Native Plants Behaving Badly

 Invasive Series - Part 3—Bridging the Gap

📝 Opinion  | By Guy Saldiveri | January 27, 2026

Our ecosystem is dynamic, living, and constantly changing. 

Assigning a single point in time to justify whether a species should be considered native or non-native, to me, is just unacceptable. 

My previous posts on this subject included my take on invasive vs. non‑native plants in “Beyond the Third Rail: A Long-View Look at Native and Invasive Plants” and “Making a Case for the Chinese Tallow Tree.”

This final entry bridges the gap and brings it all together.

In Beyond the Third Rail, I discuss the definition of native and non‑native plants and why I take issue with drawing such a distinct line based on a “snapshot in time.”

The second installment, Making the Case for the Chinese Tallow Tree, went on to discuss the possibility that while a species can be invasive, it can also have positive intrinsic values that can make it worthwhile to have around—and given enough time, nature will adapt and welcome it into the fold.

This entry will show that even a native species can behave aggressively—even invasively—despite what the definition allows.

I’ve talked about a couple of varieties of jasmine before: Carolina and Confederate. The Carolina jasmine is the native, “non‑invasive” species, while the Confederate jasmine is “non‑native” and sometimes considered the “invasive” one.

In my own experiences, these two plants behave exactly opposite in regard to their labels. The Carolina jasmine is constantly breaking out of its intended surroundings, popping up all over the yard in places I don’t want it to be, and aggressively attempting to take over any space it inhabits. The Confederate jasmine, while considered aggressive and invasive by some, is well behaved, stays where I want it to stay, and while it does spread over time, it’s a slower grower that is easily maintained by an annual pruning.

This baffles me because it’s exactly the kind of behavior that argues against the definition.

This example got me thinking about other native plants. Surely there are other natives that don’t like to follow the rules. 

Doing some research, I came across a few others that I can mention here:

• Wax Myrtle (Morella cerifera)

• Yaupon Holly (Ilex vomitoria)

• Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua)

• Switchcane (Arundinaria gigantea)

• Eastern Redcedar (Juniperus virginiana)

These aren’t fringe cases—they’re some of the most common, beloved native species in the South. All of these species are native and can be considered aggressive. They aren’t considered invasive, however, because they have been around since the “European colonization” period that defines when a species is considered native or non-native. 

The definition of native disallows the added tag of invasive, so no matter how aggressively these species behave, they’re still perfectly acceptable and you are welcome to plant as many as you wish.

Now I know anyone in disagreement with this will readily point out that one of the traits an “invasive” plant exhibits is its destructive nature:

• changes in the local ecology

• warping the soil structure

• forming monocultures that displace other species

• displacing local fauna and insects

I contend the plants listed above can and will do some of the same things:

• Wax Myrtle: Spreads aggressively by root suckers—forming dense, uniform thickets.

• Yaupon Holly: Creates solid walls of evergreen foliage and can outcompete grasses and other plants. It can dominate acres of disturbed or fire‑suppressed land and in many southern forests, yaupon monocultures are a major restoration challenge.

• Sweetgum: Colonizes open ground fast, creates dense stands that suppress other species. Foresters, land managers, and ecologists frequently characterize the sweetgum as an aggressive, nuisance, or "weed" tree. They often refer to it as “the kudzu of trees.”

• Switchcane: Our native bamboo; spreads by rhizomes and forms pure cane‑brakes. It can exclude nearly everything else. It’s historically important, ecologically valuable—but still a monoculture former.

• Eastern Redcedar: Especially in fire‑suppressed areas—it can seed prolifically and create dense stands that shade out grasses and wildflowers. 

While all these native species exhibit traits that award a non-native the “invasive” label, they are perfectly acceptable in our landscapes because the definition does not allow the invasive tag to be applied. 

There is also no doubt that all these species do provide many benefits to the local ecology as well. They fully support the local wildlife and insect populations, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t doing some harm at the same time. Many non-natives—even invasive ones—also have positive intrinsic value, but are overlooked because they have already been labeled “bad guy.” 

As I’ve said in the other essays, the only thing the non-native invasive needs is time and our patience. Nature will eventually corral it and keep it in check.

You also have to consider that the cat is out of the bag and the horse is out of the barn. These species are in the wild and full eradication is impossible. We can manage where we can—sensitive areas that are more ecologically important—but the other areas should just be left to nature and time.

I honestly don’t have all the answers—if any at all. I just know how I feel and how I think some things should be handled. I’ve never met a plant that was mean or malicious. They’re just doing what every living thing does—trying to survive. If things ever go truly sideways for us, I hope we can tap into that same resilience and tenacity.

In the meantime, I hope this warms a few hearts and opens the door to a little more acceptance. Total eradication of every non native aggressive plant isn’t just impractical—it’s unnecessary. We can protect the places that need protecting and let nature do what it has always done everywhere else.

Happy Gardening 🌱