When does a tree become native?

[John Stewart]

Hey
Just thinking about our Norway Maple problem!
If you didn't know better you would think it was native in these parts!
Same with White Mulberry and Siberian Elm!
When does a tree become native, if ever?
Later
John

 

[John Stewart]

Hey Rob
I have asked this question many a time and the usual answer is yours!
But why does a seed brought over in the large intestine of a dinosaur make it more native than a sapling brought over on the boat to the new land?
Later
John

 

[Newfie]

After it's choked out everything else?

 

[John Stewart]

Good Point!

 

[NeTree]

Case in point... Ailanthus.

 

[John Stewart]

Just did a arborist report on 14 of them so the builder can cut them down!
You know I couldn't find one reason to save them!
Everyone had issues!
And was grown and producin seed fine
Later
John

 

[JeffE]

I actually did my grad school research on invasion by Norway maple into northeastern hardwood forests.

I just got finished (I hope) having a huge argument on this subject on a different forum. It started by someone asking what they should plant under their (invasive) Chinese tallow tree... then eventually this guy and I started a full-blown debate. At first I decided it wasn't worth arguing with him (he's really obnoxious), then I just went for it. Went into issues about what makes a species invasive, why we should care, etc.

Anyhoo, if you're bored you can check it out (I'm "saccharum"):

-Jeff (hunkering down AGAIN in Central FL)

edit: whoops, this forum doesn't let you link to threads from other forums. Oh, well. I'd paste it, but it goes on for dozens of pages. If you're curious, write me and I'll email you the link.

 

[techdave]

When does a plant become native?

Good question!!!!! I think any discusion of this should consider things like the following. Is it displacing native species? Does it form beneficial associations within the native soils? Does it provide benefits to the natural commnunity (food/shelter/role in fire succession etc.) like any similar existing natives? Does it disrupt the native ecosystem by being a host for disrupanimals or insects? Is it an intermediate host for a damaging plant pathogen? ETC ETC. Just my 2 cents, Dave.

 

[JeffE]

Just to provide some background...

Ecologists differentiate between a species that is "introduced" or "exotic," (introduced outside of its historical range by humans), "naturalized," (an exotic that is able to self-establish and persist in the host community), and "invasive," (a naturalized species that causes some sort of problems, either by the sorts of ecosystem alterations that techdave lists above, by reducing biodiversity in the host system, or by having negative health or economic impacts on humans).

Most introduced species don't become naturalized, and most naturalized ones doen't become invasive.

Just wanted to clarify that, because some folks get the idea that ecologists have some sort of bigotted attitude, where we want to exclude all exotics from the system, and force people to use locally native species only... while it's just the problematic species we're worried about (although the best way to avoid introducing another problematic species is to use natives, or exotics that have proven to have low invasive potential).

 

[Tom Dunlap]

When I was in MN I was on a planning board for the Shade Tree Short Course. A 2 day event dedicated solely to trees. We would have up to 100 speakers.

A suggestion came up to have a talk about invasive species. A question was floated to try and determine the exact crtieria used to make someone's list. It was concluded that most lists were personal hate-lists more than any kind of scientific standard.

During the discussion someone brought up European buckthorn [everyone spit], Norway maple and other favs. Gary said that Colorado spruce was high on the list. I added that turf, especially Kentucky blue grass were proven to be alleopathic to trees. Get rid of turf I suggested. then my twisted mind realized that there is another non-native, invasive species we had forgotten...humans Is there another species that meets the standards that Jeff E shared?

 

[crtreedude]

We are actually planting thousands of non-native species - teak. Because of the profit of teak, we are able to plant thousands of native species as well. I rather doubt any teak trees will escape into the wild. First, they don't germinate very well, and secondly, they don't compete very well also. (Third, If I find a mature one, I would probably harvest it!)

In the feria (think farmer's market) I can by lettuce, eggplant, strawberries, brocolli, cauliflower, etc. which I believe are not native. Come to think about it, in USA, most of what you eat probably is not native, unless you live on beans, corn and squash. Apples, pears, peaches, etc. are all non-native to USA.

Of course, everything I listed is not going to compete very well with the natives. Maybe this is the key, can it regenerate itself and compete successfully with the local plants.

As you say, I am not willing to get rid on at least one non-native species - me!

 

[OutOnaLimb]

As far as our natural ecosystems go, I have spent quite a bit of time in the mountains hunting and fishing, and I dont think I have ever seen any invasive trees in the woods here in Colorado. In the urban ecosystem on the other hand, we have our fair share of Russian Olive, Siberian and Chinese elm, and a few tree of heaven. I had never really considered Norways to be invasive, around here they are more of a large ornamental. The same holds true with Lindens, honey locust, and bur oak. They may be introduced species, but they are not considered weeds like the olives, elms and tree of heaven.

Kenn

 

[techdave]

non-natives becoming natives

Thanks for all the great responses. I usually do not go into the discussion of introduced/naturalized/invasive because most peoples eyes glaze over when I do. Here in our ecosytem there are benefical introduced species like farm crops and Eucalyptus that tend to stay where planted with limited spread and limited ability to exclude or outcompete the natives. BUT there are some like Tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima) that are a big problem.
Here in California we have a very diverse matrix of temperature/soil/elevation/latitude/precipitation pattern/etc. The problem of invasives is serious enough that there is a Plant Pest council devoted to stopping the damge these intruders do. It is based on the solid scientific distinctions like the ones JeffE refers to.
To go back ot the original question, I think IF and only IF a plant does not do discernable damage to the native biota and can survive in limited areas within a greater region without spreading into the region as a whole then it might be considerd a "native". Until then it is just a pest. Just my 2 cents, Dave.

 

[wiley_p]

while cutting outside Granite Falls (this is a ways out of town) Holly can be considered an introduced species, so on top of thick salmonberry, vine maple, blackberry and swordfern there was holly thickets. I love cutting a tree on a steep hill and have it stay velcroed to the slope.

 

[a_lopa]

never this country has its fair share of pine n cypress wind rows trying to make the joint look like europe they dont look to great now after 150yrs or so!

 

[Nickrosis]

I've never seen an adequte definition of "native" in my life. When you do use the world in grant applications, etc., they want you to define what you mean by the word. With so many definitions out there, you may have one idea when writing specifications and the LA may have another when ordering the trees and plants.