy families, e.g. the Rockefeller estates or the Getty estates or whatever, the one thing they all have in common is really nice trees.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
$350K in 1997 to $3.15M in 2016. Probably hard to find a property in lower Manhattan that didn’t appreciate like that.
> If you go to the estates of any wealthy families, e.g. the Rockefeller estates or the Getty estates or whatever, the one thing they all have in common is really nice trees.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Yeah, I'm sure it was the native plants and not the 100s of millions spent in re-development.
I wonder if everyone who supported the policy ripped out their Kentucky bluegrass, fescue, and perennial ryegrass lawns because they’re not native. (I’m guessing they did not.)
If they had ripped out their lawns, would that have been an HOA violation?
If they had ripped out their lawns, would that have been an HOA violation?
Does the plan apply to homeowners' private property or only to HOA property?
It's an HOA, their job is to tell people what they can do with their private property.
HOAs basically allow you to pay a monthly fee for the right to dictate what your neighbors can do on private land they own, in the name of preserving property values.
Some love them; I think it goes without saying I'm not a fan.
HOAs basically allow you to pay a monthly fee for the right to dictate what your neighbors can do on private land they own, in the name of preserving property values.
Some love them; I think it goes without saying I'm not a fan.
It was just a question. I know that HOAs can tell people what to do with their property. However, many HOAs own substantial tracts of land in their own right. It could be that this rule OP describes pertains only to the HOA property and not to the private property of the homeowners.
I'm particularly sensitive to this as a native plant nerd here in Hawaii. Home Depot and Walmart are filled with (beautiful) invasive plants like Medinilla magnifica, Kahili ginger, Lantana, so many others. I've spoken to the managers about it from time to time but nothing changes.
I used to work at a botanical garden here on Hawaii Island that boasted of their 6 different species of Medinilla, even selling a fridge magnet in the gift shop. I tried and tried to explain how backwards this was and how these magnets would be viewed by anyone who knew or cared about fragile native ecosystems. Their response always came down to something like "but these ones are prettier." They also sold little bagged starts of two horribly invasive plants! (Bamboo orchid and Kahili ginger)
I used to work at a botanical garden here on Hawaii Island that boasted of their 6 different species of Medinilla, even selling a fridge magnet in the gift shop. I tried and tried to explain how backwards this was and how these magnets would be viewed by anyone who knew or cared about fragile native ecosystems. Their response always came down to something like "but these ones are prettier." They also sold little bagged starts of two horribly invasive plants! (Bamboo orchid and Kahili ginger)
On oahu the two biggest issues I see are with field bind weed and Acacia confusa, but I am dry side. Neither are horticulture atrocities, but t hff they are problems nonetheless. There really is no excuse for HD to continue to sell these high invasibility plants. States and local governments should be able to sue suppliers like HD for damages considering the millions that it costs to control these plants once they escape.
If I see Andean pampas grass at a home depot again, I might have a problem.
If I see Andean pampas grass at a home depot again, I might have a problem.
Hawaii's "fragile native ecosystems" exist only in your fantasies of the past, or way up in the mountains where nobody lives or farms. If Medinilla wants to invade an Albizia grove, who cares?
I'll see your cogongrass and raise you trumpet vine. I kid you not, every 3 weeks during the summer I am out cutting back the vine on top of my pergola that is a good 6 feet from my house and it still feels like I'm losing the war. This thing drops seeds all over the place and vines start sprouting from all the beds and grass. If it reaches a tree it starts to climb it like crazy and if it touches the house for long enough it will suction on to the mortar/woodwork and you will have a devil of a time getting it off. (https://www.botanicalamy.com/warning-about-invasive-plants/)
I didn't see bamboo mentioned. It grows crazy fast. I don't know if it's technically "invasive", but I imagine it's fueled quite a few neighbor feuds.
Bamboo is pretty manageable, it stops sending out new shoots by midsummer and if you really want to eradicate it you can chop it down and paint the stumps with herbicide.
Bittersweet OTOH is horrible, it colonizes everything, strangles 100 foot trees, grows roots in every direction, and makes tons of berries that get distributed by critters (I.e. crosses roads and rivers from adjacent land even if you manage to eradicate it on your own property)
Bittersweet OTOH is horrible, it colonizes everything, strangles 100 foot trees, grows roots in every direction, and makes tons of berries that get distributed by critters (I.e. crosses roads and rivers from adjacent land even if you manage to eradicate it on your own property)
Some is, some isn't.
We chose to back out of a house offer due to invasive bamboo when the owner was unwilling to reduce the price to cover professional removal.
We chose to back out of a house offer due to invasive bamboo when the owner was unwilling to reduce the price to cover professional removal.
That's a really specific ask.
I feel like a different species sometimes when dealing with humans that negotiate this hard. I tend to overpay and be done with it so I can think about other things, but I suppose that's leaving money on the table.
The last place I bought had a giant crack in the concrete floor. Inspector said it was fine, so I just let it slide.
I feel like a different species sometimes when dealing with humans that negotiate this hard. I tend to overpay and be done with it so I can think about other things, but I suppose that's leaving money on the table.
The last place I bought had a giant crack in the concrete floor. Inspector said it was fine, so I just let it slide.
I have certainly accepted some large inefficiencies in a purchase including the house I live in now.
This was a case where the seller had mowed back the bamboo and placed weed barrier and fresh soil to hide it. There hadn't been any visible bamboo during the viewing that precipitated our offer. About 3 days later we inspected and found pervasive multi-inch long shoots of bamboo throughout the yard including big shoots going into a supporting shared wall with the neighbor and into the neighbor's yard as well as into the house foundation and siding.
To completely remove the bamboo we would have had a large excavation that included tearing out and rebuilding the entry walkway disrupting our use of the home. To pay someone to do the labor, guarantee removal (there are specialist companies), and perform the geo-engineering work was estimated to cost 25-30K here in Seattle.
To be clear, we did ask the seller to reduce their price to accommodate that work because we felt we had offered a generous (and competitive above many competing offers) price for the house. That price did not include removing the hidden-at-the-time-of-offer bamboo. The seller didn't like that which was their right. They rejected our counter and months later sold the house for less than our offer minus the cost of the bamboo removal.
[edit: planting invasive bamboo in your yard literally reduces the value of your home]
This was a case where the seller had mowed back the bamboo and placed weed barrier and fresh soil to hide it. There hadn't been any visible bamboo during the viewing that precipitated our offer. About 3 days later we inspected and found pervasive multi-inch long shoots of bamboo throughout the yard including big shoots going into a supporting shared wall with the neighbor and into the neighbor's yard as well as into the house foundation and siding.
To completely remove the bamboo we would have had a large excavation that included tearing out and rebuilding the entry walkway disrupting our use of the home. To pay someone to do the labor, guarantee removal (there are specialist companies), and perform the geo-engineering work was estimated to cost 25-30K here in Seattle.
To be clear, we did ask the seller to reduce their price to accommodate that work because we felt we had offered a generous (and competitive above many competing offers) price for the house. That price did not include removing the hidden-at-the-time-of-offer bamboo. The seller didn't like that which was their right. They rejected our counter and months later sold the house for less than our offer minus the cost of the bamboo removal.
[edit: planting invasive bamboo in your yard literally reduces the value of your home]
Can confirm, once rented a house with bamboo in the backyard, it’s awful awful stuff and will spread very easily
The only way to keep it from moving further into yards or gardens is to pour concrete trenches it can’t grow thru. impossible to eradicate entirely and while it’s shooting new sprouts up from the ground after its first day or two of softness starts to get more wood like and are wicked sharp easily being able to pierce through skin/clothes/shoes and cause some nasty cuts.
No one should ever plant that stuff voluntarily!
The only way to keep it from moving further into yards or gardens is to pour concrete trenches it can’t grow thru. impossible to eradicate entirely and while it’s shooting new sprouts up from the ground after its first day or two of softness starts to get more wood like and are wicked sharp easily being able to pierce through skin/clothes/shoes and cause some nasty cuts.
No one should ever plant that stuff voluntarily!
Bamboo is fairly easy to contain- just surround the area with a 60mil thick plastic barrier. I've been growing bamboo for two decades in my yard without issue.
It also won't spread beyond wet areas, so a lot of people control it simply by not watering the surrounding areas.
In terms of maintenance, bamboo only shoots for a few weeks in the spring - it won't grow at all for the rest of the year. The real scourge in my yard are the weeds that grow year-round.
It also won't spread beyond wet areas, so a lot of people control it simply by not watering the surrounding areas.
In terms of maintenance, bamboo only shoots for a few weeks in the spring - it won't grow at all for the rest of the year. The real scourge in my yard are the weeds that grow year-round.
Can fall to mention that bamboo shoots are edible when very young. Very good mixed with macaroni in my opinion.
I would never plant bamboo in my garden in any case but if you have it, treat it like a vegetable. If it can't be cut applying a slight pressure with a potato knife is too old. Discard the hard central parts. Cook the soft parts near nodes.
I would never plant bamboo in my garden in any case but if you have it, treat it like a vegetable. If it can't be cut applying a slight pressure with a potato knife is too old. Discard the hard central parts. Cook the soft parts near nodes.
At least in northern Virginia it sprouted shoots all spring and summer and it was not in a wet/non draining area or an area we ever watered.
Maybe different species have different growing characteristics but the one we had was awful and constantly was trying to creep from the side of the back yard into the main lawn area.
Maybe different species have different growing characteristics but the one we had was awful and constantly was trying to creep from the side of the back yard into the main lawn area.
I could see it being a lot harder to contain in the south. I'm in a dry area in California and it won't grow where I don't water.
There are definitely different species of bamboo. The two main categories are running and clumping. Running bamboo is the hardest to contain, with rhizomes that travel long distances. Clumping bamboo spreads slowly.
There are definitely different species of bamboo. The two main categories are running and clumping. Running bamboo is the hardest to contain, with rhizomes that travel long distances. Clumping bamboo spreads slowly.
Here in California we have a solution: Stop watering it.
Yellow starthistle, on the other hand, should be a felony.
Yellow starthistle, on the other hand, should be a felony.
If you could borrow a couple giant pandas from the local zoo for a few days, that would be a win-win.
I assume you mean Japanese Knotweed? That stuff is nearly impossible to fully remove.
I doubt many, if any, would confuse the two. Bamboo is notorious for being hard to kill. It spreads underground using shoots, and those shoots can reemerge again and again every time you chop down the bamboo patch.
I've had to deal with some on my own property. The best solution I found, short of replacing the layer of infested dirt, is to inject some concentrated glyphosate into its hollow center stalk closer to the root. It tends to be resilient when just spraying the leaves.
they need wet soils though
I thought it would be Kudzu, but nope. Though Kudzu is still mentioned.
It's kind of amazing that weeds are a real life example of where "kill it with fire" is actually a realistic and appropriate response, and less harmful than herbicides.
It's kind of amazing that weeds are a real life example of where "kill it with fire" is actually a realistic and appropriate response, and less harmful than herbicides.
I live in Minnesota, where a good portion of the forests have been absolutely ruined by buckthorn. It changes what should be fairly open woods with large trees to something you literally can't walk or see through. In my experience it also gives cover to mosquitoes, protecting them from predators.
If I were a billionaire I'd fund research to create some sort of Dutch-elm like disease for it and release it in secret.
If I were a billionaire I'd fund research to create some sort of Dutch-elm like disease for it and release it in secret.
buckthorn = hippo phae = bright horses
Something that you give to horses to promote the grow of a shiny coat and better health. Berries are also a good human food.
Something that you give to horses to promote the grow of a shiny coat and better health. Berries are also a good human food.
“The researchers discovered that 61 percent of 1,285 invasive plant species remain available through the plant trade, including 50 percent of state-regulated species and 20 percent of federal noxious weeds”
What is invasive in Georgia can be well-mannered in West Texas or North Dakota. Barberry is not invasive in the high deserts, where it continues to be a valued ornamental. Russian olives can raise havoc in riparian areas, but be fine for areas where birds can’t spread the seeds to moister soils.
There is a “patchwork” of state regulations because there is a patchwork of climatic zones and ecosystems in the US. There is no mention in the article that, although nurseries sell invasives, most nurseries have policies not to ship invasives to the individual States where they are identified as such by local authorities.
Saying that, non-invasive natives are generally better, but not so much better that non-natives (that could be invasive in other climates) don’t have a role to play in landscaping and gardening. Skip the giant hogweed….
What is invasive in Georgia can be well-mannered in West Texas or North Dakota. Barberry is not invasive in the high deserts, where it continues to be a valued ornamental. Russian olives can raise havoc in riparian areas, but be fine for areas where birds can’t spread the seeds to moister soils.
There is a “patchwork” of state regulations because there is a patchwork of climatic zones and ecosystems in the US. There is no mention in the article that, although nurseries sell invasives, most nurseries have policies not to ship invasives to the individual States where they are identified as such by local authorities.
Saying that, non-invasive natives are generally better, but not so much better that non-natives (that could be invasive in other climates) don’t have a role to play in landscaping and gardening. Skip the giant hogweed….
Hand-wringing by members of the ultimate invasive species.
I went with my son’s middle school class on a field trip to the Audubon Society preserve in Portland, years ago. The guide gave the kids a long lecture about evil English ivy, explaining the concept of non-native invasive species. Portlanders organize groups to tear down the ivy in parks, often trampling the native ferns in their zeal.
Not ten minutes later the same guide showed the class a family of ducks crossing the path. Everyone oohed and aahed — ducklings, so cute. My son pointed out that they were mandarin ducks, a non-native species. The guide went quiet.
I went with my son’s middle school class on a field trip to the Audubon Society preserve in Portland, years ago. The guide gave the kids a long lecture about evil English ivy, explaining the concept of non-native invasive species. Portlanders organize groups to tear down the ivy in parks, often trampling the native ferns in their zeal.
Not ten minutes later the same guide showed the class a family of ducks crossing the path. Everyone oohed and aahed — ducklings, so cute. My son pointed out that they were mandarin ducks, a non-native species. The guide went quiet.
Non-native is not necessarily invasive. The latter is a subset of the former. The ivy is invasive, the ducks are just non-native.
A somewhat arbitrary distinction. Humans and their dogs and livestock are invasive and destructive. Why pick on the ivy but not on Australian shepherds and chihuahuas?
My point was the apparent lack of awareness involved in demonizing a plant species but giving a pass to a duck, when both are non-native species introduced by people. Why are Portlanders tearing down ivy but not killing house sparrows? Or marijuana plants for that matter, also not native to North America.
Portland is the Rose City, famous for the rose gardens. Those are non-native flowers, no one is running around tearing them up.
My point was the apparent lack of awareness involved in demonizing a plant species but giving a pass to a duck, when both are non-native species introduced by people. Why are Portlanders tearing down ivy but not killing house sparrows? Or marijuana plants for that matter, also not native to North America.
Portland is the Rose City, famous for the rose gardens. Those are non-native flowers, no one is running around tearing them up.
> giving a pass to a duck, ... non-native species introduced by people.
Because the duck isn't invasive.
> Why are Portlanders tearing down ivy but not killing house sparrows?
Because the ivy is invasive.
> Portland is the Rose City, famous for the rose gardens. Those are non-native flowers, no one is running around tearing them up. Environmentalism generally stops when things start
Because the roses aren't invasive.
> house sparrows
The house sparrows are invasive (at least in the northeast, not sure about the PNW). A lot of don't realize this, because they're ubiquitous. Same with starlings.
Here's where we get into the topic of humans being humans, generally acting in response to straightforward preferences.
Mass slaughter of cute (and familiar to the point where people don't realize they're not native) little birds to protect other little birds is a tougher pill to swallow than just ripping up some plants and planting different plants. This is too icky for a lot of people to consider.
Moreover, the effects are too subtle for most people to notice, who are generally not "in tune" with nature at all. How many people can even identify different sparrow species in the first place?
I don't think this amounts to some kind of double standard like you seem to be implying. People just find it harder to kill things that have blood and brains, than to kill things that have roots and leaves, especially if said blood-and-brain things are cute and/or familiar.
> Humans and their dogs and livestock are invasive and destructive
Humans: And? This is like saying that environmentalists are hypocrites because they drive cars.
Cats: Cats that are allowed to roam free outdoors are a big problem. I think people who actually are interested in this topic know that, and as far as I know this notion has been gaining popularity in recent years. People want to let little Fluffy roam free, and don't want to think of him as a bloodthirsty predator, whose aggregate behavior amounts to ecological-scale genocide. This thought crosses both the icky line and the selfish-human line.
Dogs: Arguably, only dogs with inept owners are invasive/destructive. Although once in a while even a good dog will dig up a native cottontail burrow, chase after a woodchuck, or scare off some deer. As with cats, it crosses both the icky line and the selfish-human line.
Because the duck isn't invasive.
> Why are Portlanders tearing down ivy but not killing house sparrows?
Because the ivy is invasive.
> Portland is the Rose City, famous for the rose gardens. Those are non-native flowers, no one is running around tearing them up. Environmentalism generally stops when things start
Because the roses aren't invasive.
> house sparrows
The house sparrows are invasive (at least in the northeast, not sure about the PNW). A lot of don't realize this, because they're ubiquitous. Same with starlings.
Here's where we get into the topic of humans being humans, generally acting in response to straightforward preferences.
Mass slaughter of cute (and familiar to the point where people don't realize they're not native) little birds to protect other little birds is a tougher pill to swallow than just ripping up some plants and planting different plants. This is too icky for a lot of people to consider.
Moreover, the effects are too subtle for most people to notice, who are generally not "in tune" with nature at all. How many people can even identify different sparrow species in the first place?
I don't think this amounts to some kind of double standard like you seem to be implying. People just find it harder to kill things that have blood and brains, than to kill things that have roots and leaves, especially if said blood-and-brain things are cute and/or familiar.
> Humans and their dogs and livestock are invasive and destructive
Humans: And? This is like saying that environmentalists are hypocrites because they drive cars.
Cats: Cats that are allowed to roam free outdoors are a big problem. I think people who actually are interested in this topic know that, and as far as I know this notion has been gaining popularity in recent years. People want to let little Fluffy roam free, and don't want to think of him as a bloodthirsty predator, whose aggregate behavior amounts to ecological-scale genocide. This thought crosses both the icky line and the selfish-human line.
Dogs: Arguably, only dogs with inept owners are invasive/destructive. Although once in a while even a good dog will dig up a native cottontail burrow, chase after a woodchuck, or scare off some deer. As with cats, it crosses both the icky line and the selfish-human line.
I understand all of that and don't disagree, not even about cats. As I wrote in my comment above, I mean to point out the apparent lack of awareness. It wasn't clear that the Audubon guide even knew mandarin ducks are not a native species. Whether they cause ecological damage or harm native duck species is another question.
Sparrows and especially starlings have competed with native species. They are such successful species that they may have made their way to the New World on their own if humans hadn't introduced them.
I lived in Portland for a long time. Once I was hiking with my son, on a trail with clear signs Stay On The Path and Dogs Must Be On Leash. We came across a woman off the trail, with her black Labrador off leash digging in the brush, tearing up a fern. I stopped to ask her to put her dog on a leash, and mentioned she should not be off trail damaging the plants. She was busy tearing down English ivy, and responded haughtily that she was doing that tree a favor. Besides her lack of awareness and virtue signaling it seemed she was doing more harm than good, and her off-leash dog, which no doubt never bit her, was barking at my young son and scaring him (which is why I stopped to ask her to leash her dog in the first place).
I hesitate to call such people hypocrites, or to point out that all the pot growing in Oregon required clearing native trees and plants. I call that lack of awareness, and in some cases virtue signaling.
Sparrows and especially starlings have competed with native species. They are such successful species that they may have made their way to the New World on their own if humans hadn't introduced them.
I lived in Portland for a long time. Once I was hiking with my son, on a trail with clear signs Stay On The Path and Dogs Must Be On Leash. We came across a woman off the trail, with her black Labrador off leash digging in the brush, tearing up a fern. I stopped to ask her to put her dog on a leash, and mentioned she should not be off trail damaging the plants. She was busy tearing down English ivy, and responded haughtily that she was doing that tree a favor. Besides her lack of awareness and virtue signaling it seemed she was doing more harm than good, and her off-leash dog, which no doubt never bit her, was barking at my young son and scaring him (which is why I stopped to ask her to leash her dog in the first place).
I hesitate to call such people hypocrites, or to point out that all the pot growing in Oregon required clearing native trees and plants. I call that lack of awareness, and in some cases virtue signaling.
> Portlanders organize groups to tear down the ivy in parks, often trampling the native ferns in their zeal
Sounds typical of Portlanders. Zealous about tearing things down with no regard for the consequences.
Sounds typical of Portlanders. Zealous about tearing things down with no regard for the consequences.
It's wild how invasive creeping bellflower is. It's pretty purple flower, so people think that it's just another flower which is part of why it has staying power. The rest of it is the fact that each plant can generate 15,000 seeds, can spread through a root system under the soil, and can regenerate from fragments of the root. If you have it, you'll have to keep digging it up every year for some time.
> Other invasive species being sold include Japanese barberry, Chinese privet, whitetop, Norway maple, Brazilian peppertree, Russian olive, garlic mustard, yellow star thistle, Canada thistle
Who are these people who want to own a thistle, yet alone pay for one?
Who are these people who want to own a thistle, yet alone pay for one?
Who are these people who want to own a thistle, yet alone pay for one?
Cultural and aesthetical reasons. Same as cacti.
There is a category in landscaping for plants that are strongly geometrical, tall and bold. They are called architectural plants and are a important design element to provide interest out seasons. A good design takes care of color and tone but also will include texture and tactile appealing. Some thistles are native, undemanding and can be really beautiful in winter covered in ice. They have often interesting patterns in leaves and flowers. The indigo flowers of the artichoke in top of a silvery foliage are really spectacular.
And thistles attract lots of interesting insects.
The problem is not that they are thistles, is that they aren't native and in this case also poisonous.
Cultural and aesthetical reasons. Same as cacti.
There is a category in landscaping for plants that are strongly geometrical, tall and bold. They are called architectural plants and are a important design element to provide interest out seasons. A good design takes care of color and tone but also will include texture and tactile appealing. Some thistles are native, undemanding and can be really beautiful in winter covered in ice. They have often interesting patterns in leaves and flowers. The indigo flowers of the artichoke in top of a silvery foliage are really spectacular.
And thistles attract lots of interesting insects.
The problem is not that they are thistles, is that they aren't native and in this case also poisonous.
There are some cool, non-invasive thistles but Canada thistle is definitely not one of them.
Not only that, but in SoCal, it seems there are a dearth of landscapers who are familiar with and can obtain native plants.
thrill(1)
They lost me at:
> However, the study concludes that consumers need to be more aware of what they are buying.
I can't "slow clap" enough for this statement.
I can't "slow clap" enough for this statement.
> consumers need to be more aware of what they are buying.
As a general rule, If is in Aliexpress is 1) the wrong species, 2) strongly invasive
As a general rule, If is in Aliexpress is 1) the wrong species, 2) strongly invasive
By the way, I would like to make this linguistic comment:
While the headline is misleading, it is also technically correct in an interesting way
The article says “ONE OF the world’s most invasive weeds.” Let’s suppose it was #22 on the list of all known invasive weeds ranked by invasiveness
But as a MEMBER of that group, one can legitimately label it as “A world’s worst invasive weed” and then drop the “A”
Interesting techique to make hyperbolic claims that are technically true due to the rules of English!
Do people do this elsewhere?
While the headline is misleading, it is also technically correct in an interesting way
The article says “ONE OF the world’s most invasive weeds.” Let’s suppose it was #22 on the list of all known invasive weeds ranked by invasiveness
But as a MEMBER of that group, one can legitimately label it as “A world’s worst invasive weed” and then drop the “A”
Interesting techique to make hyperbolic claims that are technically true due to the rules of English!
Do people do this elsewhere?
I don't think you can drop the "A" while preserving the original meaning. Without it, an implicit "The" is assumed: "World's worst invasive weed" => "(The) World's worst invasive weed"
Or at least that's how I interpret it as a native speaker!
Or at least that's how I interpret it as a native speaker!
Huh? Dropping the "A" changes the meaning.
Yes it does but it is often acceptable
“The rockettes have done xyz”
“A rockette has done xyz”
“Rockette does xyz”
Rockette here is used as a category of people, a label. She is a member of “The Rockettes”
Similarly, “most invasive weed” is a member of “THE MOST INVASIVE WEEDS” group, and dropping the “a” is done in newspaper headlines a lot, things are often contracted such as Politico or Prez or POTUS etc.
“The rockettes have done xyz”
“A rockette has done xyz”
“Rockette does xyz”
Rockette here is used as a category of people, a label. She is a member of “The Rockettes”
Similarly, “most invasive weed” is a member of “THE MOST INVASIVE WEEDS” group, and dropping the “a” is done in newspaper headlines a lot, things are often contracted such as Politico or Prez or POTUS etc.
This is false. This would be true for "invasive weed", but adding the "most" qualifier without another modifier indicates a specific member, not any member of a set.
Here, I just got an email with a subject “ Securitize recognized as top blockchain company, and more news”
Not “a top” but “top”. But really, they dropped the “a”. Get it?
Not “a top” but “top”. But really, they dropped the “a”. Get it?
No, the adjective can sometimes be part of the name of the group, if it becomes well known.
“Best Western Hotel offers discounts starting in May”
Does this mean this is really the best Western Hotel?
“Best Western Hotel offers discounts starting in May”
Does this mean this is really the best Western Hotel?
...the study concludes that consumers need to be more aware of what they are buying.
“...it’s clear we as a public also lack awareness about which plants are invasive and how they spread to new areas,” Beaury says.
One good thing: the study is generating interest by enforcement agencies who want to crack down on illegal sales.
"Whoa, I just saw old widow Johnson down the street doing the perp walk. What was her crime?"
"Opening planting cogongrass in her front yard."
Speaks directly up at US AG dept drone hovering nearby, "Uh, I never did like her."
“...it’s clear we as a public also lack awareness about which plants are invasive and how they spread to new areas,” Beaury says.
One good thing: the study is generating interest by enforcement agencies who want to crack down on illegal sales.
"Whoa, I just saw old widow Johnson down the street doing the perp walk. What was her crime?"
"Opening planting cogongrass in her front yard."
Speaks directly up at US AG dept drone hovering nearby, "Uh, I never did like her."
> One good thing: the study is generating interest by enforcement agencies who want to crack down on illegal sales.
> "Whoa, I just saw old widow Johnson down the street doing the perp walk. What was her crime?"
> "Opening planting cogongrass in her front yard."
Cracking down on illegal sales is highly appropriate, and very different from cracking down on people who (presumably unaware of the risks) plant it.
> "Whoa, I just saw old widow Johnson down the street doing the perp walk. What was her crime?"
> "Opening planting cogongrass in her front yard."
Cracking down on illegal sales is highly appropriate, and very different from cracking down on people who (presumably unaware of the risks) plant it.
If you can't keep your property free of invasive plants, the government should seize it and auction it off. Right now a big part of the reason why real estate is overpriced is that the costs of maintaining it are artificially low, because the government allows people to push externalities like this onto their neighbors. The government shouldn't be forcing the poor to subsidize the rich.
>Right now a big part of the reason why real estate is overpriced is that the costs of maintaining it are artificially low, because the government allows people to push externalities like this onto their neighbors.
Sounds like a HOA would be prefect for you.
Sounds like a HOA would be prefect for you.
I have about seven acres of woodlands on my property that are littered with invasive plants. If the government is auctioning off my property because of them, they're either going to be auctioning it off over and over, or somebody is going to have to strip the entire forest bare.
Or it'll get split up. The point is that people shouldn't be allowed to own more property than they can steward responsibly. That said, if everyone in an area gets rid of all their invasive plants, then it'll be vastly easier to keep them from coming back.
>if everyone in an area gets rid of all their invasive plants, then it'll be vastly easier to keep them from coming back.
I think this is a denial of what "invasive species" are, and even evolution itself.
An invasive species is something that thrives in many environments and outcompetes natives.
Since humans have become concerned about such things, loopholes in human thinking, behavior and social institutions are necessarily part of the fitness function that makes something invasive.
People can target something specific on a micro level, but at a high level, "invasive" will itself evolve to whatever works because people are psychologically or institutionally blind to it.
Have you ever tried to mow thistles or vetch?
I think this is a denial of what "invasive species" are, and even evolution itself.
An invasive species is something that thrives in many environments and outcompetes natives.
Since humans have become concerned about such things, loopholes in human thinking, behavior and social institutions are necessarily part of the fitness function that makes something invasive.
People can target something specific on a micro level, but at a high level, "invasive" will itself evolve to whatever works because people are psychologically or institutionally blind to it.
Have you ever tried to mow thistles or vetch?
> If you can't keep your property free of invasive plants, the government should seize it and auction it off
Don't take this the wrong way, but that's a little unhinged. It's a terrible idea to give any governing body this much power.
Don't take this the wrong way, but that's a little unhinged. It's a terrible idea to give any governing body this much power.
The horror of nature must be subdued! Down with our plant overlords!
Part of me wants to plant a garden containing all of these to see which one wins