Home > Plants > Himalayan balsam
The transportation of seeds or whole plants is an offence under the Invasive Alien Species (Enforcement and Permitting) Order 2019 in England and Wales and Section 14AA of the Wildlife and Countryside Act in Scotland. This means that no seeds or plants should be removed from the site where they currently grow, and sowing seeds or planting elsewhere either deliberately or accidentally would be a particularly serious offence. – Curtis Wright (phone: 07920 516559. email: curtis.wright@apha.gov.uk)
The management of non-native plant species, particularly those deemed “invasive,” has long been a contentious issue in conservation biology.
Recent discourse, however, suggests a paradigm shift in how we perceive and manage these species.
This article examines the case of Himalayan balsam (Impatiens glandulifera) and challenges the prevailing narrative surrounding invasive species management.
Historical context and introduction
Himalayan balsam, native to the western Himalayas, was introduced to Britain in the early 19th century as an ornamental plant. Its rapid spread along waterways and in damp habitats has led to its classification as an invasive species, prompting widespread “balsam bashing” campaigns aimed at its eradication. However, emerging research and alternative perspectives call into question the efficacy and necessity of such aggressive management strategies.
Challenging the invasive narrative
Pete Yeo, a plantsman and advocate for alternative approaches to invasive species management, argues that much of the evidence supporting negative impacts of Himalayan balsam on biodiversity is inconclusive. Yeo cites two influential works: “Where Do Camels Belong?” by Ken Thompson and “The New Wild” by Fred Pearce. Both authors critically examine the standard view on invasive species and argue that the evidence against Himalayan balsam’s purported negative effects is lacking.
The Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International (CABI) acknowledges that many accusations against Himalayan balsam, including its impacts on biodiversity, lack robust scientific support. This admission from a reputable international organization underscores the need for more rigorous research before implementing wide-scale eradication efforts.
Ecological role and interactions
One common argument against Himalayan balsam is that it outcompetes native species. However, Thompson and Pearce contend that the plant primarily competes with common ruderal species such as stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), bindweed (Convolvulus spp.), docks (Rumex spp.), and cleavers (Galium aparine). These native species are generally robust and capable of coexisting with Himalayan balsam. Moreover, there is evidence suggesting that Himalayan balsam may actively suppress other non-native species, potentially playing a regulatory role in ecosystems.
The accusation that Himalayan balsam increases riverbank erosion due to its annual life cycle has also been questioned. Yeo posits that the root systems of dead annual plants often remain intact, potentially continuing to stabilize soil even after the above-ground portions have died back. Additionally, perennial species coexisting with Himalayan balsam contribute to bank stabilization.
Pollinators and biodiversity
Contrary to claims of negative impacts on pollinators, some studies suggest that Himalayan balsam may provide valuable nectar sources, especially late in the season when other flowers are scarce. This potential benefit to pollinators requires further investigation and may necessitate a more nuanced approach to management.
Climate change and adaptive management
As climate change alters ecosystems globally, the role of non-native species in maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem functions may need reevaluation. Yeo and others argue that some introduced species, including Himalayan balsam, may prove beneficial in adapting to changing climatic conditions. The Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) has acknowledged that certain non-native tree species, such as holm oak (Quercus ilex) and turkey oak (Quercus cerris), may become valuable components of British landscapes as the climate warms.
The Forestry Commission in Britain has already begun recommending the use of seeds from more southerly provenances (up to 5 degrees south) for native species in new plantings, anticipating warmer future conditions. This approach recognizes the need for genetic diversity and adaptability in the face of rapid environmental change.
Conservation philosophy and practice
The debate surrounding Himalayan balsam and other non-native species reflects a broader philosophical question in conservation: should we strive to maintain ecosystems in a perceived “pristine” state, or should we adopt a more dynamic view of nature that accommodates change and novel ecosystems?
Richard Mabey, a noted British naturalist and writer, offers a cautionary perspective on “balsam bashing” activities. He notes that Himalayan balsam often colonizes bare soil where other plants are not growing and questions whether there is hard scientific evidence of it displacing native vegetation. Mabey suggests that human activities creating disturbed habitats may be more responsible for the spread of Himalayan balsam than any inherent “invasiveness” of the plant itself.
Furthermore, Mabey emphasizes the potential future value of newcomer species in the face of global plant extinctions due to climate change, pollution, and habitat loss. This view aligns with the concept of “future wilding” proposed by some ecologists, which considers the potential benefits of non-native species in creating resilient, diverse ecosystems capable of adapting to future conditions.
Conclusion and future directions
The case of Himalayan balsam illustrates the need for a more nuanced, evidence-based approach to managing non-native species. While concerns about invasive species are not unfounded, the lack of robust scientific evidence supporting many claims against Himalayan balsam suggests that current management practices may be based more on perception than fact.
Moving forward, several key actions are necessary:
- Conduct rigorous, long-term studies on the ecological impacts of Himalayan balsam and other non-native species.
- Develop more holistic management strategies that consider the potential benefits as well as risks of non-native species.
- Incorporate climate change projections into conservation planning and species management decisions.
- Foster open dialogue between traditional conservationists and proponents of alternative approaches to invasive species management.
- Educate the public about the complexities of ecosystem management and the potential roles of non-native species in future landscapes.
By adopting a more flexible, evidence-based approach to species management, conservationists can work towards creating resilient ecosystems capable of thriving in an era of rapid environmental change. The case of Himalayan balsam serves as a catalyst for reevaluating our understanding of invasive species and our role in shaping the ecosystems of the future.