Don't pull garlic mustard

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
There is not much humans can do about "invasive species". Sure smallpox is under control but trying to put buckthorn in its place is like trying to send all the people of european ancestry back to europe.
 
We've had success with Buckthorn, Honeysuckle, etc... It takes time and following up for years. Some of these woods will have no future if those are not controlled.
 
Invasive and weedy plants are a problem that will never go away. We've already opened Pandora's Box. All we can do is control it as best as we can in the places where we can afford to, by whatever means necessary. Herbicide, fire, mechanical and biological tools used together in an integrated pest management strategy are the only real option, and even then as soon as we give up, we lose.
 
A much better use of our time and energy, Dr. Blossey advises, is to scout sites that aren’t known to have garlic mustard yet, and also to kill as many deer as possible.

I don’t have a lot of knowledge on most plant and tree related subjects, that’s why I joined this forum. I look for advice given from guys who are knowledgeable. The sentence written in the article that I copied above is odd. Plants and animals share the same space, beneficial, harmful to each other usually, it balances out in the long run. What did I miss in the article? I read it three times, did the editor take out something or the author leave something out?
 
The article details several interrelated yet unintended causes and effects, notably that deer both move non-native earthworms, which seem to always coincide with garlic mustard, and carry the ticks that cause lyme disease. The point is that when looking at a "problem", it's not always obvious what the problem actually is. I think the "kill as many deer as possible" line, in the context of the article, is mostly flippant rather than serious.
 
I don't know that it is a flippant statement. There is little question that high deer populations are one of the biggest obstacles to healthy forests. Not any/all deer...just when their numbers are too high. This is just another data point leading to that conclusion.

If they eat EVERY tree seedling, there is no next generation of forest. The "balancing out" is everything crashes, in theory, including the deer. They we have to hope for a favorable "reset"...but that reset is far more likely to be Ailanthus, Pear, Honeysuckle, Privet, Buckthorn, knotweed, and Norway maple than it is Oak, hickory, and sugar maple.
 
I hate invasive species. I used to mow acres of Garlic Mustard every year, it seemed like it was nearly impossible to get under control. I didn’t know it was self-limiting.

I just started a job that’s Kudzu abatement. Kudzu is not self limiting. Seems like the best method is to take a mulcher and take it a few inches below ground level, which cuts off the sunlight to the runners and the rest of the vine & kills it. From there it’s just cleanup.
 
I would like to see this pest in the picture because I do not know what it is about. The translator twists the name
 
I don't know that it is a flippant statement. There is little question that high deer populations are one of the biggest obstacles to healthy forests. Not any/all deer...just when their numbers are too high. This is just another data point leading to that conclusion.

If they eat EVERY tree seedling, there is no next generation of forest. The "balancing out" is everything crashes, in theory, including the deer. They we have to hope for a favorable "reset"...but that reset is far more likely to be Ailanthus, Pear, Honeysuckle, Privet, Buckthorn, knotweed, and Norway maple than it is Oak, hickory, and sugar maple.
As an aside to that, here in Texas, it is well known that the cedar population has outgrown the oak population because cattle will graze on oak saplings, but not cedar
 

Latest posts

Back
Top