Many of the plants on your website are invasive species that are causing big problems in different areas of the country. Is your organization considering trying to educate the public on plants that they should not be planting? Tree of Heaven, autumn olive, and mimosa are just a few examples. When we know better, we do better.

to the site!

We have members in the USA as well as a few other countries around the world and a plant that might be invasive in one area may be perfectly fine and not cause issues in another area. Our database currently lists almost 800,000 plants and it's growing by the day, I don't think there would be enough page space to list the states/countries where each plant would be considered invasive.

Admin is aware of concerns raised by a few users today, because of mention of Ailanthus altissima in the newsletter. I'm sure there will be a response from admin.

The headline at the very top of the database page for Tree of Heaven (Ailanthus altissima) states as follows:

This plant may be extremely invasive in your area. We do not recommend planting it. This page is an informational database entry and in no way is an endorsement of the plant!

The weekly newsletter lists random plants pulled from our large database. They are not hand selected. Those invasive plants exist, have an entry in the database therefore they are a potential plant that can end up in the newsletter. If you click on that particular plant name highlighted on blue, you would have seen the invasive disclaimer Lin posted above.
This is a member based website and it's up to individuals to do their due diligence as to what to plant or not plant. Any member can add to the comments section of any plant in the database. If they have factual helpful info, please share in the comments.

Can we suggest other plants to get that disclaimer? I just tried a few well known ones, they don't have it.

But, as has been mentioned, not every invasive plant is invasive in all places.

It is now added. Anyone can edit the details in the plant database. (Choose "Others" to add additional info). Admin will review and approve the requested edits and you get an too.


See other info I added. Admin approved the additional details and even gave me an too! I wanted to put these info under Miscellaneous but there is no ✍️ editable field in Miscellaneous.

However, the additional details and the warning on the top page posted by Lin will not be visible in the newsletter. Members or non-members (I hope) has to click the data info to read these additional info and the comments about the plants.

Hi & welcome, JKE!

I wonder why did so many people join to complain about this?

Are we going to start cancelling plants now?

Hi @JKE757

Welcome to the NGA!
You'll find lots of friendly gardeners and information too.

One problem with eliminating potentially (depending on their adaptable range) invasive plants is that it would eliminate the opportunity to educate members and visitors about them.

As Sue @Calif_Sue and Lin @plantladylin pointed out, there are warnings in the database.

As a person who is interested in educating about invasive plants, you could add beneficial comments to database entries as Gigi @GigiPlumeria did.👍🏻

That would be a valuable service! I hope you'll meet new friends here too, as I've enjoyed, and have fun!

Pat

Invasive plants - usually each state lists what they consider invasive and some states actually fine you for having them. Our weather patterns are changing and this may also cause plants to migrate into other zones. Invasive plants do not actually feed the wildlife tho insects are not always so choosy. Same for poisonous plants, but poisonous plants can feed the insects.
Let the buyer beware is a common saying in the USA since buying anything is possible, but having it - could come back to bite you.
Education and teaching are different subjects...YOU are responsible for your education, teaching a subject is a paid job. We offer resources when asked about good places to find your research, but it always comes down to you, yourself, wanting to learn.

It will not have escaped notice by many of the gardeners here that the matter of "invasive" plants is something of a religion with some folks. There is all too commonly held a rather bizarre notion that every location has a fixed set of "proper" (aka "native" species), notwithstanding the plain biological facts that the species found in any given spot are, will be, and have always been constantly changing. The ranges of species expand and contract continually. These biological truths make the very concept of "nativeness" quite problematic.
It is especially unfortunate when some of those true believers come into positions of authority and are able to force their prejudices on others by threatening them with Government violence. If your local weed control authority is anything like my own, you will find the list of "forbidden" plants to be largely arbitrary, with most having no evidence given of harm caused by their existence (other than being "non-native"). I would suggest to anyone contemplating giving a warning about "invasive" plants to have some factual basis for their disparagement, because "invasive" frequently seems to mean nothing other than "does well and will establish itself in some locations where it is not recorded to have been before Columbus did his thing". To my mind, that by itself is a recommendation!

Its really not up to this or any other gardening site to attempt to educate the public about invasive species. Its up the the individual. In this age of the internet and 'connectedness', that information, as well as information about plant pests and a variety of other plant related issues is available to everyone at the touch of a button.
Since 'invasive plant', 'noxious weed' etc vary state by state, the best place to be 'educated' is on the website for your state's USDA.
Fortunately the government has had the foresight to collect all this data, as well as information about the requirements for shipping/moving plants across state lines and the state by state requirements for licensure as a nursery, grower, or plant broker in one place.
nationalplantboard.org

kreemoweet said: There is all too commonly held a rather bizarre notion that every location has a fixed set of "proper" (aka "native" species), notwithstanding the plain biological facts that the species found in any given spot are, will be, and have always been constantly changing. The ranges of species expand and contract continually.

And...
As people continue to plant stuff that has been demonstrated to be harmful in their area... because... Nobody has the right to "dictate" what they can grow in their yard... the world becomes ever more a "Planet of Weeds".
David Quammen wrote that after this continuing mass extinction event that is going on... Mother Nature will bequeath a new diversity after we're gone.... She may only have rats and cockroaches to work from... but evolution has worked from lost diversity before...

An important question is how to help people understand that every time they plant something shown to have toxic effects on the local environment, they aren't just adding an interesting plant to their yard, but seemingly adding something to the entire town or county... once it escapes from their yard... and crowds out the natural diversity... causing habitat loss for the wildlife that depend on the plants the new thug replaces.

I'm pretty sure the database is meant to be more for this is a plant that exists and these are its growing conditions. I don't look at it like, I shouldn't plant this plant or this one is "safe" to grow. They're all plants and that's what the database has in it. Plants.

If it were my newsletter, I'd simply insert a header

"Here are random examples of entries from our extensive database of plants; follow the links to see more images, info, and comments from fellow gardeners"

5 people posted because this plant being in a newsletter with no explanation seems a recommendation. Do you want to have this discussion with Oriental bittersweet, Ficaria verna, Japanese hops etc?

And I'd add another checkbox to the Miscellaneous category of plant details. "reported noxious or invasive in some regions"

sallyg said: If it were my newsletter, I'd simply insert a header

"Here are random examples of entries from our extensive database of plants; follow the links to see more images, info, and comments from fellow gardeners"

I'm going to do just that.

I'm very well acquainted with native plant theory but the details remain undefined. If you take the idea and run with it, you encounter so many questions. Are humans part of nature? If a coconut floats across the ocean to a new shore without manipulation by humans, did it invade? If it reaches a new shore with the aid of humans, did it invade? Does it matter who the humans were? Why they moved the plant? The date on which this movement occurred? That date seems very important for native theory to stand up to scrutiny. What is that date?

How far a plant must move or increase before it is described as invasive? A foot? A mile? Over an imaginary county, state, or country boundary? Can a single plant be observed and designated as having invaded? How many individuals are required to be an invasion? Is it a combination of distance and number of individuals? If so, what is the mathematical formula to calculate?

If plants are moved by humans because they offer beauty, sustenance for themselves or animals, some type of raw material that is useful, why would it be a negative to have more of those plants in other places? If people are starving, would it not be beneficial to introduce any edible plants that could thrive on their land? Does the introduction of new species increase biodiversity? If so, is that positive or negative?

Evolution and native theory seem to have very little overlap if we think in terms of a Venn diagram. If things are evolving, why is it a problem if plants move to where they were not yesterday, or last year, or at some vague, undefined past date? Is the state of evolving superior, or the static environment of native theory where no new elements are introduced and everything should stay exactly as it was on that mysterious date in its "original" place? How can evolution occur if things are static and "should" remain so? If evolution is occurring, is there a static ecosystem anywhere? Is an invasive plant the fittest for that spot, manifesting the most successful survival? Won't the native entities just evolve to accommodate the introduced ones?

I'm not a supporter or detractor of either concept, but I do have questions.

JKE757 said: Is your organization considering trying to educate the public on plants that they should not be planting?

We hope you find our varied viewpoints thought-provoking. Please return to your thread and discuss your concerns!

JKE757 said: When we know better, we do better.

That is the point exactly- the point that ruffles some feathers-
Whose VIEWPOINT must I accept to "know better" so I can "do better?"

I'm learning there is a lot about the 'invasive' debate (and some tie it to the 'native plants' debate) that should be more fluid than it currently is- and it's difficult to assess the motivation of some of those expressing viewpoints and making 'invasive' lists and policies.

I'm a gardener and I enjoy this forum of other gardeners like myself, but this is not a policy-creating or policy-adopting forum. I willing share my opinions, as do most of us here, but expect readers to research and come to their own conclusions- so we can all "do better."

Just my thoughts!

Nature said:
"It is time for scientists, land managers and policy-makers to ditch this preoccupation with the native–alien dichotomy and embrace more dynamic and pragmatic approaches to the conservation and management of species — approaches better suited to our fast-changing planet.



"Don't judge species on their origins"
Mark A. Davis, et all
Nature volume 474, pages 153–154 (2011)

https://rdcu.be/dkeGX

Invasive theory is built on the foundation of native theory, an extension of NT. To be designated as invasive, it must first be designated as exotic (non-native.) Without NT, it's impossible to define an invasive plant because a native can't invade "its own territory."