Відео

Of course and best of luck!

Fun fact that adds complexity and color to this whole picture is Pfizer and Monsanto were the same company for quite a while. We just went through an era where an explicit war was established on a virus, amplified intensely by the corporation who made 'the solution' to the enemy we had to kill. Monsanto profits on all sides with this 'war'... Any time a corporation promotes war...*any* war, it is profoundly and foundationally reasonable to question the motives and drivers and even the arguments basic validity. I'm not interested in what Ratheon thinks is an enemy, or Monsanto an enemy or Pfizer an enemy. The natural world and the people, plants and animals living their beautiful lives are not enemies

That seems like a shame. I put forward a clear and reasonably formed explanation as to why I appreciate a certain plant. If what you need is for anger and derision shown against plants that are expected to be hated that feels like a sad place to occupy. Perhaps there is room to not plant or care for this or other hated plants, but still find a way to relate with care towards them. Either way, I hope you enjoy the Paw Paws!

There is huge variety in them for sure!

I can't risk it, it's pretty intense how much this plant is hated and how easy it is to get in trouble over it. Just read through the comments!

Well said!

Neat to know!

I've been eating the fruit leather the last few days that Sasha made last year, it is an absolute joy and so filling/nourishing!

Honey Suckle offers massive browse for bees and can be chop and dropped to feed new trees as needed. It isn't a plant I'd actively facilitate growing in a landscape but I can appreciate them as a segue plant.

@@edibleacres I'm assuming it will eventually succumb to shade? We just bought 5.44 acres and a lot of it is sloped and wooded. I'd like to eventually help transition it to longer term perennial crops.

@@shanemillard608 The honeysuckle species that often appear on invasive plant lists do NOT succumb to shade. They sprawl, root, produce more seed, cover more ground even under full canopy. I remove them to facilitate regeneration of spring ephemerals and native tree species.

It is complex that the feeling applied to plants that haven't been in this country long enough overlaps quite a bit with the Make America Great Again vibe for human beings that haven't been here long enough or are 'illegal' and yet come from extremely different sides of the political spectrum generally. A good reminder that hatefulness tends to be a bridging attribute for a wide range of political stances and something to be extremely careful to avoid!

People concerned about the massive negative impacts this plant has on ecosystems are now "plant racists"? Called such by armchair commentators who have spent exactly zero hours dealing with this uber-aggressive and uber-competitive plant on large acreages....the same people who have also spent zero hours educating themselves on why this plant is controversial.

So anyone who has personally been impacted by the negative impacts of this uber-aggressive plant is now a "plant racist"? There are valid reasons why this plant is so controversial. People who have actual experience dealing with it on large acreages tend to have very different views than those on small lots.

@@edibleacres It has nothing to do with how long the plant has been in the country. And the conflation with MAGA is not only bizarre, it's also offensive. The fact that other people hold a different view than you, based upon their different experiences, does not automatically make them "hateful".

No, just people who have different experiences and backgrounds than you. But, by all means, diminish us with epithets from the comfort of your armchair.

Really it's not going to spread anywhere that isn't already covered up with other less useful plants like privet. Where is this pristine native landscape y'all are so concerned about? I've never seen that outside of native plant gardens maintained with lots of labor.

There isn't a lack of concern... Read the description... I am surrounded entirely and for many many miles in most/all directions with landscapes abused many many many times over that could all feel supported in healing with a plant like this. We are nowhere near pure and native and undisturbed landscapes in this region. It is all land reeling from generations of trauma and first responders are OK and OK to speak positively about. I feel OK with this stance.

This feels like a rationalization that again comes across as out of character. That there has obviously been previous abuse of the land in no justifies continued use that doesn't take into account the very real issues these kinds of plants raise.

Complete comfort under Black Walnut. In fact it is studied as being an accelerator to walnut growth when co planted

Autumn Olive

Interesting to know!

I could imagine that being a possible way to work.

The only places I have seen Autumn Olive expand intensely are areas that have been absolutely brutally abused. Center areas of highways, chemical annual ag fields after being abandoned, even an old gun factory where we live that is a super fund site because of the lead levels. These are the places that it has 'invaded'. I don't discount that it can happen in natural and undisturbed and special native dominant ecosystems but in nearly 20 years of looking closely and trying to understand who this plant being is, they have only 'invaded' areas that were recently brutalized by people. They feel like healers and allies and I feel really good speaking in affirming ways about who they have shown themselves to be.

@@edibleacres That is why I like this video. You present the argument for the other side. It is very much appreciated.

Sounds like a nice relationship happening there!

It is a first responder to abused and injured and raw landscapes and quiets down when a canopy closes around it.

I can't imagine what I said in this video that would feel shameful or needing to no longer take in anything I've said. Would you be so kind as to articulate anything I shared as a direct observation of a plant in our landscape that makes you need to leave?

For sure

Fun!

I'm excited to explore this idea. I find myself going for autumn olive fruit leathers recently as the sun gets stronger, I wonder if my body knows whats up :)

I will try to make that happen, nice idea!

Fun

Russian Olive is not native to anywhere in the U.S..,that’s why it’s called “Russian Olive”. It is taking over the waterways in many parts of western U.S., pushing out the native willows and cottonwoods.

I don't know of this one, haven't seen it in our landscape as far as I know

Russian Olive is not native anywhere in the United States (hence the term "Russian" Olive). It is pushing out the native willows, box elders and cottonwoods in the West.

I have not seen them be invasive in the Ozarks. They seem to be at home here in a good way.

That definitely puts a damper on them

I find it terrifying to look at the list of "invasive species" and see how useful, healthful, and abundant the majority of the plants are on that list. Then I look at where scientists get their money and I get even more concerned. There is only one base truth in nature, things change. I think the focus of the do-gooders should be on addressing the far more destructive practices of monocropping in all of its forms. But monocropping or the strip mining of soil, which happens to be what is the most upset by invasives, also tends to be the easiest/most straightforward way to extract profits off the land, and those profits are used to pay for researchers. funny how things work out some times.

But look in the mirror. If scientists, ecologists, biologists, foresters and others are going to be meaningful in ecological restoration, then they need to expand their deep but narrow scientific perspective and look at the socio-political sweep of the problem and opportunities. The vast majority of the problems caused by autumn olive were not caused by and are not driven by permaculture. Rather the opposite. And it can be readily argued that the problems cannot be solved without applying permaculture principles. Meanwhile, the multiple benefits of autumn olive are very real in permaculture circles and beyond. Are permaculturalists causing the problems caused by invasive honeysuckle and barberry and privet, and so on? I've never seen anyone claim that they are, and why should they as these plants are not commonly used in permaculture that I've seen. Yet these plants remain an invasive problem - because of the actions and inactions of other agents and agencies who actually bear the responsibility for both creating and enabling the problem. In sum, it seems apparent that the actions of permaculturists in the problems of autumn olives are comparatively so slight that the benefits of using autumn olive in niche but valuable ways seems to outweigh or be nearly irrelevant to the problems caused by autumn olive. Criticizing permaculturalists for using limited amounts of autumn olive to great benefit seems akin to criticizing a backyard apple grower for tending to a few apple trees next to an abandoned cow pasture that has been overrun by a dense dark monoculture forest of apple trees (I've seen it) expanding out from the pasture's old trees. The backyard grower's apple trees didn't cause the problem in the old pasture acreage and don't drive the problem. The responsibility lies elsewhere, and confiscating the backyard apple grower's trees would be pointless, mistaken, and anti-ecological. Apples to autumn olives is a suggestive and not an entirely literal comparison but a telling one in its personal, ecological, and socio-political sweep.

⁠@@plagshipLOL. ​​⁠Invasive species are not a problem because they have no benefits. They’re a problem because they lack natural controls and they greatly reduce the presence of native plant species in unmanaged land, species that are necessary for/to the wellbeing of other forms of life, whether that’s flowering time, larval food, nesting materials (or preferences), and on and on. And it’s hysterical that you think that biologists and foresters are somehow on the dole, lol. You are obviously unaware of how little money they make and how little support they have, especially from people like you who somehow conflate on-the-ground wildlife specialists / foresters with corporate research dollars paid to agricultural departments at state land-grant universities (like, seriously, wtf?…those majors are not even usually in the same colleges at universities). But, sure, let’s totally believe the nurseries who make money selling all these seedlings…you know, the ones who tell us it’s perfectly ok to plant them!! Funny how that works out sometimes.

If scientists, ecologists, biologists, foresters and others are going to be meaningful in ecological restoration, then they need to expand their deep but narrow scientific perspective and look at the socio-political sweep of the problem and opportunities. The vast majority of the problems caused by autumn olive were not caused by and are not driven by permaculture. Rather the opposite. And it can be readily argued that the problems cannot be solved without applying permaculture principles. Meanwhile, the multiple benefits of autumn olive are very real in permaculture circles and beyond. Are permaculturists causing the problems caused by invasive honeysuckle and barberry and privet, and so on? I've never seen anyone claim that they are, and why should they as these plants are not commonly used in permaculture that I've seen. Yet these plants remain an invasive problem - because of the actions and inactions of other agents and agencies who actually bear the responsibility for both creating and enabling the problem. In sum, it seems apparent that the actions of permaculturists in the problems of autumn olives are comparatively so slight that the benefits of using autumn olive in niche but valuable ways seem to outweigh or be nearly irrelevant to the problems caused by autumn olive. Criticizing permaculturists for using limited amounts of autumn olive to great benefit seems akin to criticizing a backyard apple grower for tending to a few apple trees next to an abandoned cow pasture that has been overrun by a dense dark monoculture of apple trees (I've seen it) expanding out from the pasture's old trees. The backyard grower's apple trees didn't cause the problem in the old pasture acreage and don't drive the problem. The responsibility lies elsewhere, and confiscating the backyard apple grower's trees would be pointless, mistaken, and anti-ecological. Apples to autumn olives is a suggestive and not an entirely literal comparison but a telling one in its personal, ecological, and socio-political sweep.

@@mountainfigsperennialfruits You make a lot of logical leaps here. Discouraging people from propagating autumn olive isn’t anywhere near confiscating people’s apple trees. Slow down and think critically. For starters, apple trees aren’t invasive. They aren’t native either, but there are lots of plants that are neither. Knowing what the terms mean and how they are used matters if you want to think through the issue. Similarly, science isn’t capitalism, and you shouldn’t conflate them. Ecologists working on wetland restoration (etc.) are not somehow in the pocket of Monsanto because Monsanto employs some botanists. Too much of your argument makes permaculture sound like a cult where people drink the kool-aid, label outsiders as enemies, and do whatever David Holmgren tells them to do. That isn’t good for permaculture or the planet.

Enjoy!

Enjoy!

Mark Angelini, give him a search and a hello!