Plants/trees – Why are only natives desirable?

[johnw]

Any plant growing in a NP that is not a native species endemic indigenous to that location, is a weed and should be eradicated.

Endemic means exclusively confined to a given region. eg Nothofagus gunnii grows naturally only in Tasmanian and so is a Tassie endemic.

An indigenous species may grow naturally in several areas eg. Nothofagus cunninghamii grows naturally in Tassie and Victoria and therefore can not be considered endemic to Tassie.

Endemic and indigenous species are both still considered native.

Correct MickyB, but so is my comment. For example the native (indigenous) Cootamundra Wattle, Acacia baileyana, is not endemic to the Blue Mountains of NSW, but it is a significant weed there - https://weedsbluemountains.org.au/weeds/cootamundra-wattle/.

[MickyB]

Any plant growing in a NP that is not a native species endemic indigenous to that location, is a weed and should be eradicated.

Endemic means exclusively confined to a given region. eg Nothofagus gunnii grows naturally only in Tasmanian and so is a Tassie endemic.

An indigenous species may grow naturally in several areas eg. Nothofagus cunninghamii grows naturally in Tassie and Victoria and therefore can not be considered endemic to Tassie.

Endemic and indigenous species are both still considered native.

Correct MickyB, but so is my comment. For example the native (indigenous) Cootamundra Wattle, Acacia baileyana, is not endemic to the Blue Mountains of NSW, but it is a significant weed there - https://weedsbluemountains.org.au/weeds/cootamundra-wattle/.

John, I agree with everything that you are trying to state, just not the terminology. You are correct that Cootamundra Wattle is not endemic to the Blue Mountains however as it does not grow there naturally, it can not be considered indigenous to that area either, even though it is a native plant.

[johnw]

Any plant growing in a NP that is not a native species endemic indigenous to that location, is a weed and should be eradicated.

Endemic means exclusively confined to a given region. eg Nothofagus gunnii grows naturally only in Tasmanian and so is a Tassie endemic.

An indigenous species may grow naturally in several areas eg. Nothofagus cunninghamii grows naturally in Tassie and Victoria and therefore can not be considered endemic to Tassie.

Endemic and indigenous species are both still considered native.

Correct MickyB, but so is my comment. For example the native (indigenous) Cootamundra Wattle, Acacia baileyana, is not endemic to the Blue Mountains of NSW, but it is a significant weed there - https://weedsbluemountains.org.au/weeds/cootamundra-wattle/.

John, I agree with everything that you are trying to state, just not the terminology. You are correct that Cootamundra Wattle is not endemic to the Blue Mountains however as it does not grow there naturally, it can not be considered indigenous to that area either, even though it is a native plant.

Micky, I think we will have to agree to disagree about the terminology. Please re-read - I was stating that it is indigenous to Australia, not the Blue Mountains. I maintain that my original statement is correct in the context that I stated it - i.e. Any plant growing in a NP that is not a native species endemic to that location, is a weed and should be eradicated. That principle is only my opinion, albeit shared with many others.

[MickyB]

John, you originally wrote

Any plant growing in a NP that is not a native species endemic to that location, is a weed and should be eradicated.

Does that mean I can go and cut down all of the Eucalyptus regnans (Mountain Ash) in the national park up the road from from me? By your terminology they are weeds. As they also grow in Tassie they are not endemic to that National Park or even Victoria. They are indigenous to that NP as they grow there naturally but they are not endemic.

Micky, I think we will have to agree to disagree about the terminology. Please re-read - I was stating that it is indigenous to Australia, not the Blue Mountains.

The whole topic has been about National Parks - not all of Australia. If we were talking about larger areas then yes, Cootamundra Wattle is indigenous to Australia. However we have been discussing smaller areas so Cootamundra Wattle is not indigenous to the Blue Mountains.

This link gives a good explanation to the difference between endemic and indigenous.
http://therightblue.blogspot.com/2008/0 ... c-and.html

[johnw]

John, you originally wrote

Any plant growing in a NP that is not a native species endemic to that location, is a weed and should be eradicated.

Does that mean I can go and cut down all of the Eucalyptus regnans (Mountain Ash) in the national park up the road from from me? By your terminology they are weeds. As they also grow in Tassie they are not endemic to that National Park or even Victoria. They are indigenous to that NP as they grow there naturally but they are not endemic.

Micky, I think we will have to agree to disagree about the terminology. Please re-read - I was stating that it is indigenous to Australia, not the Blue Mountains.

The whole topic has been about National Parks - not all of Australia. If we were talking about larger areas then yes, Cootamundra Wattle is indigenous to Australia. However we have been discussing smaller areas so Cootamundra Wattle is not indigenous to the Blue Mountains.

This link gives a good explanation to the difference between endemic and indigenous.
http://therightblue.blogspot.com/2008/0 ... c-and.html

To try and move away from discussion of semantics and get back on topic I will revise my definition of a weed in the context of the topic to:

Any plant that does not occur naturally in a specified location, i.e. not introduced there by human intervention (deliberate or accidental), nor by distribution of seed or other plant material by birds or other animals, nor by any other means. This is primarily expressed in the context of a national park, but also includes public reserves immediately adjacent that have the potential to impact the national park in question. The removal of such plants would occur according to relevant legislation and plan of management (or similar) of the affected national park or adjacent reserve.

[LachlanB]

Fwiw, a species can be endemic on a national or regional scale too... It doesn't have to be just a specific location.

So you're both right, just using the term endemic at different scales!
(:

[Moondog55]

Like Smallpox used to be; endemic that is and like Tuberculosis is in Nuigini

[MickyB]

Fwiw, a species can be endemic on a national or regional scale too... It doesn't have to be just a specific location.
So you're both right, just using the term endemic at different scales!

That is correct. It can be restricted to a country, state or region. Cootamundra Wattle is not found outside of Australia so therefore it is endemic to Australia.
However if you looks at John's sentence he states endemic to a particular national park which is what I have been correcting him on.

Any plant growing in a NP that is not a native species endemic to that location, is a weed and should be eradicated.

I understand and totally agree with what John means but endemic is not the correct word. I have already given a couple of examples but I'll give another. Cyathea cunninghamii (slender tree fern) is found growing in Tasmania and Victoria as well as the north and south islands of New Zealand. As this plant is growing in two countries it can be considered native and/or indigenous to each country but can not be considered endemic. C. cunninghamii are considered rare in both Vic and Tassie (not sure about NZ) but as they are not endemic they are a weed, according to John's statement.

[north-north-west]

Strange thing for a pedant to say but . . . can we leave the semantics and concentrate on the original question?

[johnw]

Strange thing for a pedant to say but . . . can we leave the semantics and concentrate on the original question?

Yes, please! Thank you NNW. I am actually quite curious to know the identity of the tree species that wildwanderer observed in the first place.

[north-north-west]

I am actually quite curious to know the identity of the tree species that wildwanderer observed in the first place.

Yes, I too would like to know what and where.

[Hiking Noob]

In reference to the OP- Just because those exotic plants aren't a pest in that park they may have seeds that birds like the taste of, those seeds could then grow in a more favorable area and may become a pest. In my highly biased opinion if a plant is planted in Nation Park or a bush regen area it should be endemic to that area and should be grown from local seeds/spores.

Just because it is native to Australia doesn't mean it won't become a pest either, I still have any metres of Fishbone Fern to pull out and that is native to parts of Oz and NZ.
In my local Landcare site the problem plants are Jasmine, Lantana, Ivy, Ginger, Wandering Jew, Camphor Laurel, Asparagus weed, Cocos Palms and some indoor type plants that I don't recognise and can't kill. Luckily there is no Morning Glory yet as it is taking over Newcastle and surrounds at a great rate, sadly Stratco and others are still selling the plant. A group of people at one end of the creek have treated the creek as an extension of their backyard and have planted loads of attractive(to them) exotic plants, for some reason a Moreton Bay Chestnut was planted 3m from a backyard, they can grow to 30m high and drop massive seed pods and as it is next to a creek there are around 20 to thirty that have popped up in the last year and I'd imagine they will grow in other areas as the seeds are washed downstream.

Oh, after seeing areas after fires a lot of weeds seem to come back quicker than the native ground covers.

[Warin]

In my local Landcare site the problem plants are Jasmine, Lantana, Ivy, Ginger, Wandering Jew, Camphor Laurel, Asparagus weed, Cocos Palms and some indoor type plants that I don't recognise and can't kill.

Lucky you. No ochna, running bamboo, privet nor cotoneaster. Ochna is a particular hate - hard to kill .. has a deep tap root and two applications of glyphosate 360 on the leaves some 6 months apart tends to slow it down . Maybe that is the one your having trouble with .. from South Africa .. serrated small leaves - black berry on a red background .. http://weeds.dpi.nsw.gov.au/Weeds/Details/96

[Moondog55]

Maybe the problem is that we don't really have a proper definition of what exactly a "National Park" is?

[Hiking Noob]

In my local Landcare site the problem plants are Jasmine, Lantana, Ivy, Ginger, Wandering Jew, Camphor Laurel, Asparagus weed, Cocos Palms and some indoor type plants that I don't recognise and can't kill.

Lucky you. No ochna, running bamboo, privet nor cotoneaster. Ochna is a particular hate - hard to kill .. has a deep tap root and two applications of glyphosate 360 on the leaves some 6 months apart tends to slow it down . Maybe that is the one your having trouble with .. from South Africa .. serrated small leaves - black berry on a red background .. http://weeds.dpi.nsw.gov.au/Weeds/Details/96

Haha, nope, however the person that did the site visit said a lot of people would have just walked away from it. The Jasmine was insane, it has taken a lot of time with a veggie peeler and undiluted Glyphosate to get it somewhat under control. I'm sure it looked nice on somebody's back fence though.

Apologies for going OT.

Last edited by Hiking Noob on Sun 08 Jul, 2018 1:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[Neo]

Native = of that country
Indigenous = country/general area
Endemic = found in local area only
Naturalised = from somewhere else but now widespread (too hard basket)
Weed = prolific reproducer and is displacing indigenous/endemic species

[north-north-west]

Anyways, my take is that the only flora and fauna that belong in NPs are those that are inherent aspects of the local natural ecosystem.

[LachlanB]

Anyways, my take is that the only flora and fauna that belong in NPs are those that are inherent aspects of the local natural ecosystem.

I would tend to agree with you, but think there is scope to preserve exotic plants in NPs when they are connected to historic locations and don't pose an ecological threat. For instance, although the plants in it are not native, I think Bendora Arboretum here in the ACT should be maintained. Likewise, it would be a shame if the Sherwood daffodils were removed.

[Hughmac]

There are clearly very limited instances where culturally significant plantings should be protected - Audley in the RNP is a classic example, as are the redwoods in the Otway Ranges. There is however no reasonable case to be made for further planting, expansion or protection of exotics in our NPs. There is ample room in urban parks and gardens for these species.

[Moondog55]

There are clearly very limited instances where culturally significant plantings should be protected - Audley in the RNP is a classic example, as are the redwoods in the Otway Ranges. There is however no reasonable case to be made for further planting, expansion or protection of exotics in our NPs. There is ample room in urban parks and gardens for these species.

But many of these Urban parks are "National" parks and run by the parks authority, and this is why I said that we need a definition and/or new grading of what exactly a National park is

[Hughmac]

I gather you're referring to parks like Sydney Harbour or Lane Cove - still no place for exotics as far as I'm concerned. Hyde Park or The Royal Botanic Gardens? Fine, that's what they are about.

[Moondog55]

They are ALL National Parks, many of which are heritage listed parks because of these exotics. So this is why I keep saying we need a new definition Hyde Park and the Botanic Gardens are not National parks but many with similar attributes are Do you really mean something else? Then better start by defining what you mean

[Hiking Noob]

I am fairly sure I came across a Government page that had a list of exotic plants and some were labelled as beneficial.

I'll have to do some digging to see if I can find it.

[LachlanB]

But many of these Urban parks are "National" parks and run by the parks authority, and this is why I said that we need a definition and/or new grading of what exactly a National park is

Definitions from the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). 1a is the most protection, VI the least. Notice how broad the definitions are... Afaik, this is the framework that the Australian parks network is built on:

Ia Strict Nature Reserve: Category Ia are strictly protected areas set aside to protect biodiversity and also possibly geological/geomorphical features, where human visitation, use and impacts are strictly controlled and limited to ensure protection of the conservation values. Such protected areas can serve as indispensable reference areas for scientific research and monitoring

Ib Wilderness Area: Category Ib protected areas are usually large unmodified or slightly modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence without permanent or significant human habitation, which are protected and managed so as to preserve their natural condition

II National Park: Category II protected areas are large natural or near natural areas set aside to protect large-scale ecological processes, along with the complement of species and ecosystems characteristic of the area, which also provide a foundation for environmentally and culturally compatible, spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational, and visitor opportunities

III Natural Monument or Feature: Category III protected areas are set aside to protect a specific natural monument, which can be a landform, sea mount, submarine cavern, geological feature such as a cave or even a living feature such as an ancient grove. They are generally quite small protected areas and often have high visitor value

IV Habitat/Species Management Area: Category IV protected areas aim to protect particular species or habitats and management reflects this priority. Many Category IV protected areas will need regular, active interventions to address the requirements of particular species or to maintain habitats, but this is not a requirement of the category

V Protected Landscape/ Seascape: A protected area where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant, ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value: and where safeguarding the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values

VI Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources: Category VI protected areas conserve ecosystems and habitats together with associated cultural values and traditional natural resource management systems. They are generally large, with most of the area in a natural condition, where a proportion is under sustainable natural resource management and where low-level non-industrial use of natural resources compatible with nature conservation is seen as one of the main aims of the area

(from https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-ar ... categories)

[Moondog55]

If that is the case then having exotics in a "National Park " is OK as it would fall under the term [near natural] and [recreational] categories and the the main efforts to remove exotics should be reserved for 1a and 1b areas.
Knowing how many exotic and feral species reside in many of our so-called 'wilderness areas' the categories are a joke

[Warin]

If that is the case then having exotics in a "National Park " is OK as it would fall under the term [near natural] and [recreational] categories and the the main efforts to remove exotics should be reserved for 1a and 1b areas.
Knowing how many exotic and feral species reside in many of our so-called 'wilderness areas' the categories are a joke

Most of the work is done by volunteers - and they want to work in 'their' local area for their own benefit. The number of volunteers willing to work in 'wilderness' areas is very small. Most see it as a responsibility of NP themselves to do the work in 'wilderness' areas.

[tom_brennan]

In most cases I'd agree with the notion that only local indigenous species should be in a national park.

But surely this is not completely black and white. A couple of examples:
- some national parks are about post-British historic or cultural values - and these may have exotic plants as part of that history. For example, Yanga Homestead in Yanga NP.
- in some cases, degradation or weed infestation may be best managed - in the first instance - by using plants from other areas

[Moondog55]

People are not really good at looking at grey questions, we seem to better at making black and white decisions.

[johnw]

I would be very interested to know the identity and location of tree species that wildwanderer observed per the original post.

[Hughmac]

'National parks are areas of land protected because of their unspoilt landscapes, outstanding or representative ecosystems, Australian native plants and animals, and places of natural or cultural significance. In addition to their role in conservation, national parks provide opportunities for public nature appreciation, well-being, enjoyment, and as valuable scientific research.'
Straight from https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/co ... onal-parks
The only way exotics fit this definition is if they have cultural significance, which would be a very rare and limited circumstance.