In this short video Martin Crawford from the Agroforestry Research Trust talks about so-called native plants, and why the concept is in reality a bit of an illusion.
Share & Bookmark This Story!
Wild food guide to the edible plants of Britain
Be A Facebook Friend
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
love what you’re doing here, producing so many vids and i agree with the sentiment of this video. but it’s such a controversial topic (at least here in Australia it is) I think it’s worth putting out more convincing and tightly structured arguments, this was a bit meandering for something so short, (and I wasn’t sure how to interpret the spheres bit, if that in anyway added to the argument).
I don’t think that the point Martin was making is argumentative,
i think he was merely stating the fact,
that when it comes to the migration of plant species,
there are, Can be NO borders.
I think in relation to the subject, the word spheres, is Martins own way of describing, the pebble in the pond effect, the ripples may start from one point but they spread far and wide. (my own interpretation).
quite simply, we create native environments for plants, and they are quite happy to live where they grow naturally. imagine if we applied the same concepts to people and animals. in fact, whenever we have applied the same concepts to people and animals there is a revolt. so, obviously, martin makes us think about the question. is there really such thing as native plants? my answer is another question, do we really have the ability to ask? no borders (except hedgerows) no boundaries. let the seeds fly as they will.
feed two with one seed.
Interesting isn’t it….. normally people will say “Oh it’s native” or “Yes the Romans brought it in” but no-one ever comments on migratory birds.
I enjoyed the video. It’s a very valid point to make.
nice i am really interested in this sort of stuff!!!
all very well but one should err on the side of caution as some native species can be very destructive. i guess people will have seen river corridors utterly dominated by himalayan balsam or oak woods becoming slowly infested with sycamore (which results in the loss of ‘native’ ground flora and eventually the oak climax vegetation) or ponds utter choked with plants such as pigmyweed or parrots feather.
do we want a countryside dominated by a far shorter species list than we have at present? so the title ‘the fallacy of native plants’ i conclude is somewhat misleading…
Yes the notion of ‘native’ plants (or animals) is a fallacy in the vastness of time, things change very slowly; but to deny naturally occurring borders exist (however leaky) is ludicrous. The fact is, without limits to plant habitats – whether climate-based or, actually more likely, geographically-based – there would not be the diversity that we all (or so I thought) enjoyed.
It’s the same argument for vast monoculture farming – we’re planting seed for something new in place of the ‘native’ species – a totally natural process that shouldn’t be sniffed at?
And if that’s the extreme, you might want to grow rhododendron in your garden and not care if it takes over undergrowth of the oak forest next door, is that OK?
And do we pick and choose the species we protect or introduce?
I’m off to eat a grey squirrel…
I don’t think there’s a contradiction between pointing out that the concept of “native plants” is questionable and still attempting to be careful in introducing new plants to a particular area. As human beings we have finally begun to learn that we need to be more responsible in our impact on the earth and its ecosystems, which means that we should be thoughtful in everything that we do that might have a significant impact.
I accept that the earth’s climate will change (and always has changed) regardless of the actions of humans, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think it’s important for us to try to minimise the part we play in making these changes more dramatic. In the same way, I accept that plants will move around the earth and spread into new habitats, but I don’t think it’s a good plan for humans to mindlessly import species into new environments on purpose. As a species we really need to get better at thinking through the consequences of our actions! Especially since, as far as we know, we’re the only species blessed (or cursed!) with this long range view – we need to accept our status as custodians of the planet.
Hear, Hear! Exactly how many ‘native’ species were there in the British Isles during the last Ice Age?
Charles: In Origin of Plants the author states that there were 200 ‘native’ plants at the end of the Ice Age.
well the biodiversity consideration is an important one lest we forget. an oak will host hundreds of native species in ireland; a sitka spruce on the otherhand barely any. but yea we don’t have free will and the world is a mess, so do what you can.