These are some great points. What is native even – Denmark, for example, was wiped clean 20.000 years ago. Natives before and after looked completely different. I like to divide into three categories. Native plants – which is only really truly relevant for wildlife. Some butterflies NEED a certain host plant. You cant sub that. Some bees NEED certain flower types. You cant sub that. But native carrots, sod that. Every crop we grow for our own direct benefit is modified to hell and back. Then there are non natives. I have some flowering bushes that are only there for their flowers. They are not native. They BURST with bumblebees in May. Thats a good bush in my book.
But then you have the invasives. Non native plants that directly outcompete your 'indigenous' plants. We have several trouble makers here. Japanese Knotweed is a prime example. If you only look once, its a perfect plant: can grow anywhere, is edible and a super tasty springtime addition to the vegetable plate. Doesnt need much looking after. Its quite pretty too. But then you start to see that it spreads, and spreads, and spreads, and that the roots go several meters underground, and that they can lie dormant there for 5 years and then come again. And they completely overshadow everything, and if left unchecked nothing could germinate underneath their closed canopy. If humans disappeared from earth today, in 200 years Denmark would be one big desert of japanese knotweed – and whichever animals could eat them. So as with everything else in life, the story is so much more complicated, and great care has to be taken not to completely smash natural ecosystems with a cool new perennial that acn suddenly grow in your climate.
Are there really people who think they should only eat native plants? Can you imagine just hazelnuts nettles and berries with the odd tuber from the marshes! A la Ray Mears…(thanks Ray!love you)) Eucalptus trees don't seem to seed around here but if it gets warmer they might.In Madiera they're invasive- i saw a solid carpet of grey seedlings in the woods. Years ago, in a Cannington College tropical greenhouse, there was a taro plant and a fellow student, from Africa said that they ate those at home. I took a bite from a stem and it was like eating rosehips, with an extreme tingle like little spikes in my throat! No wonder the pests leave it alone! Thankyou for the films.good to see you out and about. Cheers Huw and Dan
I do have to wonder about the logic of planting laurel, rather than starting off something like Hazel especially for the soil. Wouldn't the fall of leaves each year help to enrich the soil further? Wouldn't it provide insect habitat and nutrients for things like slugs and the like as well? Like, I can see the point, but this was a calculation I wanted to do myself. I actively chose Crab Apple, Hazel, Blackthorn, and Wild Cherry not because I was attempting to go native, but because I wanted to think a little further ahead. I mentioned in replying to someone else about Rhododendron which is according to the Woodland Trust near devastating to the recultivation of natural rainforests. Yes, the evergreen might provide shelter and habitat, but surely we need to take a balanced look at certain plants. Planting Cherry Laurel for example could well be a problem in the way Rhods are according to the RHS. So again, don't we owe a responsibility to make a judgement call and be considerate about which non-natives that we are choosing to use?
That laurel hedge couldve been done with yew and youd have the same results with a little bit more time, less risk of it escaping and tons more of ecological worth.
Where i live laurel has become a real problem in some regions where it is starting to push out natives in the undergrowth of forests. A lot of laurel hedges are too dense for birds to even nest in after only a few years of cutting, they break through rooting barriers, the flowers and fruit have little to no ecological worth… theres not many plants i hate more
Agree on a lot of things said in the video but Laurel is the devil and i will die on that hill😂
I'm not sure arguing that all the veg we grow can be considered in the same category as bringing in a flowering plant or tree that could become evasive. Not saying it's bad to bring in plants into your yard that are bad, I do it, I have tons that don't grow out in the wild here. But you certainly have to be careful and control those that crawl, creep and climb, there's plenty of vines and ground cover people get that take over and when your gone if the next generation knows nothing and do nothing is when they become a problem. I have a neighbor that has 2 types of vines that he didn't plant, it was planted decades ago and the whole neighborhood deals now, and actively removes it every year or it will bring down trees and bushes if left alone.
One observation I would make is that insects are capable of changing host plants over time if they are under pressure. This can lead to the development of new, slightly different species if the original species/variety is not able to adapt. That is part of how evolution happens. With climate change, this is going to be happening whether we like it or not. However, with our short life spans we are looking at things through a different lens than "nature" so to speak. For instance, monarch butterflies may go extinct eventually even if we start planting more milkweed right now, but a new, closely related species may emerge that has a different host plant – it's just, most of us or none of us will be around to see it happen. An invasive, in many cases, is bad because it eventually wipes out other life that is much more beneficial to the larger ecosystem of an area, but that is not the same as a non-native, although in some cases they do intersect. You could have a native plant (or animal/insect) that because of climate or other factors, suddenly becomes more dominant and could be considered invasive depending on where it is and what it is doing. As a scientist, I find all of this fascinating and as someone with that POV, I always try to keep an open mind about everything and base my decisions on a preponderance of evidence vs what we just don't know for sure yet. Sometimes that is a fairly easy equation to understand, but sometimes it is much more complicated. At the pace we are going with overpopulation and destroying our planet in so many different ways, I'm not sure any of it is going to matter for humans at the end of the next few generations because I'm not sure there will be any left. But we all keep plugging along as best we can.
New Zealand also ended up with rats pigs dogs rabbits possums wallabies goats and hedgehogs and we had no mammals , with devastating effects on our ground dwelling birds.
coppiced Hasel and Doormice go together and i do wonder what Eucalyptus does to the other beneficial undergrowth given it's intensly aromatic and we know many non natives and natives too block others from growing. let's not impatiently spread any invasives just because we are in a hurry to save our planet. I planted a birch 7 years ago and took it down last year at 6+ metres high ,that seems a decent yeild as a crop tree
In the name of self-suffcieny I'd say anything goes, well nearly anything providing the species isn't inherently invasive. How many UK gardens have non-natives for ornamental purposes, it makes more sense having them self-suffciency. If the goal is nature restoration, or partial restoration, you almost certainly have to go native, but not always. Horsechestnut is a non-native tree which has become naturalised and works well for ecology. Always an interesting discussion. Keep up the good work!
I really appreciate this interview, because the conversation comes up frequently about native non-native and invasive in the gardening world everywhere. Obviously everything that's not native to your zone is not necessarily invasive. I believe " native" with climate change is a very fluid concept. We're always adapting plants to tolerate climates they're not used to so they can be grown more heat tolerant cold tolerant etc, that's not necessarily "native"but absolutely necessary in my opinion. I totally agree being mindful of what you're doing with your portion of Eden been allotted to you is clutch❤
I really appreciate this balanced discussion of native/non-native trade offs. Eucalyptus is an interesting one, that I have been wanting to plant where I live (West Coast of Canada), but with some hesitation. I lived in Ecuador for many years where eucalyptus was introduced by colonists and thrived in the Andean region. It has profoundly influenced the landscape, economy, aritability, and water retention of the country. It grows fast and straight, so it is a wonderful wood for building, (most buildings there are done with eucalyptus and brick), it also burns well. Lots to consider with plants like this. I also appreciate Dan's comments about how if we insist on keep our own land 'pristine' are we just moving the problem and load to another area or region. This is something I think about often in an endeavor to live ethically.
I was banned from a native plant forum because I suggested planting almonds on a 6' high berm created to level a horse corral in a hot, dry 9a environment in northern California. MIlitancy in the 'only native' crowd is very accurate.
23 Comments
Wow amazing thank you very much ❤
These are some great points. What is native even – Denmark, for example, was wiped clean 20.000 years ago. Natives before and after looked completely different.
I like to divide into three categories. Native plants – which is only really truly relevant for wildlife. Some butterflies NEED a certain host plant. You cant sub that. Some bees NEED certain flower types. You cant sub that. But native carrots, sod that. Every crop we grow for our own direct benefit is modified to hell and back. Then there are non natives. I have some flowering bushes that are only there for their flowers. They are not native. They BURST with bumblebees in May. Thats a good bush in my book.
But then you have the invasives. Non native plants that directly outcompete your 'indigenous' plants. We have several trouble makers here. Japanese Knotweed is a prime example. If you only look once, its a perfect plant: can grow anywhere, is edible and a super tasty springtime addition to the vegetable plate. Doesnt need much looking after. Its quite pretty too. But then you start to see that it spreads, and spreads, and spreads, and that the roots go several meters underground, and that they can lie dormant there for 5 years and then come again. And they completely overshadow everything, and if left unchecked nothing could germinate underneath their closed canopy. If humans disappeared from earth today, in 200 years Denmark would be one big desert of japanese knotweed – and whichever animals could eat them. So as with everything else in life, the story is so much more complicated, and great care has to be taken not to completely smash natural ecosystems with a cool new perennial that acn suddenly grow in your climate.
Are there really people who think they should only eat native plants? Can you imagine just hazelnuts nettles and berries with the odd tuber from the marshes! A la Ray Mears…(thanks Ray!love you))
Eucalptus trees don't seem to seed around here but if it gets warmer they might.In Madiera they're invasive- i saw a solid carpet of grey seedlings in the woods.
Years ago, in a Cannington College tropical greenhouse, there was a taro plant and a fellow student, from Africa said that they ate those at home. I took a bite from a stem and it was like eating rosehips, with an extreme tingle like little spikes in my throat! No wonder the pests leave it alone!
Thankyou for the films.good to see you out and about. Cheers Huw and Dan
Another fab one!
"The duty and the gift of consciousness." Wow, well said.
its all bullshit and its bad for ye , plant whatever the shit u like xD
Fascinating discussion, thank you!
I do have to wonder about the logic of planting laurel, rather than starting off something like Hazel especially for the soil. Wouldn't the fall of leaves each year help to enrich the soil further? Wouldn't it provide insect habitat and nutrients for things like slugs and the like as well? Like, I can see the point, but this was a calculation I wanted to do myself. I actively chose Crab Apple, Hazel, Blackthorn, and Wild Cherry not because I was attempting to go native, but because I wanted to think a little further ahead. I mentioned in replying to someone else about Rhododendron which is according to the Woodland Trust near devastating to the recultivation of natural rainforests. Yes, the evergreen might provide shelter and habitat, but surely we need to take a balanced look at certain plants. Planting Cherry Laurel for example could well be a problem in the way Rhods are according to the RHS. So again, don't we owe a responsibility to make a judgement call and be considerate about which non-natives that we are choosing to use?
That laurel hedge couldve been done with yew and youd have the same results with a little bit more time, less risk of it escaping and tons more of ecological worth.
Where i live laurel has become a real problem in some regions where it is starting to push out natives in the undergrowth of forests.
A lot of laurel hedges are too dense for birds to even nest in after only a few years of cutting, they break through rooting barriers, the flowers and fruit have little to no ecological worth… theres not many plants i hate more
Agree on a lot of things said in the video but Laurel is the devil and i will die on that hill😂
I'm not sure arguing that all the veg we grow can be considered in the same category as bringing in a flowering plant or tree that could become evasive. Not saying it's bad to bring in plants into your yard that are bad, I do it, I have tons that don't grow out in the wild here. But you certainly have to be careful and control those that crawl, creep and climb, there's plenty of vines and ground cover people get that take over and when your gone if the next generation knows nothing and do nothing is when they become a problem. I have a neighbor that has 2 types of vines that he didn't plant, it was planted decades ago and the whole neighborhood deals now, and actively removes it every year or it will bring down trees and bushes if left alone.
Great discussion! Answered a lot of questions for me personally… thank you. Beautiful gardens. Blessings Kiddo!🌿💚🙏💕👵
Can you burn eucalyptus in a fireplace?
Waiting patiently for you to start selling Mashua tubers 😁🤫
Thanks for this.
One observation I would make is that insects are capable of changing host plants over time if they are under pressure. This can lead to the development of new, slightly different species if the original species/variety is not able to adapt. That is part of how evolution happens. With climate change, this is going to be happening whether we like it or not. However, with our short life spans we are looking at things through a different lens than "nature" so to speak. For instance, monarch butterflies may go extinct eventually even if we start planting more milkweed right now, but a new, closely related species may emerge that has a different host plant – it's just, most of us or none of us will be around to see it happen. An invasive, in many cases, is bad because it eventually wipes out other life that is much more beneficial to the larger ecosystem of an area, but that is not the same as a non-native, although in some cases they do intersect. You could have a native plant (or animal/insect) that because of climate or other factors, suddenly becomes more dominant and could be considered invasive depending on where it is and what it is doing. As a scientist, I find all of this fascinating and as someone with that POV, I always try to keep an open mind about everything and base my decisions on a preponderance of evidence vs what we just don't know for sure yet. Sometimes that is a fairly easy equation to understand, but sometimes it is much more complicated. At the pace we are going with overpopulation and destroying our planet in so many different ways, I'm not sure any of it is going to matter for humans at the end of the next few generations because I'm not sure there will be any left. But we all keep plugging along as best we can.
Even stinging nettles aren't native, they were brought over by the Romans (probably).
I'm intrigued by the banks of cannas in this garden and wonder what role they play. I would love to know.
New Zealand also ended up with rats pigs dogs rabbits possums wallabies goats and hedgehogs and we had no mammals , with devastating effects on our ground dwelling birds.
coppiced Hasel and Doormice go together and i do wonder what Eucalyptus does to the other beneficial undergrowth given it's intensly aromatic and we know many non natives and natives too block others from growing. let's not impatiently spread any invasives just because we are in a hurry to save our planet. I planted a birch 7 years ago and took it down last year at 6+ metres high ,that seems a decent yeild as a crop tree
In the name of self-suffcieny I'd say anything goes, well nearly anything providing the species isn't inherently invasive. How many UK gardens have non-natives for ornamental purposes, it makes more sense having them self-suffciency. If the goal is nature restoration, or partial restoration, you almost certainly have to go native, but not always. Horsechestnut is a non-native tree which has become naturalised and works well for ecology. Always an interesting discussion. Keep up the good work!
I really appreciate this interview, because the conversation comes up frequently about native non-native and invasive in the gardening world everywhere. Obviously everything that's not native to your zone is not necessarily invasive. I believe " native" with climate change is a very fluid concept. We're always adapting plants to tolerate climates they're not used to so they can be grown more heat tolerant cold tolerant etc, that's not necessarily "native"but absolutely necessary in my opinion. I totally agree being mindful of what you're doing with your portion of Eden been allotted to you is clutch❤
I really appreciate this balanced discussion of native/non-native trade offs. Eucalyptus is an interesting one, that I have been wanting to plant where I live (West Coast of Canada), but with some hesitation. I lived in Ecuador for many years where eucalyptus was introduced by colonists and thrived in the Andean region. It has profoundly influenced the landscape, economy, aritability, and water retention of the country. It grows fast and straight, so it is a wonderful wood for building, (most buildings there are done with eucalyptus and brick), it also burns well. Lots to consider with plants like this. I also appreciate Dan's comments about how if we insist on keep our own land 'pristine' are we just moving the problem and load to another area or region. This is something I think about often in an endeavor to live ethically.
I was banned from a native plant forum because I suggested planting almonds on a 6' high berm created to level a horse corral in a hot, dry 9a environment in northern California. MIlitancy in the 'only native' crowd is very accurate.