The plant police are on patrol

Spring is upon us (well, most of us: here in PA winter’s back, 20F last night)  and in the plant police as well as in the maples and oaks the sap is rising. There’s been a spring outbreak of outrage amongst the plant police against Time magazine who, in a familiar excess of trivialization, recently published 51 Things We Can Do to Save the Environment. And of course it has to be 51… only 49 or 50 and we’re doomed.

Number 26 “Plant a bamboo fence” recommends exactly that, planting bamboo. “Most homeowners have to restrict its growth, lest it get out of control,” we’re told. “Do this, however, and you reduce bamboo's capacity as a carbon sink. Only large-scale plantings, which absorb CO2 faster than they release it, can favorably tip the scales. How big is your yard?”

This has upset the plant police, they’ve got their knickers in a twist (do American’s say that?) and have been firing off irate letters to Time magazine and encouraging the rest of us to do the same. Yes, covering your whole garden with a bamboo species from across the other side of the  globe may, possibly, perhaps, set it off on a path to taking over the roadside outside your house and then the meadow up the street. Possibly. It will certainly be tough to get rid of if your change you mind and decide to go for a lawn.

But while criticizing Time magazine for this suggestion, they seem to be railing against all bamboos. There are about 1,000 different species of bamboo… the hedge bamboo, Bambusa multiplex, which you might think was the one that Time had in mind, is naturalized in Florida, according to the USDA, but is not invasive. And the USDA reports that none of the many other bamboos which are found outside gardens in the USA are formally cited as invasive except two: Phyllostachys aurea, the golden bamboo, is cited as invasive in Florida and Hawaii, and Phyllostachys nigra, the black bamboo, is cited as invasive in Hawaii alone. Both are lovely garden plants, both seem only to be problems in the warmest zones. Vigorous in gardens and invasive in the wild are not at all the same thing.

Some invasives certainly pose serious problems, but isn’t this all bit trivial compared to the bigger, the almost incomprehensible threat to our native plants? The Guardian newspaper in England reported today: “The world's scientists yesterday issued a grim forecast for life on earth when they published their latest assessment of the impacts of climate change. A warming world will place hundreds of millions of extra people at greater risk of food and water shortages and threaten the survival of thousands of species of plants and animals, they said."

And we’re supposed to worry about planting bamboo in the back garden?

Comments

[Larry]

Graham, if it comes from the Guardian or New York Times, just tap a beer and forget it. They will each have a new threat next week, hoping to use it to actually sell some papers.

[Graham Rice]

Actually, I thought The New York Times story on the issue was rather limp, while The Independent, for example, was more angry in its tone. The Guardian seemed in between.

And far be it for me to call someone else cynical, but even the publications which deny global warming is actually happening are trying to sell copies.

But OK, ignore the papers altogether - and read the report. You can download it here: http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM6avr07.pdf