permaculture

[Toby Hemenway <toby@patternliteracy.com>]

On 9/7/05 10:35 AM, "Kate Halstead" <rockyprairie@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Miscanthus, as with so many other plants, should be evaluated carefully
> before planting in non-native areas.
> 
> http://horticulture.coafes.umn.edu/miscanthus/

A little knee-jerk on one of my favorite topics: you'll note that on the
link Kate gives, the photo shows Miscanthus "invading" a roadside under a
Motel 6 billboard, with mowed lawn in the foreground. Hardly pristine
habitat, and why isn't the lawn considered invasive?. The website also
states that Miscanthus is generally confined to the places it was planted,
and that it is primarily a "nuisance in old fields" (if it's an old field,
what makes a grass a nuisance? Do I see a little prejudice here?). It also
is "occasionally escaping to the wild around inhabited places." So like most
so-called invasives, it enters habitats that have been disturbed by humans.
The plant is not the problem. I agree that new species should always be
evaluated, but I think Miscanthus's classification as invasive is based on
the usual xenophobic viewpoint of the invasion biologists and natives-only
crowd. (You know, the ones who eat oats and wheat for breakfast before
spraying blackberries with Garlon-A in my local wetland . . . Don't get me
started.) That billboard is a damn sight more invasive than the lovely grass
is.

Toby
www.patternliteracy.com