Comments on: Paulownia (Princess Tree) on “Most Hated Plants” List

By: Sustainability: Just for Human Benefit?

Sustainability: Just for Human Benefit? — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:58:15 +0000

[...] That’s the very sad fact. This is a similar argument that was expressed when I wrote about Paulownia crops, where a professional grower told me that he didn’t see any problem on his plantation. My [...]

By: Carole Brown

Carole Brown — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:08:09 +0000

Alison, I agree it's hard to see a problem when you have an investment in short-term gain. It's something we as a society need to look really hard at. Thanks John. Since we taxpayers spend billions of dollars every year in an attempt to preserve ecosystem function by the removal of invasive species, stewardship of the land should be the priority. I was just reading a great article you wrote on this very subject: Paulownia AKA Princess Tree, Heritage and the Future.

By: John Peter Thompson

John Peter Thompson — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:52:15 +0000

Invasive species represent an unintended consequence of human disturbance of native eocsystems. The biological invasions are a symptom of an equally problematic assault on native systems: climate change. What will we do when we find our native species moving to new regions because of climate pressures becoming invasive by definition? (in the case of endangered species perhaps with human help)

What we are trying to do is preserve the remants of once intact ever changing endogenous ecosystems. Like the farmer who has no use for a rose bush in a corn field, stewards (gardeners) of natural areas will have to choose to weed some species on an almost constant basis. The Paulownia is easily targeted as an undesirable weed of native ecosystems. Like the home owner who is aggrieved when the neighbor plants running bamboo on the property line next to the perennial garden, the natural area managers understabdibly work to reduce propagule pressure by calling for species’ bans in an attempt to freeze or at least slow down biological invasion.

If we do not combine plant bans with plant removal resources, we ultimately will lose the battle, for it is actually “new” not yet introduced species on which we should be focused. Growers and sellers should work to offer alternatives to the Paulownia, but the industrial plantations will be hard to remove and the destruction will remain without a funded eradication effort.

By: Alison Kerr

Alison Kerr — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:09:26 +0000

I imagine it’s pretty hard to see and admit a problem when you have a lot invested in not seeing a problem.

I’d like to know why Vince, as a professional grower, is choosing to promote an imported decorative tree rather than a native one.

Native plants are better for wildlife – they support insects. Birds eat the insects.

Imported plants, with the potential for invasiveness (even if it hasn’t happened yet) are just for looks. Some might be happy with that, but I’m not. I value wildlife in my garden and countryside and I’d rather not pay taxes toward removing invasive plants people plant to look nice.
Alison Kerr´s last post ..Black Friday Duck Shopping

By: Carole Brown

Carole Brown — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 15:52:55 +0000

Vince, respectfully, the Paulownia is much more than locally invasive, having spread from New York to Texas and Florida. It's a major problem to ecosystems for all of the reasons listed above. I'm glad you've seen few "volunteers" but I'm sure the woodlands surrounding your property are suffering from the onslaught. When one looks at the problem with a priority of healthy ecosystems and fully functioning ecosystem services, I don't see any responsible way to grow this because you cannot contain the seeds. "Responsible growing" has already given us the myth that Purple Loosestrife is now sterile so no longer invasive. I'm now seeing many myths and greenwashing from Paulownia growers, too. That is a huge shame.