Ok - what is your point. Be very clear.

I do look at this scientifically (and here I look beyond Ailanthus and speak of invasive non-native plants as a whole):

- these plants did not evolve here
- they do not support the ecosystem in which they now live
- they in fact reduce the carrying capacity for the native insects and birds because they do not support them, sometimes driving small populations of specialized fauna to extinction
- we can support the ecosystem by removing them.

What in that is not scientifically neutral?

By the way, you did not comment on the pythons.

Smooth sumac is one of the few plants on the Gulf Coast that turns a rich red color in autumn.

Good points about the sumac...
- interesting form, including suckering habit
- native, with benefits as previously described by Esh
- fall color
- very adaptable!
- bothered by a few pests and diseases, but usually just keeps on go
- easy to transplant.
__________________________________________

I see no basis for the phrase "wasted money against NATURE", as used above by Snasxs.

Brandon, except for item 2, these features as shared by the notorious Tree of Heaven or Hell.

Snasxs, you may be getting something else mixed up with tree-of-heaven. Ailanthus altissima (TOH) does not share Rhus glabra's form (especially when older), and has little to no fall color. It also drops limbs like crazy and smells repulsive!

BTW, are you going to answer Esh's question or address my comment?

I have posted on the pythons in the other thread, dear Brandon.

Ok - what is your point. Be very clear.

You didn't clarify what was your point that I missed. I certainly would like to understand where you are coming from.

In fact, what is the point of this whole thread? I do think that perhaps you brought it up just so you could talk about Ailanthus. You and I have been around a long time - you used to like to promote plants that are not native to the U.S. even when they are invasive. Is that what you are trying to do here? Show that Ailanthus is so close in appearance to Rhus glabra that it doesn't matter which one we grow?

....and, I still see no basis for the phrase "wasted money against NATURE", as used above by Snasxs.

If snasxs wants to play the devil's advocate...

...then advocate for smallpox, AIDS, plenty of E. coli and Cryptosporidium in drinking water, German cockroaches, and salmonella in the food supply - all of those are Nature's components as well.

That position is a straw man, and snasxs knows it. No competent gardener or horticulturist confuses the two plants in question.

To press the point: would you (snasxs) plant Ailanthus altissima amongst any of the wonderful plants that you've posted images of on this forum? That's actually rhetorical; of course you wouldn't, because the allelopathy would denigrate that which you admire most.

esh_ga, I do not promote any plant but merely the knowledge. I think everyone should be told a full story. Every coin has two sides. People should have the freedom to make judgement on their own. Shutting down information is not the way to go. Don't you agree?

For all readers,

I would like to introduce two insects that are specialized only to eat the Tree of Heaven.

The first is a moth.

{{gwi:324977}}

The second look like a cross between a cicada and a butterfly. This second one is especially focused or specialized on the Tree of Heaven. Again, this insect ONLY eat the Tree of Heaven. They are very effective in controlling the Tree of Heaven.

{{gwi:324978}}

{{gwi:324979}}

The insects gang up on the seedlings of the Tree of Heaven, such that the seedlings mostly do not survive! It effectively controls the plant. On the other hand, the insects are dependent on the Tree of Heaven. Their eggs cannot properly hatch without the Tree of Heaven.

Further, there are special parasitic wasps that specialize in eating this insect both adults and youngs.

My point -

Since the group of Brandon, Esh, beigestonehill, viburnumvalley and +oM are clearly able to identify so many differences between native Sumac's from the Tree of Heaven, chances are, there are substantial chemical differences between the native Sumac's and the Tree of Heaven. Therefore the insects are not able to survive on the native Sumac's and they only attack the Tree of Heaven which seems to be so very bitterly resented by the previously mentioned group.

snasxs - can you tell us the names of those two insects? The first one looks a bit like an Ailanthus Silk Moth. Are they present in the US?

Indeed, snasxs, you make our point very well in two ways:

there are substantial chemical differences between the native Sumac's and the Tree of Heaven

1. because of those chemical differences the native Sumac has specialized insects that need it to survive so when non-native plants out compete it, those native insects have no food.

2. the natural predators of the Ailanthus are still in Asia therefore they are not here to control the spread of the Ailanthus and it grows faster and more aggressively than in it's native range. It is a thug here.

Shutting down information is not the way to go

Who here is shutting down information? I am happy for people to learn as much as possible as to the scientific reasons why this plant is harmful to the native ecosystems of the eastern United States.

flora_uk,

Yes, the first moth is a sub-group from the Ailanthus Silk Moth: Philosamia cynthia Walker et Felder. I know the Ailanthus Silk Moth has a native population in North America: US and Canada.

The second is Lycorma delicatula, or some kind of relatives. I don't think they present in the US.

I heard that the most potent insect that specializes in the Tree of Heaven is Eucryptorrhynchus brandti (Harold). There are researches on it.

esh_ga, you are incorrect. Ailanthus Silk Moth are found in Euro-Asia as well as North and Central Americas. The North American region may not be as purist as you aspire it to be :-)

Oh snasxs - I long ago gave up PURE - I'm just going for tolerable now.

Is Philosamina cynthia having a "native" population in the US or do you mean naturalized? I found this info:

"Today's European and American wild cynthia are the descendents of adults originally taken from Asia and introduced with the intention of establishing silk industries in the various countries to which they were taken."

Are you saying that we should embrace having Ailanthus in the US so that this insect can have something to eat? I'm afraid that is not an argument that holds much weight from a scientific perspective.

By the way, if by some miracle all the Ailanthus died tomorrow, that source also says the little moth can eat Ligustrum and Salix too.

Are you wanting us to support the feeding habits of the Gypsy moth too?

Perhaps the Wooly adelgid that feeds on hemlocks? I guess we really should be more sensitive to their needs ... What will they eat when they finish killing all our hemlocks?

Esh, I had a reply but I decide not to post it. I repeat that you need the scientific neutrality on this matter.

Does anyone else think that I don't have "scientific neutrality" on this? I am just posting facts.

I still am not sure what your point is on this post. It seems like you want us to keep Ailanthus around so that we can support an insect that doesn't even belong here.

In the meantime, invasive plants like Ailanthus crowd out native plants that are the food source for specialized native insects, thus reducing the populations of THOSE insects.

The question to you is why do you support a non-native insect's health over the health of native species?

Esh, to make it clear, you seem to passionately embrace errors. Think about the reasons behind.

Example 1: silk moths are native to the Americas.

Example 2: Ailanthus silk moth is dependent on the Tree of Heaven to breed.

Esh, I think snasxs is the only one who understands whatever point it is he/she is trying to make. I am not totally sure snasxs is not "thinking aloud" and in the process of forming an opinion(s) him/herself.

j0nd037, I encourage you to carefully read each post in this thread, and then close you eyes and reflex. See if you can understand what I am saying.

I believe what I have read are riddles and speaking in paths which have no direction that lead to a mirage disguised as an oasis ;)

j0nd03, what do you think about the solutions I suggested in the posts of Tue, Jan 31, 12 at 23:17 through Wed, Feb 1, 12 at 9:30?

I believe I will not be drawn into a debate with the Riddler :)

j0nd03, I am sorry you are not comfortable to have a discussion with me.

Esh,

I, for one, don't think you have ANYTHING to worry about regarding not being scientifically neutral (whatever that really means in this case). Especially with the way Snasxs picks and chooses what questions to respond to and which to just ignore, I think it's possible that she's got a hidden agenda of some kind. Either that, or she's just not communicating well. I'm still trying to decide for sure.

Brandon, why don't you give me a list of questions that you think I have not answered. Thank you.

Is Philosamina cynthia having a "native" population in the US or do you mean naturalized?

You didn't answer this one.

Example 1: silk moths are native to the Americas.

Do you have a link that says that this specific silk moth is native to the US?

There may be even more, but here are some of the questions/comments from above (with slight rewording to make them stand on their own here, outside of above contexts):

- What do you think about what Esh said about DOT, etc being trained to ID and remove invasives?

- What does "wasted money against NATURE" mean, as used in the above conversation?

- How do you think Esh is not being "scientifically neutral"?

And, a new but closely related question....

- What exactly is "scientifically neutral", as used in the above conversation?

Brandon, here it is:

Ailanthus silkmoth
Samia cynthia (Drury, 1773)
Family: Saturniidae
Subfamily: Saturniinae

Identification: Wings are olive brown to brown with wide pinkish median bands. Each wing has a large crescent-shaped transparent spot edged with gold.

Wing Span: 4 1/8 - 5 1/2 inches (10.5 - 14 cm).

The specific species is believed to be introduced to North America by human activities. However, this is a speculation. The image below shows the specimens of some kinds of lunar moths (North American Species) and the variations of this silk moth. They are in the same family. Ailanthus silkmoth only attacks the Tree of Heaven. It is a role model non-native species, if it indeed is non-native. Its current distribution is spotty along the Atlantic coast from Connecticut to Georgia and west to northern Kentucky. Brandon, you should love them. They are also beautiful.

{{gwi:324980}}

Snasxs, It wasn't me that had asked you anything about the moths.

Brandon, I am tired now. I am sorry for mistaken you with Esh. Do you not know each other?

Just from on GardenWeb. She seems like a very interesting, highly knowledgeable, really friendly person...but we've never met.

Snasxs,
Are you in Virginia? Have you ever made it up to College Park MD? That was the home of a friend of mine named Bob Mitchell who edited "Butterflies and Moths" last revised in 1987. Here's what he said about Cynthia Moth at that time: "introduced from China, is found in cities from Boston to Savannah and westward to Indiana. The larva feeds on Ailanthus,..."
In Eastern US we have several native species lumped together as Silk Moths. It is worth noting that only the larva feed and the loss of foliage to the host plant is minimal, barely noticable. Are you suggesting that the Cynthia Moth can somehow effect Ailanthus populations?
Regarding the moths you mentioned earlier in this thread you said The insects gang up on the seedlings of the Tree of Heaven, such that the seedlings mostly do not survive! It effectively controls the plant.
Are you aware that a major invasive trait of Ailanthus is vegetative reproduction, in which case no seedlings are involved?
My question to Snasxs, can you offer anything desirable about Ailanthus? Would you plant it on your property? Does it have any wildlife value? Does it have any commercial value? If so what?
This pic in Baltimore shows why we call TOH the Ghetto Palm
{{gwi:324981}}
Plant Invaders of Mid-Atlantic Natural Areas is a booklet by NPS & Fish & Wildlife. The field data has been carefully taken over a number of years, check out the link and see what these researchers say.

Here is a link that might be useful: Plant Invaders of Mid-Atlantic Natural Areas

Sam, try these two insects:

Lycorma delicatula

Eucryptorrhynchus brandti (Harold)

Yes, they do destroy the Tree of Heaven effectively.

snasxs wants to pick/choose only the points that support the straw man argument of why an allelopathic invasive plant species should be allowed to continue to be planted.

IF a species of moth can only survive with the life cycle of an introduced exotic species (as stated previously), then it could not possibly have been native to North America - since there was no Ailanthus here before introduction. The rest of the argument dissolves thereafter.

Haven't seen any votes for any of the other pestilence mentioned earlier - what gives? What about West Nile virus? Bubonic plague? Swine flu? Awful lot of resources expended controlling those invasives - maybe should restrict such costs to only states outside VA.

My spouse is long-time accomplished microbiologist, often extolling their beauty and intricacies when viewing these deadly micro-organisms under a microscope or on a Petri dish.

Dang - sorry, brandon, there must have been an escape from the Bait Shop.

Ailanthus has become an important part of the North American flora, being the only species capable of successfully colonizing rare cracks in the concrete between a building foundation and a sidewalk.

Props enough for me!

+oM

I have seen eighty year old TOH's, there are three planted in a row on a farm in Oklahoma that my cousin owns. They sprout from the roots in at least a hundred foot radius. The traffic from horses keeps the sprouts from becoming trees. The trunks are about four foot in diameter.

My cousin asked me what kind of sumac they were, and I told her it was the tree of heaven. Interesting tree at this age, from a distance they are unique. They've been around for so long and do provide shade. The leaves are very unappealing in the fall, and the bark as you approach is not attractive.

Interestlngly, sumac is ubiquitious on the farm, along with blackberry and locust. The sumac is beautiful in the fall, the blackberries are delicious, the locust is a nitrogen fixer but has some scary looking thorns and is a pest.

There is also an American Elm there that is at least eight foot in diameter. It sits out in a field and has a massive canopy. It's a horsey hideout, with it's shade, who knows how old it is. It's truely a sight to behold, up close and from afar.

To Sam from Maryland,

Anyone in the DC and Maryland region realizes the main problems crowding out native plants are human overpopulation and the concrete structures and roads. If the Tree of Heavens crowd out 1, than humans crowd out 100. In the region, concrete and asphalt cover almost everything leaving small patches of disturbed land for pioneer plants like the Tree of Heaven. Large number of cars and massive traffic jam put pressure onto native land.

Sam, do you realize your picture actually makes my point. Clearly the Tree of Heaven is not competing with native plants in the picture. In a sense, the Tree of Heaven is helping to destruct the alien structures not native to North America and return them back to soil suitable for native plants. As a top predator, humans, such a Sam, react to the brainless Tree of Heaven in a brainy behavior unique to animal society.

Percentage of developed land in MD: 27%
Percentage of MD land subject to invasive damage: >>75%

As was pointed out earlier, development only increases the importance of managing invasives, and certainly doesn't excuse their use.

Ok, I finally gave in and opened this thread. I have been avoiding it, and the one on invasives as I knew it would probable be best for me to stay away. I tend to have very strong opinions and some sometimes can't get past them. Now I see I was right. However there is something that strikes me about all this. It seems as though snasxs is entertaining themselves and us during the depth of winter when little else is going on in the tree world. I see this because I myselfmany times have picked a position contrary to the "norm" to make people think about their opinions, and frankly because I get bored, cantankerous, and kind of an a#$hole at sometimes. Hey, at least I don't lie about it. ;-)

So snasxs, is that what is happening here?

Arktrees

Sam, did you see my response to your picture?

Regarding the original question, yes, I like Smooth Sumac, but prefer the larger non-native Sumacs.

bboy, for the record, I do not like Tree of Heaven. I would not want to have it in my yard. But I do not have the anger or hatred demonstrated by some. I would not call a brainless plant "Tree of Hell".

And with that, goes the self-proclaimed high ground argument of "scientific neutrality."

It is finally revealed that snasxs has been basically just using semantics to shroud the effort to defend the defenseless: a lost botanical soul from the continental land mass due west of this continent, brainlessly trying to survive in this New World.

Anger or hatred? Not sure where that sentiment is derived, but it sure ISN'T Sinophobia as related elsewhere. For me, I'd dislike this plant's behavior in local environments whether it was from east Asia or from the moon.

As for unanswered questions: snasxs has never 'fessed up to the origin of this posting - the pretense of inability to discern differences between Rhus and Ailanthus, thus promoting equal acceptability of both.

The posting of Sun, Jan 29, 12 at 13:45 is especially telling in this regard. Who could believe THAT?

viburnumvalley, I would refrain from going into that lowly styled bickering.

If so, you wouldn't have started this thread's debate.

viburnumvalley, I encourage you to drop your colored glasses and read the thread, if necessary, imagining I am "one of your kind".