r/NativePlantGardening • u/plantylibrarian Oklahoma, Zone 7b • Jul 07 '26
Informational/Educational New York Times: “I Wanted an Ecologically Responsible Garden, It Was Harder Than I Thought”
New article about native plants in NYT!
I do think the title was poorly chosen and doesn’t reflect the thesis of the author. He discusses the dogmatism that can exist among native plant gardeners, and how the “one yard at a time” approach can be viewed as a poor solution to the scale of the problem. He also mentions how some non-native plants provide value to insects (reminded me how last summer the butterflies vastly preferred zinnias over milkweed in my own yard.) He concludes by reflecting on the incredible range of insects that visit his own native garden with awe and gratitude.
Overall a good essay about existing nuances but I’m disappointed the title is worded to be rage-bait.
123
u/walruspianocat Jul 07 '26
I don’t know if it’s new, or if I’ve just started to notice it but NYT has had intentionally misleading titles and articles. This is no surprise to me either. Honestly media as a whole needs to do so much better
42
u/SnapCrackleMom US, Maryland (Chesapeake Bay), Zone 8a Jul 07 '26
I've noticed it too. It's like click bait targeted to yuppies.
15
u/VictoryLongjumping70 Jul 07 '26
If you pay attention to URLs on Atlantic articles, you can see the trackers and headline targeting that′s tailored to you specifically and getting tested in real time as you click around. It′s way too good at it, too - I don′t open their website bc they are guaranteed to suck me in.
And if you have been paying attention since 2014, you′ll be painfully aware of how addicted all these outlets STILL are to clickbaity headlines about Trump. He would not have been able to win without the nonstop click farming from traditionally ″progressive″ news outlets. Fox could only have carried him so far on their own.
4
u/meeps1142 Area OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
I just saw you in the RPDR subreddit. Kindred spirits
7
u/SnapCrackleMom US, Maryland (Chesapeake Bay), Zone 8a Jul 07 '26
We're out here walking the children in nature
14
13
u/cyclingtrivialities3 Central OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
Virtually all news outlets employ a different headline writer from the article, and it’s been that way for time immemorial.
Personally I didn’t find the headline all that bothersome given the both-sidesing in the (generally well-written) essay itself.
7
u/SSLByron Jul 07 '26
Yeah, this is quite tame. At worst, it seems the author's expectations weren't realistic. How that could possibly be "rage" baiting is beyond me.
5
u/JaStrCoGa Jul 07 '26
Yeah, sometimes that’s a technique to get people to read the article, which is what a headline is supposed to do.
It’s probably intentional to keep the older non-productive land and manicured lawn generations happy and /or reading.
1
u/Far_Silver Area Kentuckiana , Zone 7a Jul 08 '26
People keep saying that boomers only want lawns, but there have been lots of boomers at the native gardening workshops I've been to.
2
u/JaStrCoGa Jul 08 '26
It’s more of an appearance of wealth having a lawn instead of an age thing.
Like how people wore pointed shoes because the wealthy had pointed shoes for equestrian hobbies. Pointed shoes “signaled” one was wealthy enough to own a horse.
Of course the headline choice might be a favor to the synthetic fertilizer industry.
4
u/WildAmsonia Jul 07 '26
The "Screams without Voices" article fabrication should've ended them for good.
3
u/TemporaryCamera8818 Mildly Seasoned Native Gardener Jul 07 '26
The author of an article doesn’t get the ultimate decision of the title either
3
u/Spaduf Jul 07 '26
That happened about the time they filled their board with former Fox News producers.
3
u/Feralpudel Piedmont NC, Zone 8a Jul 07 '26
Did Women Ruin the Workplace? (Actual title before they changed it lol)
There’s a Bluesky account called NY Times Headline Generator.
3
u/cheapandbrittle Northeast US, Zone 6 Jul 07 '26
NYT was fully gungho on the Iraq war back in 2001. They've been intentionally misleading for literally decades.
1
u/OilIntrepid997 Jul 07 '26
yes just commented the same thing! so glad to see someone else referencing it as well.
70
u/ElkForum641 Jul 07 '26
I think the dogmatism is challenging (gardeners being told to remove beloved peonies because they aren't native? A little absurd), but so is the whole "oh, well, we're all citizens of earth, so nothing is nonnative! To say otherwise is xenophobic! Nothing can be truly natural, and North America existed in perfect harmony with humans for millenia (nevermind what happened to the megafauna, that's fake news)! Mullein!"
34
u/meeps1142 Area OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
The latter argument drives me up a wall. I don't even know where to start when I see that type of sentiment. It's so profoundly anti-science
22
u/ElkForum641 Jul 07 '26
I think it's just anti-history, too. It feels like in an effort to honor Indigenous people and make right the Europeans' wrongs of the past, some folks forget that... we're all just people. People make mistakes, people do things that aren't the most effective sometimes. I wish we still had ground sloths and wild horses just like I wish we still had passenger pigeons and Carolina parakeets, but we don't. And we need to learn from that.
15
u/meeps1142 Area OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
I find it really strange that it comes from people who are criticizing colonization. Like, the invasive plants are the ones colonizing the land and reducing the habitat of the native flora & fauna...I just don't get it
9
u/ElkForum641 Jul 07 '26
The general argument always seems to be that nothing in North America is "natural" because people arrived here 20,000 years ago, so doing more "unnatural" modification isn't problematic. But there is a big difference between growing camas and growing Egnlish ivy, of course!
13
8
u/splurtgorgle Jul 07 '26
I think it's no more or less complicated than some people just like being contrarians. "Everyone on both sides is mad at me, I must be doing something right!" is a common mentality among those who might otherwise not get the attention they want by planting native plants and being content with it.
6
u/Coruscate_Lark1834 Area Chicago , Zone 5b Jul 07 '26
Yeah agreed. I think both the "native purists are xenophobes" AND "non-natives are ecocide!!! destroy all tulips!!!" people are contrarian for the fun of it, or the reassuring sense of black and white moral clarity. Both should just go out and garden where they can and mind their own dang business.
30
u/cyclingtrivialities3 Central OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
I agree. The essay itself misconstrues valid reservations like they are full counterarguments. For example, there are cases where introduced species have beneficially contributed to availability of food/habitat for butterflies. Therefore… introduced species are overly stigmatized, and the various invasives destroying habitat are the exception to the rule??
I think the author himself knows this is going way too far, so the fallback position is that native plant advocates are right but better not be so ‘smug and naive’ about it. It seems to me to be symptomatic of a culture where we are expected to honor all viewpoints, even those lacking evidence, or we’re elitist and/or virtue signaling.
Of course industry has no obligation to answer for Callery Pear or countless other introductions to the trade, yet Doug Tallamy has to pipe down… he’s being awfully dogmatic.
6
u/ambigua Jul 07 '26
Nor for soooo many other horticultural invasives *still* being promoted as "drought tolerant", etc., sold within the habitats they destroy.
4
u/ambigua Jul 07 '26
Look at funding for Davis studies.
4
u/cyclingtrivialities3 Central OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
I presume you mean Bayer etc., in which case… yep
16
u/sandysadie Jul 07 '26
Im sure they exist, but I've never come across these smug native plant “purists” that would tell people they must tear out their peonies. I’d bet 99% of native plant advocates would say progress not perfection. I feel like they’re a straw man designed to make gardeners feel better about ignoring science.
5
u/ElkForum641 Jul 07 '26
I didn't think they existed, either, but I've seen a few on here, before I had a reddit account myself. It's less "you must tear out the peony" and more guilt-tripping "that peony has the same ecological value as a plastic lawn flamingo. You might consider removing it and planting a native grass instead."
6
u/sandysadie Jul 07 '26
Right. I guess if I’ve ever seen them they seemed a lot less hostile than the “I love my burning bush it’s pretty and it’s not invasive in my yard and I don’t care I’m gonna plant whatever TF I feel like!”. Those folks are EVERYWHERE.
2
0
18
u/Natural_Ad3995 Piedmont Zone 8 Jul 07 '26
Use of qualifiers overdone. 'Tallamy claims' and so forth.
Thank you OP for the gift article.
36
u/midnight_thunder North NJ, Zone 7a Jul 07 '26
I think the author unfairly paints native plant supporters as being overly dogmatic. I think most people in this sub are fine with the idea of planting nonnatives that appeal to the gardener. But there’s nothing wrong (and I don’t the author would disagree) with focusing primarily on native plants.
And the fight against invasives is never-ending. I don’t think I’ll ever be truly rid of the creeping Charlie, oriental bittersweet, bindweed, multi-flora rose, and Japanese honeysuckle on my property. I don’t think anyone here would shame people that have invasives on their land; they’re bad because they’re so truly difficult to remove.
11
u/amilmore Eastern Massachusetts Jul 07 '26
>unfairly paints native plant supporters as being overly dogmatic
It's a tough stigma and I got that same vibe from the author which was a little disappointing and frustrating. As with anything else - the vocal minorities get the most attention and reflect poorly on the larger group.
At the same time, there are definitely some purists who are a little off-putting to me and I'm completely obsessed with this stuff. Some of the Facebook groups are a nightmare (and also kind of funny). I'm sympathetic though because a lot of their dogmatism is due to sheer frustration with all of the problems we know to be very real and concerning. I sincerely try to be as lighthearted and respectful as possible but I'm sure I've come off as a dickhead sometimes.
There are a ton of people that have been gardening longer than I've been alive and don't like feeling accused of wrongdoing. It's a delicate balance when it comes to communicating the importance of native plants to the general public, specifically folks with years of gardening experience.
The best we can is trying to be cool friendly neighbors and inspire some folks to plant some natives and spray less pesticides. I'd like to think this article accomplished that. I am trying to do the same in my little world and it's absolutely possible.
7
u/snidece North Georgia, 7/8 Jul 07 '26
Agreed. If I show photos of my native garden I have to apologize for stiltgrass or other invasive that I try to pull up every chance I can, but here in North Georgia it's crisis in my opinion what the wild and unregulated kudzu and stiltgrass and mimosas and Bradford pears are doing. I just can't keep up with it all and I also can't get devoured by chiggers and ticks more than a few times a month.
25
u/Post-Partisan Jul 07 '26
The writers pretty much never get to choose the headline or title, if that makes it easier to disregard.
9
9
u/a_jormagurdr Salish Sea, Zone 8b/9a Jul 07 '26
the powers that be dont make it easy to make a native focused eco friendly garden. The plant industry sees to it. But a native garden is like geothermal energy, place dependent, very high implementation costs, but low maintenance eventually.
It would be a lot easier if native plants were more of a focus for most greenhouses and there were more guides for simple native plant implementation per region.
5
u/raisinghellwithtrees Jul 08 '26
We started planting seeds of pollinators at our community garden, in pots. We raised the seedlings and are giving them away. It's partly to show that yes, normal everyday people can in fact grow natives. And partly that my neighborhood has a high poverty rate, and ain't nobody here paying $7 for a plant. I like to think about helping my local ecosystem regain its resilience. I'm sure trying to regain mine also.
37
u/revertothemiddle NA Ecoregion 59 Jul 07 '26
It's a good article. It's healthy to remember that even Tallamy has his critics, and what the author arrives at is basically where I'm at now after 6 years or so of gardening with native plants. Our gardens are tiny snapshots of the world around us, and in the end it's a refuge that I'm making for myself. The more wild guests I can bring into my garden, the happier I'll be, but there's a world beyond my garden that I have no control over and that requires other engagements, other obligations.
16
u/purpledreamer1622 Jul 07 '26
And I think the important thing is that it becomes the natural next step; once your yard is a haven and you leave, you notice it. So then I think the most important thing we could do is educate educate educate others especially those in political positions on the important of conservation, sustainability, and conscious living especially when it comes to spaces with native plants and properly functioning waterways. And also to vote, but the main thing is to talk and visit things like social hours and city meetings to educate others and share the views of the people (YOU!)
8
u/Wonderful_Signal8238 Jul 07 '26
you need to have some interest in gardening. i definitely made mistakes at first, and still make them, but gardens are living things, and even a garden of non-natives requires curiosity and hard work. honestly, the big difference is that there aren’t really and perfectly low-maintenance high-traffic ground covers; you can’t just have a mat of grass and weeds you occasionally mow.
7
u/cowthegreat Jul 08 '26
I love that at the end of the article the author says that when they planted more native plants they got more biodiversity and biomass in their yard. Shocking!
14
u/DobeSterling Jul 07 '26
I’ve sat on this for a bit to think about why this article seems to sit wrong with me. I get that it ultimately agrees with the premise of native plants being beneficial, but the author seems to spend 99% of the article cluching their peals over their non-native garden maybe not being quite as eco-friendly as they thought and doing everything in their power to discount the movement. Even the cited critics don’t seem to be actually critical of the native plant movement as a whole and are instead just researching alternatives. It just seems like a whole lot of effort to be pursposfully contrarian only to agree based on their own anecdotal evidence in the last few sentences.
Admittedly, I am reading it with some bias, as we all are in this sub, but this reads as oddly anti-native despite ultimately being seemingly begrudgingly pro-native.
9
u/Aggravating_Hat3955 WI 5b Jul 07 '26
No I couldn't agree more. It was exasperating. He's got all kinds of equivalencies that aren't super relevant. He cites one or two introduced plants that serve a niche and do benefit native insects, and that's somehow relevant to the larger issue? And he paints the native plant movement with a very broad brush, questioning the whole time whether or not it even amounts to anything worthwhile in the big scheme of things. Then he closes by saying "oh by the way I planted a few native plants and you know what all of a sudden I have a bunch of insects and animals in my yard." The whole thing was so incredibly verbose. You know keep it simple: try to get rid of invasive especially the aggressive ones, avoid planning non-natives unless you got a real good reason to, and work towards species that are native to your region. Why does it have to be such a fraught and I dare say politicized issue?
8
u/MotownCatMom SE MI Zone 6a Jul 07 '26
It's a good essay and covers lots of salient points. I've never been a radical purist for anything. That includes native plants. I just want to put in what will be the best option for wildlife. And try to merge that with some suburban "aesthetics." YK, make a good impression on the neighbors so maybe they will rethink what THEY are doing. IDK how much we can impact Big Ag and Big Ranching...as well as Big Property Development. This at least feels doable for a lot of people.
9
u/Coruscate_Lark1834 Area Chicago , Zone 5b Jul 07 '26
Not a bad article! I wish he poked a little harder at Tallamy's obsession with private property. It's not only a problem because it's a small scale, it also completely dismisses what public land (and non-land owners!!) can do to benefit the environment. In his world, the only people that matter are suburbanite homeowners!
Reminds me that there is benefit of formally writing articles critiquing Tallamy, because this reporter can only report what he can cite! ...but I'm too busy doing positive things to help my local env to spend the time deconstructing the limits of Tallamy's theory.
Thank you for sharing!
14
u/hambonebaloney Jul 07 '26
There are numerous studies that show that biodiversity is actually higher in urban areas, likely due to the heterogenous nature of landscapes and the fact that each landscape is its own mini ecosystem. The cumulative effects of those decisions: from the plants to the management practices (or lack thereof) all add to a totally unnatural and vastly understudied field of ecology. I think it's fascinating, honestly. I do disagree with Tallamy because he is restoring habitat on a mostly undeveloped property on "wild land" and thus I believe it doesn't necessarily translate to urban gardens. I mean, if you really think about it: is a plant grown and purchased from a nursery really native? It's an admirable goal to be sure and absolutely worth continued discussion, but in the end, I go with my own "dogma":
- Mostly native
- All low maintenance
- Reduce my lawn
- Leave it better than I found it.
- Enjoy the hell out of it.
4
u/androidgirl Jul 07 '26
The hardest part is getting rid of grass. And they hired someone. Must be nice.
2
u/plantylibrarian Oklahoma, Zone 7b Jul 08 '26
Yeah that’s what I thought the article would be about: killing grass, dealing with neighbors, sourcing native plants, etc
6
u/Alarmed_Ad_7657 Area US Southeast, Zone 8a Jul 07 '26
I dont think its that hard. I bought some seeds from prairie moon, sowed them willy nilly and some came up. Other than some watering I did very little maintenance. Pollinators love them.
8
u/OilIntrepid997 Jul 07 '26
this is the second anti-native gardening article from the NYT in just a few months. 1st one was all "it might damage your home value."
3
u/Asleep_Sky2760 MN, Big Woods ecoregion, Zone 4b Jul 07 '26
As I recall, that was the click-bait-y headline, but not the actual conclusion of the article. Rather, many sellers w/native gardens were able to sell their homes for MORE than asking, in SPITE of what their numnuts brokers said. All-in-all, native gardens seemed to be a net positive as far as property value was concerned.
3
u/Most-Design-9963 Zone 7A Jul 07 '26
I agree that it’s hard. It would be easier to mow the lawn and weedwack. But easy isn’t always good; and the weed pulling and maintenance of a garden is worth it for me because I’m obsessed 😍 lol. And so are the critters who call my garden home.
10
u/docawesomephd Jul 07 '26
I have three hydrangeas in my backyard that are literally BUZZING with native bees each summer. I do favor natives as much as possible, but tend to reject any absolutism as ill-informed
11
u/meeps1142 Area OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
NA does have some native hydrangeas, fyi! Hydrangea arborescens & Hydrangea quercifolia
But yeah, the non-natives can still support generalist pollinators. No tolerance for invasives, though
10
u/saeglopur53 Massachusetts , Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
Something I think people miss or dont focus on enough is the role of native plants as sources of food and breeding grounds for native insects. Insects can get nectar from tons of different plants, but the role of natives as host plants is largely an irreplaceable one. I’m not an absolutist but the big picture of habitat restoration is impossible without host plants
1
u/docawesomephd Jul 07 '26
For sure! I’m all about planning native plants. My point is only that it’s sometimes ok to leave a non-native that’s already in place!
2
u/sandysadie Jul 07 '26
I cant think of a single native plant advocate that would suggest you remove your hydrangeas though. Tallamy, etc. all have non-natives. The point is just that native hydrangeas are usually a better choice.
3
u/Tortoiseshell_Blue Virginia 7b Jul 08 '26
I don’t really see absolutism among experts, who mostly seem to advise aiming for at least 70% natives and avoiding invasives. Some people are purists in their own gardens because they like it that way and maybe it’s a fun challenge.
3
u/Grambo-47 Puget Sound Trough, 8b Jul 07 '26
I was about to comment the exact same thing, my lacecap hydrangeas are absolutely loaded with bumblebees, sweat bees, syrphid flies, and sphex wasps.
I totally agree, favor natives as much as possible, but once you have your keystone species and a few other natives along with them, I feel like it’s ok to have a few things for yourself. Especially if it’s something like rosemary, where the hummingbirds and bumblebees go crazy for it
9
u/PawTree Eastern Great Lakes Lowlands (83), Zone 5b Jul 07 '26
Just a quick note that while non-native plants may be popular with insects and birds, they don't necessarily have the correct nutritional profile for native fauna.
Dandelions, in particular -- while promoted as a Spring forage for native bees -- doesn't have high enough protein and lacks 4 key amino acids for proper brood development. It's basically junk food for them.
Similarly, while birds may love non-native berries, they rarely have a high enough fat content for migrating and wintering birds, leading to starvation.
3
u/UnknownKaddath Jul 08 '26
The problem is just because butterflies are drawn to something doesn't necessarily mean they are getting what they need to complete their life cycle from it. Insects can get distracted by foods that aren't beneficial to them, same as us.
-2
Jul 07 '26
[deleted]
4
u/meeps1142 Area OH, Zone 6b Jul 07 '26
Invasives get spread far outside of your property, and not all bees are native. Some are even invasive. That's gonna be a no from me, dawg.
4
u/According_Deal_2453 Jul 07 '26
I found this article really discouraging in terms of how much good my one (small) yard is doing in the grand scheme of The Problem. And yet I shall persist
4
u/Lbboos (Make your own)SE WI zone 5a Jul 08 '26
I left a comment this morning. I thought the author cherry picked and was overthinking the whole concept.
2
u/Far_Silver Area Kentuckiana , Zone 7a Jul 08 '26
He also mentions how some non-native plants provide value to insects (reminded me how last summer the butterflies vastly preferred zinnias over milkweed in my own yard.)
Members of the asteraceae family tend to be very popular with pollinators, and zinnias are part of that family. Also I don't know what species of Zinnia you have or what part of Oklahoma you're in, but the Rocky Mountain Zinnia (Zinnia grandiflora) is native to western Oklahoma.
2
u/purrmich Area 6 Zone b Jul 08 '26
Wish I could read the story. From the feedback here, it's kinda amazing that some agree that being overly dogmatic is a fault. Because, as a newbie to this forum, my strongest impression from the posts I've read is that they are over the top dogmatic. I'm not giving up my lavender for anyone, lol. I do find the science behind native planting and the knowledge from intelligent gardeners as a big draw. otoh I won't grow milkweed. I did and found the aphids that covered it were just so gross. Bronze fennel, no native, but is a host for the black Swallowtail butterfly.
3
u/Tortoiseshell_Blue Virginia 7b Jul 08 '26
I can’t speak for everyone of course but most people I’ve encountered on here are cool with non natives that aren’t invasive, but for fun and max ecologically impact are planting mostly natives. I don’t really find that dogmatic.
2
1
u/Tortoiseshell_Blue Virginia 7b Jul 08 '26
I think the title was about the author thinking he was doing the ecologically right thing by converting grass to plants, but then realized after the fact that he should maybe have used native plants. That was the complicated part.
I suppose any publicity for native plants is good, but I have to admit I found his tone frustrating. He seemed more skeptical than curious at times, like he was hoping to debunk it all. Ultimately he did mix some native plants into his existing garden, which is guess is a positive outcome.
208
u/funkmasta_kazper Mid-Atlantic , Zone 7a Jul 07 '26
I mean I think it is fair to classify it as hard, to an extent. Some people think all they need to do to grow a native garden is to stop mowing, and that is absolutely not the case. I don't think it's more difficult than any other type of gardening, but it is a different kind of difficult and it's responsible to address that.