Help me understand the importance of native plants

[Anonymous]

Check out Earth Sangha in Fairfax county. Their website's not the best, but it's a really cool organization with a huge diversity of native plants.
https://www.earthsangha.org/wpn
They also offer discounts to schools. Having a pollinator garden at school is awesome for the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I gotta say, I went out at lunch -- my front yard is all flowers, mostly natives/pollinator-friendly species -- and there were hardly any bees or butterflies out there compared to previous years. So far we have only seen those little white butterflies (which I hope aren't cabbage butterflies, since I have planted eggplant) -- no monarchs, no black, yellow, or blue swallowtails, and none of the little orange, yellow, or brown types we usually see. We currently have coneflowers, liatris, milkweed, sunflowers, coreopsis, monarda/wild bergamot, agastache/hyssop, and lavender in bloom, and usually they are covered with flying things. Last year we could literally have a hundred bees of at least a half dozen different species on the hyssop alone, today I could count them on one hand and zero bumblebees or honeybees. It's worrisome.

It’s legitimately frightening. I don’t have much native (yet), but the absence of birdsong is noticeable. I have some plants that are basically weeds (I haven’t gotten close, but I think one is aster and I know one is a native silene) that I would have pulled in years past. They’re staying now.

They must be all in my yard. We've noticed the orange swallowtails, the little flittering brown/orange onces, moths, bees of many species, hummingbirds. Monarchs we have seen later in the season. My milkweed is just now blooming. We've had loads of bird nests this year: robins, blue birds, wrens, chickadees, finches. We've even idenfied a new bird species we have never seen before. So be patient. It could take a couple of years. Longer if your neighbors use lots of pest/herbicides. Some bees -mason bees for example- will not nest in areas with that stuff.

Good luck and thanks for doing what you're doing.

Yes, my yard is covered as well (though no monarchs despite all the milkweed ). And our yard is a far cry from all-native--plenty of nandina, hydrangea, roses--much of which were well established before we bought here (mea culpa). But more because of small kids & pets, I have never sprayed (now 8+ years), and one of my immediate neighbors is even more militant. We are bordered behind by an abandoned (wooded) lot, and even the other neighbor who used to get on me about our weedy clover-covered lawn has cut it back a lot. So I wonder if more than anything, the lack of pesticides + a lot of benign neglect is the real boon for pollinators.

100%. Some bees will not nest in areas with lots of chemicals. (And of course, it can kill them and that is happening too).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re not important.

Plant what YOU like.

"Let the bees eat cake!"

Bees aren’t native, either dummy. They pollinate non-native fruit, nut and vegetable crops.

We can do this all day….

We can; it’s not going to make your uninformed arguments any more persuasive. No, honeybees aren’t native, but there are 4,000 native bees in America. Haven’t noticed any in your yard, not many birds or butterflies? No, you haven’t; there’s nothing for them to eat, nowhere to live. That’s what we’re talking about. DP.

My yard is absolutely overrun with insects of all kinds, so clearly I’m doing something right by pretty much ignoring my weedy overgrown mess.

You’re welcome.

They type of insect matters, dummy. Just like insects are generalists/specialists, so are birds. Also, if those insects are non-native, they could be doing more harm than the small good of feeding birds (e.g., the spotted lanternfly).

NP- oh dear, how do I identify which insects are invasives and how do I get rid of them?

I'm not really sure. I'm no entymologist but I do follow the "native plant" boards, news, etc. on social media, etc. They often have news of things like this (not just plants but bugs, and other related topics).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re not important.

Plant what YOU like.

"Let the bees eat cake!"

Bees aren’t native, either dummy. They pollinate non-native fruit, nut and vegetable crops.

We can do this all day….

We can; it’s not going to make your uninformed arguments any more persuasive. No, honeybees aren’t native, but there are 4,000 native bees in America. Haven’t noticed any in your yard, not many birds or butterflies? No, you haven’t; there’s nothing for them to eat, nowhere to live. That’s what we’re talking about. DP.

My yard is absolutely overrun with insects of all kinds, so clearly I’m doing something right by pretty much ignoring my weedy overgrown mess.

You’re welcome.

They type of insect matters, dummy. Just like insects are generalists/specialists, so are birds. Also, if those insects are non-native, they could be doing more harm than the small good of feeding birds (e.g., the spotted lanternfly).

NP- oh dear, how do I identify which insects are invasives and how do I get rid of them?

These guys are bad news and in Virginia (I had thought that they didn't make it this far yet): https://www.fcva.us/departments/public-information/spotted-lantern-fly

Also stink bugs, some beetles, and invasive bugs are destroying Eastern forests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re not important.

Plant what YOU like.

"Let the bees eat cake!"

Bees aren’t native, either dummy. They pollinate non-native fruit, nut and vegetable crops.

We can do this all day….

We can; it’s not going to make your uninformed arguments any more persuasive. No, honeybees aren’t native, but there are 4,000 native bees in America. Haven’t noticed any in your yard, not many birds or butterflies? No, you haven’t; there’s nothing for them to eat, nowhere to live. That’s what we’re talking about. DP.

My yard is absolutely overrun with insects of all kinds, so clearly I’m doing something right by pretty much ignoring my weedy overgrown mess.

You’re welcome.

They type of insect matters, dummy. Just like insects are generalists/specialists, so are birds. Also, if those insects are non-native, they could be doing more harm than the small good of feeding birds (e.g., the spotted lanternfly).

Check this out. Here's a list of invasive species in VA (of all types) including plants and bugs: http://www.invasivespeciesva.org/species

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They’re not important.

Plant what YOU like.

"Let the bees eat cake!"

Bees aren’t native, either dummy. They pollinate non-native fruit, nut and vegetable crops.

We can do this all day….

We can; it’s not going to make your uninformed arguments any more persuasive. No, honeybees aren’t native, but there are 4,000 native bees in America. Haven’t noticed any in your yard, not many birds or butterflies? No, you haven’t; there’s nothing for them to eat, nowhere to live. That’s what we’re talking about. DP.

My yard is absolutely overrun with insects of all kinds, so clearly I’m doing something right by pretty much ignoring my weedy overgrown mess.

You’re welcome.

They type of insect matters, dummy. Just like insects are generalists/specialists, so are birds. Also, if those insects are non-native, they could be doing more harm than the small good of feeding birds (e.g., the spotted lanternfly).

Ok sure, but don't spray insecticides!!! A few non-native bugs are ok, don't kill everything in an attempt to get rid of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the biodiversity and habitat arguments. I really do.

I also don't want a yard full of bees, and I don't care for the look of native gardens. I want a place for my kids to play and I like to grow vegetables. I am in a constant battle against my neighbors' ivy and creeper, which a yard full of native plants would just make it harder to keep in check.

So I get it ... but I don't do it.

Then you don't actually understand the arguments. A loss of bees and other pollinators would be catastrophic for everyone. Where do you think your food comes from? LOTS of food crops rely on pollinators, and the entire ecosystem relies on the food chain of insects and birds. You don't do it because it's not pretty and you don't like bees. You don't get it at all.

Do you only plant "native" vegetables too?

That’s kind of a red herring in that when people decide to have a vegetable garden, they’re not usually displacing a lot of habitat, whereas the people who like their big, sterile monoculture lawns make the decision to have only plants like petunias and begonias similar. Things that offer absolutely zero nutrition or habitat to native birds, bees and other insects. And what’s more they argue about this, that it doesn’t matter that there’s no habitat, that it doesn’t matter that we’ve lost 70% of our birds, that none of this matters and no actions anyone takes will have an effect.

Also, in my experience, your average vegetable gardener is usually happy to plant native flowers in their yard since they understand that we’re part of a big web. Or at least not to ignorantly argue that there’s no value to it.

Just pointing out that a lot of what we grow and eat is NOT native, so the native plant purists are generally being hypocritical about it. And you're making a lot of generalizations here- I used to work at a garden center and there were plenty of people who bought a whole mix of everything- annuals, veggies, perennials, shrubs. Sadly, the proliferation of Round-up in agriculture destroyed a whole lot more habitat than the home gardeners who only plant petunias.

And I say this as someone who has a veg garden, berries, many native plants, and some non-natives (caladium! the horror!). Simply trying to shame people to convert their yard to a meadow is not helping your cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the biodiversity and habitat arguments. I really do.

I also don't want a yard full of bees, and I don't care for the look of native gardens. I want a place for my kids to play and I like to grow vegetables. I am in a constant battle against my neighbors' ivy and creeper, which a yard full of native plants would just make it harder to keep in check.

So I get it ... but I don't do it.

Then you don't actually understand the arguments. A loss of bees and other pollinators would be catastrophic for everyone. Where do you think your food comes from? LOTS of food crops rely on pollinators, and the entire ecosystem relies on the food chain of insects and birds. You don't do it because it's not pretty and you don't like bees. You don't get it at all.

Do you only plant "native" vegetables too?

That’s kind of a red herring in that when people decide to have a vegetable garden, they’re not usually displacing a lot of habitat, whereas the people who like their big, sterile monoculture lawns make the decision to have only plants like petunias and begonias similar. Things that offer absolutely zero nutrition or habitat to native birds, bees and other insects. And what’s more they argue about this, that it doesn’t matter that there’s no habitat, that it doesn’t matter that we’ve lost 70% of our birds, that none of this matters and no actions anyone takes will have an effect.

Also, in my experience, your average vegetable gardener is usually happy to plant native flowers in their yard since they understand that we’re part of a big web. Or at least not to ignorantly argue that there’s no value to it.

Just pointing out that a lot of what we grow and eat is NOT native, so the native plant purists are generally being hypocritical about it. And you're making a lot of generalizations here- I used to work at a garden center and there were plenty of people who bought a whole mix of everything- annuals, veggies, perennials, shrubs. Sadly, the proliferation of Round-up in agriculture destroyed a whole lot more habitat than the home gardeners who only plant petunias.

And I say this as someone who has a veg garden, berries, many native plants, and some non-natives (caladium! the horror!). Simply trying to shame people to convert their yard to a meadow is not helping your cause.

Agree! Purists for purism sake aren't really helping. OP would do a lot more more good if she just planted her hydrangea and petunias (and some catmint & tickseed & milkweed) and passed on the pesticide/insecticides. Also, by far the biggest draw for pollinators in my yard is plain old parsley--which was covered with black swallowtail caterpillars last year. I'm hoping for a reprise!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the biodiversity and habitat arguments. I really do.

I also don't want a yard full of bees, and I don't care for the look of native gardens. I want a place for my kids to play and I like to grow vegetables. I am in a constant battle against my neighbors' ivy and creeper, which a yard full of native plants would just make it harder to keep in check.

So I get it ... but I don't do it.

Then you don't actually understand the arguments. A loss of bees and other pollinators would be catastrophic for everyone. Where do you think your food comes from? LOTS of food crops rely on pollinators, and the entire ecosystem relies on the food chain of insects and birds. You don't do it because it's not pretty and you don't like bees. You don't get it at all.

Do you only plant "native" vegetables too?

That’s kind of a red herring in that when people decide to have a vegetable garden, they’re not usually displacing a lot of habitat, whereas the people who like their big, sterile monoculture lawns make the decision to have only plants like petunias and begonias similar. Things that offer absolutely zero nutrition or habitat to native birds, bees and other insects. And what’s more they argue about this, that it doesn’t matter that there’s no habitat, that it doesn’t matter that we’ve lost 70% of our birds, that none of this matters and no actions anyone takes will have an effect.

Also, in my experience, your average vegetable gardener is usually happy to plant native flowers in their yard since they understand that we’re part of a big web. Or at least not to ignorantly argue that there’s no value to it.

Just pointing out that a lot of what we grow and eat is NOT native, so the native plant purists are generally being hypocritical about it. And you're making a lot of generalizations here- I used to work at a garden center and there were plenty of people who bought a whole mix of everything- annuals, veggies, perennials, shrubs. Sadly, the proliferation of Round-up in agriculture destroyed a whole lot more habitat than the home gardeners who only plant petunias.

And I say this as someone who has a veg garden, berries, many native plants, and some non-natives (caladium! the horror!). Simply trying to shame people to convert their yard to a meadow is not helping your cause.

I'm not sure the point you're making. Yes, a lot is not native but food plants are a bit different, imo. But, some are native, as you point out. (Big Agriculture/monofarming is a different story altogether).

I'm a big natives proponent. And, yes, I recognize that some folks are pretty militant but most people will agree you dont have to have 100% natives in your yard. I think even Tallamy says that you aim for 75% (I don't have the info in front of me but I'm in the ballpark, I believe). Though there is debate about that it's not like there is currently a hard scientific rule.

And I dont know any purist, however you're defining that, that uses round-up and the like. I know that we do not and, happily, if you plan your gardens right, we found you don't NEED it. Or any herbicides. We haven't used either in several years.

In short, what you characterize is hypocritical is really a subject of debate. But even if they're hypocrites, as you say, they can still be that and be right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the biodiversity and habitat arguments. I really do.

I also don't want a yard full of bees, and I don't care for the look of native gardens. I want a place for my kids to play and I like to grow vegetables. I am in a constant battle against my neighbors' ivy and creeper, which a yard full of native plants would just make it harder to keep in check.

So I get it ... but I don't do it.

Then you don't actually understand the arguments. A loss of bees and other pollinators would be catastrophic for everyone. Where do you think your food comes from? LOTS of food crops rely on pollinators, and the entire ecosystem relies on the food chain of insects and birds. You don't do it because it's not pretty and you don't like bees. You don't get it at all.

Do you only plant "native" vegetables too?

That’s kind of a red herring in that when people decide to have a vegetable garden, they’re not usually displacing a lot of habitat, whereas the people who like their big, sterile monoculture lawns make the decision to have only plants like petunias and begonias similar. Things that offer absolutely zero nutrition or habitat to native birds, bees and other insects. And what’s more they argue about this, that it doesn’t matter that there’s no habitat, that it doesn’t matter that we’ve lost 70% of our birds, that none of this matters and no actions anyone takes will have an effect.

Also, in my experience, your average vegetable gardener is usually happy to plant native flowers in their yard since they understand that we’re part of a big web. Or at least not to ignorantly argue that there’s no value to it.

Just pointing out that a lot of what we grow and eat is NOT native, so the native plant purists are generally being hypocritical about it. And you're making a lot of generalizations here- I used to work at a garden center and there were plenty of people who bought a whole mix of everything- annuals, veggies, perennials, shrubs. Sadly, the proliferation of Round-up in agriculture destroyed a whole lot more habitat than the home gardeners who only plant petunias.

And I say this as someone who has a veg garden, berries, many native plants, and some non-natives (caladium! the horror!). Simply trying to shame people to convert their yard to a meadow is not helping your cause.

Who has shamed anyone here? I’ve posted several times in this thread and I’m one of the pro-native plant people who has said that OP should go ahead and plant hydrangeas if she likes them, but plant them with lots of natives, and I’ve explained (along with a dozen other people) why natives are vital. If you’re seeing shame in these posts, I think that speaks to your feelings and not what people have written.

And no, round up in agriculture has not destroyed a lot more habitat than non-native purists. I would agree that several agricultural practices, pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, monoculture, reduced hedgerows and a variety of other things have destroyed habitat, but that doesn’t let us suburbanites off the hook. 915 million acres are officially “farm” in the US, but grass is the most irrigated crop in the US. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2 Grass. Good old turf that mostly doesn’t get played on, that just sits there and does nothing, doesn’t sequester carbon, doesn’t create habitat or food for anything. That’s what we’re drawing down the aquifers to water. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2

Perhaps you think this is “shame.” I think this is sharing facts. Personally, I used to see grass as a net neutral plant, but I don’t see it that way anymore, especially not the intensive way it’s fertilized, sprayed and watered. It becomes an impervious surface leading to increased run off and flooding. It adds nitrogen to our waterways which create dead zones in the water and especially in the ocean. OP wanted to understand the importance of native plants and people are supplying answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the biodiversity and habitat arguments. I really do.

I also don't want a yard full of bees, and I don't care for the look of native gardens. I want a place for my kids to play and I like to grow vegetables. I am in a constant battle against my neighbors' ivy and creeper, which a yard full of native plants would just make it harder to keep in check.

So I get it ... but I don't do it.

Then you don't actually understand the arguments. A loss of bees and other pollinators would be catastrophic for everyone. Where do you think your food comes from? LOTS of food crops rely on pollinators, and the entire ecosystem relies on the food chain of insects and birds. You don't do it because it's not pretty and you don't like bees. You don't get it at all.

Do you only plant "native" vegetables too?

That’s kind of a red herring in that when people decide to have a vegetable garden, they’re not usually displacing a lot of habitat, whereas the people who like their big, sterile monoculture lawns make the decision to have only plants like petunias and begonias similar. Things that offer absolutely zero nutrition or habitat to native birds, bees and other insects. And what’s more they argue about this, that it doesn’t matter that there’s no habitat, that it doesn’t matter that we’ve lost 70% of our birds, that none of this matters and no actions anyone takes will have an effect.

Also, in my experience, your average vegetable gardener is usually happy to plant native flowers in their yard since they understand that we’re part of a big web. Or at least not to ignorantly argue that there’s no value to it.

Just pointing out that a lot of what we grow and eat is NOT native, so the native plant purists are generally being hypocritical about it. And you're making a lot of generalizations here- I used to work at a garden center and there were plenty of people who bought a whole mix of everything- annuals, veggies, perennials, shrubs. Sadly, the proliferation of Round-up in agriculture destroyed a whole lot more habitat than the home gardeners who only plant petunias.

And I say this as someone who has a veg garden, berries, many native plants, and some non-natives (caladium! the horror!). Simply trying to shame people to convert their yard to a meadow is not helping your cause.

Who has shamed anyone here? I’ve posted several times in this thread and I’m one of the pro-native plant people who has said that OP should go ahead and plant hydrangeas if she likes them, but plant them with lots of natives, and I’ve explained (along with a dozen other people) why natives are vital. If you’re seeing shame in these posts, I think that speaks to your feelings and not what people have written.

And no, round up in agriculture has not destroyed a lot more habitat than non-native purists. I would agree that several agricultural practices, pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, monoculture, reduced hedgerows and a variety of other things have destroyed habitat, but that doesn’t let us suburbanites off the hook. 915 million acres are officially “farm” in the US, but grass is the most irrigated crop in the US. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2 Grass. Good old turf that mostly doesn’t get played on, that just sits there and does nothing, doesn’t sequester carbon, doesn’t create habitat or food for anything. That’s what we’re drawing down the aquifers to water. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2

Perhaps you think this is “shame.” I think this is sharing facts. Personally, I used to see grass as a net neutral plant, but I don’t see it that way anymore, especially not the intensive way it’s fertilized, sprayed and watered. It becomes an impervious surface leading to increased run off and flooding. It adds nitrogen to our waterways which create dead zones in the water and especially in the ocean. OP wanted to understand the importance of native plants and people are supplying answers.

DP. I don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who's converted an entire yard to native plants. That would be cool to do, but expensive and a lot of work. We have numerous "beds" that include many native plants (thanks to the PP for the 75% benchmark!). Our "lawn" is a crappy looking weedscape. So yeah, I'm not using herbicides, but clover aside, I doubt most of these weeds (many of which are invasive) are serving any ecological function either.

Now, my neighbor down the street was experimenting with letting nature take over his yard- but once the grass/weeds hit 1.5 ft high a rat infestation took hold and people started complaining (not an HOA, it's an older neighborhood) So better to keep a lawn mowed unless you really know what you are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the biodiversity and habitat arguments. I really do.

I also don't want a yard full of bees, and I don't care for the look of native gardens. I want a place for my kids to play and I like to grow vegetables. I am in a constant battle against my neighbors' ivy and creeper, which a yard full of native plants would just make it harder to keep in check.

So I get it ... but I don't do it.

Then you don't actually understand the arguments. A loss of bees and other pollinators would be catastrophic for everyone. Where do you think your food comes from? LOTS of food crops rely on pollinators, and the entire ecosystem relies on the food chain of insects and birds. You don't do it because it's not pretty and you don't like bees. You don't get it at all.

Do you only plant "native" vegetables too?

That’s kind of a red herring in that when people decide to have a vegetable garden, they’re not usually displacing a lot of habitat, whereas the people who like their big, sterile monoculture lawns make the decision to have only plants like petunias and begonias similar. Things that offer absolutely zero nutrition or habitat to native birds, bees and other insects. And what’s more they argue about this, that it doesn’t matter that there’s no habitat, that it doesn’t matter that we’ve lost 70% of our birds, that none of this matters and no actions anyone takes will have an effect.

Also, in my experience, your average vegetable gardener is usually happy to plant native flowers in their yard since they understand that we’re part of a big web. Or at least not to ignorantly argue that there’s no value to it.

Just pointing out that a lot of what we grow and eat is NOT native, so the native plant purists are generally being hypocritical about it. And you're making a lot of generalizations here- I used to work at a garden center and there were plenty of people who bought a whole mix of everything- annuals, veggies, perennials, shrubs. Sadly, the proliferation of Round-up in agriculture destroyed a whole lot more habitat than the home gardeners who only plant petunias.

And I say this as someone who has a veg garden, berries, many native plants, and some non-natives (caladium! the horror!). Simply trying to shame people to convert their yard to a meadow is not helping your cause.

Who has shamed anyone here? I’ve posted several times in this thread and I’m one of the pro-native plant people who has said that OP should go ahead and plant hydrangeas if she likes them, but plant them with lots of natives, and I’ve explained (along with a dozen other people) why natives are vital. If you’re seeing shame in these posts, I think that speaks to your feelings and not what people have written.

And no, round up in agriculture has not destroyed a lot more habitat than non-native purists. I would agree that several agricultural practices, pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, monoculture, reduced hedgerows and a variety of other things have destroyed habitat, but that doesn’t let us suburbanites off the hook. 915 million acres are officially “farm” in the US, but grass is the most irrigated crop in the US. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2 Grass. Good old turf that mostly doesn’t get played on, that just sits there and does nothing, doesn’t sequester carbon, doesn’t create habitat or food for anything. That’s what we’re drawing down the aquifers to water. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2

Perhaps you think this is “shame.” I think this is sharing facts. Personally, I used to see grass as a net neutral plant, but I don’t see it that way anymore, especially not the intensive way it’s fertilized, sprayed and watered. It becomes an impervious surface leading to increased run off and flooding. It adds nitrogen to our waterways which create dead zones in the water and especially in the ocean. OP wanted to understand the importance of native plants and people are supplying answers.

DP. I don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who's converted an entire yard to native plants. That would be cool to do, but expensive and a lot of work. We have numerous "beds" that include many native plants (thanks to the PP for the 75% benchmark!). Our "lawn" is a crappy looking weedscape. So yeah, I'm not using herbicides, but clover aside, I doubt most of these weeds (many of which are invasive) are serving any ecological function either.

Now, my neighbor down the street was experimenting with letting nature take over his yard- but once the grass/weeds hit 1.5 ft high a rat infestation took hold and people started complaining (not an HOA, it's an older neighborhood) So better to keep a lawn mowed unless you really know what you are doing.

Where did I advocate for everyone to convert their entire yard?

And while I don’t know any of them personally, you can drive through my city (Minneapolis) and yeah, there are quite a few people who have converted their front yards (and possibly back yards, I don’t know because I’m not in them) from lawn to fully garden, not always fully native, but quite a few.

Again, I have not advocated that people destroy their entire lawns, but let’s not keep them just out of custom and because we don’t know any better.

[Anonymous]

There are many other kinds of pollinators besides your standard European honey bee (which isn't even native). Take a look at Brookside gardens and visit their pollinator area. Look very closely at the flowers. You'll see many smaller insects and what look like super tiny miniature bees. Those are also very important pollinators. Native plants help to create a biodiversity that are suitable for those kinds of pollinators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are not “ saving the planet” with your tiny yard.

You actually are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the biodiversity and habitat arguments. I really do.

I also don't want a yard full of bees, and I don't care for the look of native gardens. I want a place for my kids to play and I like to grow vegetables. I am in a constant battle against my neighbors' ivy and creeper, which a yard full of native plants would just make it harder to keep in check.

So I get it ... but I don't do it.

Then you don't actually understand the arguments. A loss of bees and other pollinators would be catastrophic for everyone. Where do you think your food comes from? LOTS of food crops rely on pollinators, and the entire ecosystem relies on the food chain of insects and birds. You don't do it because it's not pretty and you don't like bees. You don't get it at all.

Do you only plant "native" vegetables too?

That’s kind of a red herring in that when people decide to have a vegetable garden, they’re not usually displacing a lot of habitat, whereas the people who like their big, sterile monoculture lawns make the decision to have only plants like petunias and begonias similar. Things that offer absolutely zero nutrition or habitat to native birds, bees and other insects. And what’s more they argue about this, that it doesn’t matter that there’s no habitat, that it doesn’t matter that we’ve lost 70% of our birds, that none of this matters and no actions anyone takes will have an effect.

Also, in my experience, your average vegetable gardener is usually happy to plant native flowers in their yard since they understand that we’re part of a big web. Or at least not to ignorantly argue that there’s no value to it.

Just pointing out that a lot of what we grow and eat is NOT native, so the native plant purists are generally being hypocritical about it. And you're making a lot of generalizations here- I used to work at a garden center and there were plenty of people who bought a whole mix of everything- annuals, veggies, perennials, shrubs. Sadly, the proliferation of Round-up in agriculture destroyed a whole lot more habitat than the home gardeners who only plant petunias.

And I say this as someone who has a veg garden, berries, many native plants, and some non-natives (caladium! the horror!). Simply trying to shame people to convert their yard to a meadow is not helping your cause.

Who has shamed anyone here? I’ve posted several times in this thread and I’m one of the pro-native plant people who has said that OP should go ahead and plant hydrangeas if she likes them, but plant them with lots of natives, and I’ve explained (along with a dozen other people) why natives are vital. If you’re seeing shame in these posts, I think that speaks to your feelings and not what people have written.

And no, round up in agriculture has not destroyed a lot more habitat than non-native purists. I would agree that several agricultural practices, pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, monoculture, reduced hedgerows and a variety of other things have destroyed habitat, but that doesn’t let us suburbanites off the hook. 915 million acres are officially “farm” in the US, but grass is the most irrigated crop in the US. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2 Grass. Good old turf that mostly doesn’t get played on, that just sits there and does nothing, doesn’t sequester carbon, doesn’t create habitat or food for anything. That’s what we’re drawing down the aquifers to water. https://www.businessinsider.com/americas-biggest-crop-is-grass-2016-2

Perhaps you think this is “shame.” I think this is sharing facts. Personally, I used to see grass as a net neutral plant, but I don’t see it that way anymore, especially not the intensive way it’s fertilized, sprayed and watered. It becomes an impervious surface leading to increased run off and flooding. It adds nitrogen to our waterways which create dead zones in the water and especially in the ocean. OP wanted to understand the importance of native plants and people are supplying answers.

DP. I don't know about you, but I don't know anyone who's converted an entire yard to native plants. That would be cool to do, but expensive and a lot of work. We have numerous "beds" that include many native plants (thanks to the PP for the 75% benchmark!). Our "lawn" is a crappy looking weedscape. So yeah, I'm not using herbicides, but clover aside, I doubt most of these weeds (many of which are invasive) are serving any ecological function either.

Now, my neighbor down the street was experimenting with letting nature take over his yard- but once the grass/weeds hit 1.5 ft high a rat infestation took hold and people started complaining (not an HOA, it's an older neighborhood) So better to keep a lawn mowed unless you really know what you are doing.

Where did I advocate for everyone to convert their entire yard?

And while I don’t know any of them personally, you can drive through my city (Minneapolis) and yeah, there are quite a few people who have converted their front yards (and possibly back yards, I don’t know because I’m not in them) from lawn to fully garden, not always fully native, but quite a few.

Again, I have not advocated that people destroy their entire lawns, but let’s not keep them just out of custom and because we don’t know any better.

There are lots of things people can do if they don't want to convert their entire yard. Shrink it. Add some clover. Stop using the fertilizers.

In fact, more and more people ARE converting their yard (lots of stories online and pics) as it can be done and the yards are gorgeous (there are folks, of course, where it looks a mess). It can be done inexpensively too. I'm in the "shrink the lawn" group b/c my DH likes the grass. But he has agreed to make those areas smaller. And the rest of the yard is a mix of mostly natives (some non), geared towards pollinator plants. He loves it. I love it. The insects and birds def love it. And I get compliments from my neighbors all the time on it. AND I did it myself a bed at a time over a period of years. There are so many resources online to help. You don't NEED a professional.

There is also a movement to prevent HOA's from requiring all lawn/ornamentals. MD just passed a law in that regard.