Right, but like -- how do we know that's bad? Could it be that covering the ground is actually _better_ for certain species to thrive which has a net positive effect on the ecosystem (I don't know, but it's not clear from the passing mention that garlic mustard is out-competing other species.
The idea that we could return to a world where there are only native species in an ecosystem is totally insane. I'm not suggesting that we should let all native species die off, or be left to fight it out for themselves without human intervention. But focusing on presence of native species as an indicator for ecosystem health doesn't seem to be a helpful measure.
Right, but like -- how do we know that's bad? Could it be that covering the ground is actually _better_ for certain species to thrive which has a net positive effect on the ecosystem (I don't know, but it's not clear from the passing mention that garlic mustard is out-competing other species.
The idea that we could return to a world where there are only native species in an ecosystem is totally insane. I'm not suggesting that we should let all native species die off, or be left to fight it out for themselves without human intervention. But focusing on presence of native species as an indicator for ecosystem health doesn't seem to be a helpful measure.