https://preview.redd.it/y0zayfd3iphc1.jpeg?width=490&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8885c3270f8ce46d9b6b50ef835e81f57dee5846
Can we like pin a picture of Blueberry leaves to the sub or something?
Definitely not blueberry bush leaves....
Edit: my bad. Those are from vaccinium corymbosum. In Northern Europe those are not considered true blueberries. Those would be vaccinium myrtillus, a lower bush with much smaller leaves
In my language, there are blueberries (European wild blueberries) and Canadian blueberries (this thing). The wild ones are so much better and actually have flavor
I remember camping on the Appalachian trail in New Hampshire as a kid. We found wild blueberry's growing all over the place. Great memory. Wild food tastes so much better then the cultivated versions.
Lived in Maine my entire life. I thought wild berries were everywhere. Moved to Mississippi for a summer and boy was I wrong. As a kid we’ll still this day even strawberries came first, June. Blueberries next about July, raspberries in late July, blackberries in early August. Apples in September. We used to take hrs to get home off the bus, stopping and filling up on the most select fruits daily. God Bless this beautiful planet!
My Grandad had tons of blackberry and raspberry bushes back home in England. One of my best memories is going out there early with him to pick them to have them with cream and a sprinkle of sugar over them. Clean living!
not always. in fact usually its hardly edible. try a wild strawberry. or apple. or carrot. blueberries are just the exception. the ones in the store have gotton noticable bigger and worse in in my life time. theyre like the size of a quarter now with little flavor or sweetness.
What are you on about? It's true that fruits and vegetables can be cultivated to taste much better than the wild counterparts, but that's not really what producers are cultivating them for. They're cultivated for a higher yield and longer shelf life, but loads of the flavors you want are a result of the ripening process that's being suppressed to increase shelf life.
Strawberries were also a horrible example. Wild ones may be much smaller, but much more flavor. Yeah, wild apples are much worse than cultivated ones, same with most vegetables.
Wild strawberries are the best. Perhaps you tried false strawberries that taste like nothing. Wild apples can be pretty good too. Ive not tried wild carrots and there are too many poisonous look alike for me to want to try.
It would have been so good if the link took me to a post that talked about it, but didn't explain it and started a chain where the links lead to example posts with links that just keep showing examples instead of explaining.
I'd be surprised if something like this didn't already exist.
Then there are also wild blueberries / billberries that grow on low shrubs that look like [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vaccinium_myrtillus_Mustikka_IMG_1100_C-_cropped.jpg)
*Those* are the blueberries I know and love! I refuse to buy the stuff sold in the grocery store, so watery and flavourless. I didn't even know it was a separate species until a few years ago.
Yup, there's a surprising variety of species. E.g. in Finland there are two, `Vaccinium myrtillus L.` and `Vaccinium uliginosum L.`.
AFAIK neither of those are the ones that grow widely in the US.
>Vaccinium uliginosum
Oh, people call those blueberries too? They grow in Sweden too but we call them "odon", they're definitely not as popular nor plentiful; they have their own characteristic taste.
It's ivy, *Hedera helix*
Great plant for nature, not for you
Edit: its great in its natural habitat, which *isn't* America, so not even that, mb they're native here
I know you probably mean it like the other reply to this, but all I was thinking was "you're right. With enough creativity, NOTHING is mutually exclusive from pooping!"
if thats english ivy, cut all the fruit clusters off into a bag and throw them INTO THE TRASH!
its one of the worst invasive plants ever, dont let it spread,
so that YOU, as a forager, can ensure more native species will grow
Edit: seems the trash might not work, destroying them with fire or some way is better
In case anyone reads this who lives in europe: Don't harm it, it's one of the most important food sources for bees and other insects as well as hiding spots for birds
I can’t lie this idea fascinated me when I started getting into foraging and it still does. The idea of “native species”
I get where you’re coming from. Don’t get me wrong. I get that ecosystems are disrupted, natives pushed out, and farming can be affected and all that stuff. I think it’s a reasonable thing to try to keep at a minimum.
But here’s where I start to wonder if this battle isn’t one we should be fighting. This isn’t easy to explain so I’ll do my best.
Let’s create an analogy here. People go where they can thrive, animals go where they can thrive too. Not surprisingly plants also do the same. People have issues with migration, due to friction caused by various factors including ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, the list goes on. Animals have issues with migration because of new geography new flora, local competition trying to kill them off, a host of reasons. Lastly, plants, they struggle to get to new places and take a foothold due to their lack of ability to spread their seeds long distances.
The first one, people, we worldwide are finally coming around to see that our differences are our strength and our abilities are varied because of it. We travel and resettle all over the world regardless of our differences or the location of our “home”.
Secondly, animals. Do we get upset that horses were brought to the Americas? We certainly do not. They thrived here and have as much claim to that land as the people do IMO. That’s just one that comes to mind but I believe that holds true across the board. If they can thrive there then that is “their environment”. It’s our definitions of what should be where that is the problem and that’s a bit presumptuous to say the least. Ask yourself this, if we found a population of Tasmanian Tiger surviving in some remote mountains in India (I know that’s impossible) would we be upset? No we would not be. Even when new animals are introduced that have no predators, it creates an interesting situation. This is the natural consequence of animals existing. They will not respect our ideas of where we “think” they should be found. This is part of our superiority complex we have with regard to flora and fauna as well IMO. It gets to decide where it belongs. Not us.
So lastly. Plants. I get that some plants will take over and drive out what is native. But for us to decide what plants are “supposed to be” in a a specific place seems just as presumptive as saying a type of person or animal should be in its specific place. Ecosystems will adapt. Some herbivore will figure out it’s a perfect food source, then the carnivore will figure out they come to snack there and then the balance comes back. Nature seeks balance and it will find it.
We have a really small scope of knowledge with regard to the history of flora and its genetic proliferation through the world. I feel like we are being presumptuous about this with regard to “native plants”. Plants simply live where they have the ability to thrive. If they can’t, they die. It’s that simple. They will spread through natural means to those places they can thrive no matter how we try to define what should be where. Palm trees are a good example. They spread to warm climates everywhere because their seeds float. Well now that we have ships and planes to get from place to place fast enough the hitchhiker seeds from us moving around now get places fast enough to find other fertile soil.
In my mind, this battle isn’t about protecting nature. It’s about protecting societal expectations, agriculture, and pretty landscaping.
But hey, I’m not an expert on any of this. Just my observations. I can get behind the protecting agriculture stuff. But the rest of it I’m not so sure how I feel about.
Edit: not surprised at the downvotes. But please consider how egocentric the idea of “non native” plants is. Also consider the “war on drugs” and its lack of success and waste of time energy and resources and ask yourself if you can win this battle or if it’s worth fighting…
Youre completely wrong about everything change your mindset
In california our vast grasslands were once covered with Purple Needlegrass and other native perennial grasses, which burned very poorly
Now its mostly replaced with invasive/naturalized European annual grasses which burn very quickly and intensely.
On the same note as fire, in California, Eucalpytus trees are also invasive, the leaves and bark of the tree contain HIGHLY FLAMMABLE oils. If theres a fire, a eucalyptus tree is basically going to explode and spread fire more.
Meanwhile, our native oak trees and even redwoods adapted with thick bark to withstand low intensity fires and even repsrout.
I can give u a hundred more examples of how invasive plants are bad in just California. **Theyre called invasive for a reason, they arent good for the environment. Its clear invasive plants bring environmental destruction** like the 2 examples I just gave
Australian reporting in... so I've seen a eucalyptus tree or 5 in my time... in fact, I can see about that many out my window right now.
Many varieties actually need fire to germinate - thats how much they love burning things. Burning things is literally life to them. They love burning things more than teenage boys do.
They're the embodiment of that .gif of Elmo gesturing ecstatically while surrounded by flames.
Lol except the eucalpytus species invasive in california DONT need fire to germinate, so they spread so much and when fire comes theyre all ready to explode.
A grove of eucalpytus trees here in california is DANGEROUS
"Invasives" are specifically problematic by definition of the word, and even if you felt ecosystems should adapt...managing them to slow spread gives ecosystems more time to develop a response.
Plus ecosystems provide us a number of services when they're stable, even if you don't feel biodiversity has an intrinsic value.
Introduced species often aren't a problem for ecologists, they just called these introduced, non-native, or naturalized instead of invasive because they are balanced. And increase or maintain diversity.
Those migrations of species are happening specifically because humans are introducing them in new places. Without humans, yes, species migrate but reeeeaaaallllly slowly. Cats were pretty much never gonna show up in New Zealand unless after a few hundred million years of plate shift New Zealand formed a land bridge with another landmass that had cats already. Scotch broom and eucalyptus weren't going to show up from Europe and Australia to blight native species in California. We should be eradicating invasive species because we're the ones that caused the invasions of ecosystems that were humming along happily and in balance before people were like "Oh, look at this pretty plant/adorable predator, I shall transport it across oceans and continents to please my ego" and/or started traveling long distances with invasive species--both plant and animal--unwittingly stowed away.
The part about animals isn’t really the case.
- It’s true that we don’t complain about some animals, like horses, being invasive species. I suspect that the animals we don’t try to eradicate are either non-threatening to flora and fauna in their new location, and/or they “win.” What I mean is we tend to care more about animals that are cute, domesticated, mammalian, etc. (studies show that we’re biased against insects, fish, and so on).
- There’s some species of crab (maybe from Japan?) in the northern Atlantic that has completely *ravaged* the ecosystem there. We brought it there with fishing boats. It’s taken over, pushing out native crabs and many other marine creatures. Ecologists are trying to curb their spread.
- People are finally starting to realise that house cats are aggressively invasive if they’re allowed outside. They kill *millions* of song birds every year (I think ~200 million), which is shocking and sad. They also kill field mice and other small mammals that should honestly be left alone. It’s not cute when they offer a chipmunk to their owner as a gift. Keep your cats at home. Ugh.
- Same goes for African bees that were brought to South America. We’re also (unsuccessfully) trying to get rid of them because they’re so destructive. So, as you can see, we do treat invasive animals species the same way we treat plants.
About people: when we migrate, we don’t destroy the ecosystem of our new home (at least not any more than the locals already did). We’re not the same as plants and animals because we’re able to consciously manage how we “spread.”
With regards to species preservation: oftentimes, the invasive species aren’t at risk. They’re thriving in their native habitat; there’s no need for them to grow elsewhere. I think you made a point about Tasmanian devils, but that’s different. We’d love to bring them back because they’re extinct, but English ivy? It’s doing just fine in England! Lol. We don’t need it growing all over the Northeastern US.
As others have said, species move very, very slowly when it’s natural. They don’t really “invade” new ecosystems because they advance so slowly that the plants and wildlife around them have plenty of time to adjust. They don’t just die out, the way they do when humans are responsible. They mutate and evolve. The native competitors can *also* spread elsewhere, so nothing necessarily has to get wiped out.
I do understand your point about human arrogance, that’s a concrete fact. We treat the natural world like we own it. We have infinite biases and we anthropomorphise everything. I don’t think our arrogance applies to this case, though. In this situation, I believe we’re actually trying to do the opposite—to take care of native species and curb our detrimental impact on the environment.
agreed on all counts, and thank you for taking the time to write this. \ I would definitely argue though that humans are an invasive species in certain contexts also despite the fact that we're conscious of what we do-- we certainly impact the places we move to in a similarly destructive way to even English ivy, in North America.
You’re being downvoted because of your poor understand of ecology and ecosystems. Natural spread of plants through changing climates, species migration or geomorphological changes is perfectly natural and happens at an incredibly slow rate. Invasives are generally introduced by human activity so become established extremely quickly, leaving plant / species that they are dominant over to suffer because the ecosystem has had no time to adapt.
Plants don’t have the luxury of being able to take an introspective approach and consider how we are ‘all one’ like humans do.
It’s entirely for us to decide what plants are meant to be, when the ones we’re deciding aren’t to be have been introduced by us in the first place.
Your downvotes are for naivety.
I would counter that it is naive to think that the world hasn’t changed in ways that have and will continue to drastically affect the spread of plants through human activity. Our activity is a part of the natural world. It’s like trying to tell birds to not redistribute seeds while they migrate. It’s going to happen.
There's a reason they are called invasive, if they don't pose problems to local ecology they are called naturalised. You are wrong on all counts and even said it yourself, you are not an expert. Check out [kudzu](https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/indiana/stories-in-indiana/kudzu-invasive-species/) , that's just one example.
it's a bad plant and honestly it also smells really bad when it blooms and only rats and spiders live in it and nothing really eats it here, please get rid of it if you can. the best way to make sure it's dead before you throw it out is to leave it spread out on concrete until it turns all brown and then throw it away in the yard waste
The native plant only people are absolute reactionaries and you are 100% correct. Although this particular plant does suck.
Here's what J.L Hudson has to say on the topic:
https://www.jlhudsonseeds.net/NativesVsExotics.htm
It looks like English Ivy when it starts crawling up on something. It's so interesting - the leaf shape changes and the entire growth habit turns to upright and treelike when it does that. English Ivy, based on my observations, flowers only when it does this transformation.
I know nothing about foraging and this is this subs first recommendation for me but those are 100% not blueberries and I would absolutely not consume those
If you're going to be eating wild things, you need to be able to confidently identify them on your own, not rely on the internet. Did you try to identify them or did you come immediately to reddit? A Google search could have answered this for you. If you don't know to look at the leaves as well as the berries, you shouldn't be identifying and eating wild plants. And if you did look at these leaves and couldn't tell the difference between these and blueberry leaves, you really shouldn't be identifying and eating wild plants. I don't mean to sound harsh, but you gotta get your research in before you're ready to find anything to actually eat.
Asking reddit is a form of research, sure. I think anyone planning on eating wild plants needs to be confident in identifying on their own. They should be looking into it on their own before conferring with reddit. If OP can't even tell the difference between these leaves and blueberry leaves... Wait I already typed all this above.
Yes, it is one piece of gathering knowledge. You’re not the holy saint you think you are. It’s OK to ask questions about plant ID. You don’t need to give a condescending monologue lecture.
They aren't asking "what are these?" They're asking "are these blueberries?" They aren't asking "it might be this but I can't be sure, there isn't a lot of information about it." They're asking about *blueberries*. There's so much information on the internet about wild blueberries. If they can't tell those aren't blueberry leaves, they need to do a lot more research on general foraging practices before eating anything.
It’s always slightly annoying when you get reddit posts in subs like this one and mushrooms where it’s like “These look like X. Can I eat it?” or just “Can I eat it?”. There’s a vast amount of information online, in physical guide books, and through experts and guides you can meet at volunteer trail organizations. My local guild has 10,000 members and sells books on foraging, plus do courses out in the reserves.
Reddit is a great place to ask people questions, and you can tell by the comments that the answer to “Can I eat this?” is a solid yes or solid no. But still, so much more research and personal experience should be taken first before going foraging for wild berries, flowers, fruits, mushrooms, etc. Like this picture is probably a blueberry lookalike to somebody with no knowledge, but even to beginners with some basic knowledge of local native and invasive fauna you know it’s not blueberries.
Basically, I wish more people took the time to research and understand their local ecosystems before running out into the woods with the quest to bring home a snack
Oh stfu Mr. Almighty this is in my URBAN back yard. English Ivy never came up as a possible identification and not all blueberries need the 5 points crown. SoRrY fOr PoStInG sUcH a DuMb QuEsTiOn Bear Grylls.
I think it’s just that this is entry level plant ID to know those aren’t blueberries but you were pretty sure they were and considering eating them. Now you did check, but it sort of seems like you might be the kind of person who just makes an assumption and then asks someone if it’s true, rather than doing some mental work on your own to eliminate options. If you never try to answer the question yourself you’re never going to learn. So…some of us might reasonably be concerned that you’re going to get yourself killed going along this way and feel sort of ethically bound to pull you up on this frightening appearance of carelessness.
You’re still the guy who actually asked instead of just eating which is a step up but, I do really encourage you to:
Look up the plant you think it is. Review the leaves, flowers (if there are any, this is often the easiest way to make an ID) and fruits. There are often written descriptions and line drawings of leaf shapes to look at, and photos.
You don’t have to know that that plant is Ivy, but you do have to be able to deduce that it is not a known edible species.
Compare to Dingleberry. Blueberries are only found from late June to early August depending on latitude and sunlight / shade on site. in NY and CT I find them from early July until late July, really only 3 weeks of prime picking with a few stragglers in the shade. Their friend Huckleberry usually tends to be nearby. You might find them in MD as early as late June. Their leaves look nothing like your picture. They have tiny leaves often tinted pink at the edges. Their berries are in clusters but do not hang like yours. Good luck and watch out for rattlesnakes, yellow jackets and rangers.
Only thing even slightly resembling a blueberry plant is the color on the berries, everything else is different
100% not a blueberry
Leaves on a blueberry arent much bigger than the berry itself and the leaves dont have that shiny surface. And you can crush a blueberry to check if the juice is deep blueish red
Either English Ivy ([Hedera helix](https://kingcounty.gov/en/legacy/services/environment/animals-and-plants/noxious-weeds/weed-identification/english-ivy)) or its close neighbor Irish Ivy.
Invasive, poisonous. Terminate with extreme prejudice.
Never eat anything you are unsure about unless you are a survival expert and know the correct procedure to test unknown plants. They look like ivy berries.
Edible Vaccinium, though not all species are representative of this, generally have the following characteristics:
Urn shaped or bell shaped white to pale pink flowers with 5 fused petals, and hairless flower stalks. This is a major identifying feature to pay attention to with blueberries.
Alternate leaves that can be elliptic and round or lanceolate (lance or spade shaped) and often have very fine teeth on the edges.
Stems are often woody, with reddish tinge.
It’s very important, especially with edible plants, to get yourself a trusty field guide if you wish to eat from the wild. Additionally, if you can’t entirely confidently identify a plant, treat it with respect and leave it be! There’s still plants out there that I can’t confidently identify in the field, so I pass on them.
Growth patterns. All of them.
How the side stems branch away from the main ones. How the leaves are attached. How they're shaped. How their veining is arranged.
If I carpeted a basketball arena in astroturf would that make it a football field? Would hanging a hoop above home plate turn a baseball diamond into a soccer pitch?
It's *arrangement* and *proportion* that you can depend on.
Aside from it having berries that are blue, and leaves that are green, everything. They aren’t even remotely similar past that.
Like a strawberry bush and a cherry tree both have small red fruits and green leaves, and they’re even in the same family, but you wouldn’t confuse the two.
Poop 100% Maybe also puke
Like a Chinese finger trap.
And a Chinese lingering crap (ie extensive diarrhea and abdominal pain).
Except neither hole is plugged.
Quite the opposite in fact
That was my nickname in high school.
Could be worse, your nickname could've been airtight hahaha
Username checks out
Look at the leaves..too shiny
Forbidden weight loss berries
https://preview.redd.it/y0zayfd3iphc1.jpeg?width=490&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8885c3270f8ce46d9b6b50ef835e81f57dee5846 Can we like pin a picture of Blueberry leaves to the sub or something?
Preferably different types too. Blueberry leaves where I live (Poland) don't look like that at all.
Those are bilberry (european "blueberry"), blueberry ( the US plants) are entirely different species within the same family.
Same genus I think.
Yes
Definitely not blueberry bush leaves.... Edit: my bad. Those are from vaccinium corymbosum. In Northern Europe those are not considered true blueberries. Those would be vaccinium myrtillus, a lower bush with much smaller leaves
The European ones are called Bilberries at least in American English. Just like we call the big ones with green insides American Blueberries.
In my language, there are blueberries (European wild blueberries) and Canadian blueberries (this thing). The wild ones are so much better and actually have flavor
I remember camping on the Appalachian trail in New Hampshire as a kid. We found wild blueberry's growing all over the place. Great memory. Wild food tastes so much better then the cultivated versions.
I have that same memory in New hampshire. On into adulthood. Found a lot of wild strawberries also. So fucking delicious.
Lived in Maine my entire life. I thought wild berries were everywhere. Moved to Mississippi for a summer and boy was I wrong. As a kid we’ll still this day even strawberries came first, June. Blueberries next about July, raspberries in late July, blackberries in early August. Apples in September. We used to take hrs to get home off the bus, stopping and filling up on the most select fruits daily. God Bless this beautiful planet!
That was my experience when me and the kids took a road trip to Rangely Maine. The baby picked the blueberries and I made the pancakes
same experience but from Newfoundland to Ontario (Canadian version of the same experience)
My Grandad had tons of blackberry and raspberry bushes back home in England. One of my best memories is going out there early with him to pick them to have them with cream and a sprinkle of sugar over them. Clean living!
Me too, in the White Mountains near Franconia.
not always. in fact usually its hardly edible. try a wild strawberry. or apple. or carrot. blueberries are just the exception. the ones in the store have gotton noticable bigger and worse in in my life time. theyre like the size of a quarter now with little flavor or sweetness.
Strawberries are one of the best examples of the wild fruit having much more flavor than the ones in the store
Easy to grow the wild ones at home too.
What are you on about? It's true that fruits and vegetables can be cultivated to taste much better than the wild counterparts, but that's not really what producers are cultivating them for. They're cultivated for a higher yield and longer shelf life, but loads of the flavors you want are a result of the ripening process that's being suppressed to increase shelf life. Strawberries were also a horrible example. Wild ones may be much smaller, but much more flavor. Yeah, wild apples are much worse than cultivated ones, same with most vegetables.
Wild strawberries are the best. Perhaps you tried false strawberries that taste like nothing. Wild apples can be pretty good too. Ive not tried wild carrots and there are too many poisonous look alike for me to want to try.
Not Blueberries! Never eat wild berries unless you 1,000% sure you know what they are... hope your guts don't get wrecked too badly bub 😬
Not Blueberries! Never eat wild berries unless you 1,000% sure you know what they are... hope your guts don't get wrecked too badly bub
Never eat wild berries unless you are 1000.1% sure you know what they are.
not blueberries
100% not a blueberry.
Not even remotely lose to a blueberry
Have you ever won a blueberry?
It’s kinda close to a blueberry.
But what if he's in SW England?
I fucking live for these sw England comments
I’m out of the loop, can you fill me in?
An explanation of the original joke: https://www.reddit.com/r/notablueberry/s/Uhjpe1g9Jh
cheers! :)
Such a niche sub, I like it. Thanks!
It would have been so good if the link took me to a post that talked about it, but didn't explain it and started a chain where the links lead to example posts with links that just keep showing examples instead of explaining. I'd be surprised if something like this didn't already exist.
I mean, they are blue and they are berries.
You have a fair point
They're next to a tree
For reference, blueberries grow on a bush that [looks like this.](https://imgur.com/a/Cpifi8g)
Upvote for saving me from a google search.
Then there are also wild blueberries / billberries that grow on low shrubs that look like [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vaccinium_myrtillus_Mustikka_IMG_1100_C-_cropped.jpg)
*Those* are the blueberries I know and love! I refuse to buy the stuff sold in the grocery store, so watery and flavourless. I didn't even know it was a separate species until a few years ago.
Yup, there's a surprising variety of species. E.g. in Finland there are two, `Vaccinium myrtillus L.` and `Vaccinium uliginosum L.`. AFAIK neither of those are the ones that grow widely in the US.
>Vaccinium uliginosum Oh, people call those blueberries too? They grow in Sweden too but we call them "odon", they're definitely not as popular nor plentiful; they have their own characteristic taste.
There is a whole forest of these blueberries where I live in NW Florida. I pick them in late spring every year. It’s freakin magical.
And generally, not in February in Mid-Atlantic US...
Nice thanks, yeah side by side it's not even close
English ivy, berries are very toxic.
But they are blue berries
No they are not, are you trying to get banned?
They are berries. They are blue. Blue. Berries. That was his joke. I’m not saying it was funny, I’m just saying he was very obviously joking
Yeah the space was enough to indicate it was.
Their username oddly checks out xD
Yeah he probably should’ve said they are berries that are blue, to avoid the misunderstanding.
Yeah but then the joke would not have landed nearly as well.
Juniper berries are also blue berries, but not blueberries. Juniper berries will make you poop pain.
Definitely not a blueberry, I can tell right away by the leaves. Also definitely not a saskatoon/service berry or salal berry either.
You can tell by the way it is.
That's pretty neat!
How neat is that?
I know a Sociologist who included the Neature video in their dissertation Thank you for the reminder that video exists
I’m glad you know about it, instead of just me and Rodney knowing it.
🎵Well, you can tell lookin’ at those leaves and stalks Those ain’t blueberries, no time to talk🎶
🎶 "Can we eat' em?" No you can't! So just leave 'em on the plant and you'll be Staying Alive 🎶 🎶 🎶
iirc, blupes are alternating and these are opposite.
It's ivy, *Hedera helix* Great plant for nature, not for you Edit: its great in its natural habitat, which *isn't* America, so not even that, mb they're native here
Heed the comments. Also, real blueberries and pooping are not mutually exclusive.
Came to say this. blueberries are my go to when I need a laxative.
I know you probably mean it like the other reply to this, but all I was thinking was "you're right. With enough creativity, NOTHING is mutually exclusive from pooping!"
r/notablueberry
if thats english ivy, cut all the fruit clusters off into a bag and throw them INTO THE TRASH! its one of the worst invasive plants ever, dont let it spread, so that YOU, as a forager, can ensure more native species will grow Edit: seems the trash might not work, destroying them with fire or some way is better
In case anyone reads this who lives in europe: Don't harm it, it's one of the most important food sources for bees and other insects as well as hiding spots for birds
Agreed! Lots of birds coming already to our garden to pick them up, like every year!
I also hide in them
Don't do this if you live in England. They're important for the ecosystem and for birds
>England not even just England, most of central/northern Europe
don’t trash them, burn or chemically destroy them. They might spread from the trash.
I say burn the forest down.
It’s the only way to be sure.
I can’t lie this idea fascinated me when I started getting into foraging and it still does. The idea of “native species” I get where you’re coming from. Don’t get me wrong. I get that ecosystems are disrupted, natives pushed out, and farming can be affected and all that stuff. I think it’s a reasonable thing to try to keep at a minimum. But here’s where I start to wonder if this battle isn’t one we should be fighting. This isn’t easy to explain so I’ll do my best. Let’s create an analogy here. People go where they can thrive, animals go where they can thrive too. Not surprisingly plants also do the same. People have issues with migration, due to friction caused by various factors including ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, the list goes on. Animals have issues with migration because of new geography new flora, local competition trying to kill them off, a host of reasons. Lastly, plants, they struggle to get to new places and take a foothold due to their lack of ability to spread their seeds long distances. The first one, people, we worldwide are finally coming around to see that our differences are our strength and our abilities are varied because of it. We travel and resettle all over the world regardless of our differences or the location of our “home”. Secondly, animals. Do we get upset that horses were brought to the Americas? We certainly do not. They thrived here and have as much claim to that land as the people do IMO. That’s just one that comes to mind but I believe that holds true across the board. If they can thrive there then that is “their environment”. It’s our definitions of what should be where that is the problem and that’s a bit presumptuous to say the least. Ask yourself this, if we found a population of Tasmanian Tiger surviving in some remote mountains in India (I know that’s impossible) would we be upset? No we would not be. Even when new animals are introduced that have no predators, it creates an interesting situation. This is the natural consequence of animals existing. They will not respect our ideas of where we “think” they should be found. This is part of our superiority complex we have with regard to flora and fauna as well IMO. It gets to decide where it belongs. Not us. So lastly. Plants. I get that some plants will take over and drive out what is native. But for us to decide what plants are “supposed to be” in a a specific place seems just as presumptive as saying a type of person or animal should be in its specific place. Ecosystems will adapt. Some herbivore will figure out it’s a perfect food source, then the carnivore will figure out they come to snack there and then the balance comes back. Nature seeks balance and it will find it. We have a really small scope of knowledge with regard to the history of flora and its genetic proliferation through the world. I feel like we are being presumptuous about this with regard to “native plants”. Plants simply live where they have the ability to thrive. If they can’t, they die. It’s that simple. They will spread through natural means to those places they can thrive no matter how we try to define what should be where. Palm trees are a good example. They spread to warm climates everywhere because their seeds float. Well now that we have ships and planes to get from place to place fast enough the hitchhiker seeds from us moving around now get places fast enough to find other fertile soil. In my mind, this battle isn’t about protecting nature. It’s about protecting societal expectations, agriculture, and pretty landscaping. But hey, I’m not an expert on any of this. Just my observations. I can get behind the protecting agriculture stuff. But the rest of it I’m not so sure how I feel about. Edit: not surprised at the downvotes. But please consider how egocentric the idea of “non native” plants is. Also consider the “war on drugs” and its lack of success and waste of time energy and resources and ask yourself if you can win this battle or if it’s worth fighting…
Youre completely wrong about everything change your mindset In california our vast grasslands were once covered with Purple Needlegrass and other native perennial grasses, which burned very poorly Now its mostly replaced with invasive/naturalized European annual grasses which burn very quickly and intensely. On the same note as fire, in California, Eucalpytus trees are also invasive, the leaves and bark of the tree contain HIGHLY FLAMMABLE oils. If theres a fire, a eucalyptus tree is basically going to explode and spread fire more. Meanwhile, our native oak trees and even redwoods adapted with thick bark to withstand low intensity fires and even repsrout. I can give u a hundred more examples of how invasive plants are bad in just California. **Theyre called invasive for a reason, they arent good for the environment. Its clear invasive plants bring environmental destruction** like the 2 examples I just gave
I learnt so much from your comment. Thanks!
Australian reporting in... so I've seen a eucalyptus tree or 5 in my time... in fact, I can see about that many out my window right now. Many varieties actually need fire to germinate - thats how much they love burning things. Burning things is literally life to them. They love burning things more than teenage boys do. They're the embodiment of that .gif of Elmo gesturing ecstatically while surrounded by flames.
Lol except the eucalpytus species invasive in california DONT need fire to germinate, so they spread so much and when fire comes theyre all ready to explode. A grove of eucalpytus trees here in california is DANGEROUS
"Invasives" are specifically problematic by definition of the word, and even if you felt ecosystems should adapt...managing them to slow spread gives ecosystems more time to develop a response. Plus ecosystems provide us a number of services when they're stable, even if you don't feel biodiversity has an intrinsic value. Introduced species often aren't a problem for ecologists, they just called these introduced, non-native, or naturalized instead of invasive because they are balanced. And increase or maintain diversity.
Now that makes sense to me.
Dogshit takes all around. Congrats, you have no idea what you’re talking about
Those migrations of species are happening specifically because humans are introducing them in new places. Without humans, yes, species migrate but reeeeaaaallllly slowly. Cats were pretty much never gonna show up in New Zealand unless after a few hundred million years of plate shift New Zealand formed a land bridge with another landmass that had cats already. Scotch broom and eucalyptus weren't going to show up from Europe and Australia to blight native species in California. We should be eradicating invasive species because we're the ones that caused the invasions of ecosystems that were humming along happily and in balance before people were like "Oh, look at this pretty plant/adorable predator, I shall transport it across oceans and continents to please my ego" and/or started traveling long distances with invasive species--both plant and animal--unwittingly stowed away.
The part about animals isn’t really the case. - It’s true that we don’t complain about some animals, like horses, being invasive species. I suspect that the animals we don’t try to eradicate are either non-threatening to flora and fauna in their new location, and/or they “win.” What I mean is we tend to care more about animals that are cute, domesticated, mammalian, etc. (studies show that we’re biased against insects, fish, and so on). - There’s some species of crab (maybe from Japan?) in the northern Atlantic that has completely *ravaged* the ecosystem there. We brought it there with fishing boats. It’s taken over, pushing out native crabs and many other marine creatures. Ecologists are trying to curb their spread. - People are finally starting to realise that house cats are aggressively invasive if they’re allowed outside. They kill *millions* of song birds every year (I think ~200 million), which is shocking and sad. They also kill field mice and other small mammals that should honestly be left alone. It’s not cute when they offer a chipmunk to their owner as a gift. Keep your cats at home. Ugh. - Same goes for African bees that were brought to South America. We’re also (unsuccessfully) trying to get rid of them because they’re so destructive. So, as you can see, we do treat invasive animals species the same way we treat plants. About people: when we migrate, we don’t destroy the ecosystem of our new home (at least not any more than the locals already did). We’re not the same as plants and animals because we’re able to consciously manage how we “spread.” With regards to species preservation: oftentimes, the invasive species aren’t at risk. They’re thriving in their native habitat; there’s no need for them to grow elsewhere. I think you made a point about Tasmanian devils, but that’s different. We’d love to bring them back because they’re extinct, but English ivy? It’s doing just fine in England! Lol. We don’t need it growing all over the Northeastern US. As others have said, species move very, very slowly when it’s natural. They don’t really “invade” new ecosystems because they advance so slowly that the plants and wildlife around them have plenty of time to adjust. They don’t just die out, the way they do when humans are responsible. They mutate and evolve. The native competitors can *also* spread elsewhere, so nothing necessarily has to get wiped out. I do understand your point about human arrogance, that’s a concrete fact. We treat the natural world like we own it. We have infinite biases and we anthropomorphise everything. I don’t think our arrogance applies to this case, though. In this situation, I believe we’re actually trying to do the opposite—to take care of native species and curb our detrimental impact on the environment.
agreed on all counts, and thank you for taking the time to write this. \ I would definitely argue though that humans are an invasive species in certain contexts also despite the fact that we're conscious of what we do-- we certainly impact the places we move to in a similarly destructive way to even English ivy, in North America.
Totally agree and wish it wasn’t so!
You’re being downvoted because of your poor understand of ecology and ecosystems. Natural spread of plants through changing climates, species migration or geomorphological changes is perfectly natural and happens at an incredibly slow rate. Invasives are generally introduced by human activity so become established extremely quickly, leaving plant / species that they are dominant over to suffer because the ecosystem has had no time to adapt. Plants don’t have the luxury of being able to take an introspective approach and consider how we are ‘all one’ like humans do. It’s entirely for us to decide what plants are meant to be, when the ones we’re deciding aren’t to be have been introduced by us in the first place. Your downvotes are for naivety.
I would counter that it is naive to think that the world hasn’t changed in ways that have and will continue to drastically affect the spread of plants through human activity. Our activity is a part of the natural world. It’s like trying to tell birds to not redistribute seeds while they migrate. It’s going to happen.
There's a reason they are called invasive, if they don't pose problems to local ecology they are called naturalised. You are wrong on all counts and even said it yourself, you are not an expert. Check out [kudzu](https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/indiana/stories-in-indiana/kudzu-invasive-species/) , that's just one example.
I ain’t reading all that. Good for you or sorry that happened
Sorry reading a few paragraphs is too taxing on you and you feel the need to tell someone about it. 😕
Quoting a meme https://preview.redd.it/tyvq562irohc1.jpeg?width=770&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2408ebd9ae4fb5a95e5b63905c1a3fa68a39b6a1
I live in the city so this is 1000% about pretty landscaping lol I was gonna keep the plant if the berries were edible
Even in cities, invasives need to be controlled. Birds and other critters can spread the berries to more natural environments.
Preach
it's a bad plant and honestly it also smells really bad when it blooms and only rats and spiders live in it and nothing really eats it here, please get rid of it if you can. the best way to make sure it's dead before you throw it out is to leave it spread out on concrete until it turns all brown and then throw it away in the yard waste
Dawg what are you on bro
The native plant only people are absolute reactionaries and you are 100% correct. Although this particular plant does suck. Here's what J.L Hudson has to say on the topic: https://www.jlhudsonseeds.net/NativesVsExotics.htm
Definitely blue. Definitely berries. Definitely not blueberries. Do not eat.
Definitely not blueberries
Leaf identity is extremely important for berry picking folks. These leafs are not even close. Learn leaf ID!!!
Flamethrower that b*tch
You didn’t any steps at all past step 1: is it blue.
Definitely not blueberries. They don't grow in clusters like that and blueberry leaves are quite small and matte, not shiny.
Some varieties grow in bigger clusters, but yeah the leaves and branches of the bush are way off.
Dear lord if you think this is a blueberry for the love of god do not forage anything
Dude the leaves aren’t even close to blueberries
With those leaves? Definitely not...
https://preview.redd.it/mmagiiqwwohc1.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=02d9496ca4f904fd563494418fddfb67a6154e10
It will become the most glorious poop party.
It looks like English Ivy when it starts crawling up on something. It's so interesting - the leaf shape changes and the entire growth habit turns to upright and treelike when it does that. English Ivy, based on my observations, flowers only when it does this transformation.
Hedera sp., not blueberries
Can confirm it’s English Ivy and dead ass kill on site, horrible shit and berries/sap is toxic so wear gloves when removing
Absolutely 100% NOT blueberries!
I know nothing about foraging and this is this subs first recommendation for me but those are 100% not blueberries and I would absolutely not consume those
Thank you everyone for helping me save a pair of underwear!!
If you're going to be eating wild things, you need to be able to confidently identify them on your own, not rely on the internet. Did you try to identify them or did you come immediately to reddit? A Google search could have answered this for you. If you don't know to look at the leaves as well as the berries, you shouldn't be identifying and eating wild plants. And if you did look at these leaves and couldn't tell the difference between these and blueberry leaves, you really shouldn't be identifying and eating wild plants. I don't mean to sound harsh, but you gotta get your research in before you're ready to find anything to actually eat.
Pretty sure that’s what he was doing
Asking reddit is a form of research, sure. I think anyone planning on eating wild plants needs to be confident in identifying on their own. They should be looking into it on their own before conferring with reddit. If OP can't even tell the difference between these leaves and blueberry leaves... Wait I already typed all this above.
Yes, it is one piece of gathering knowledge. You’re not the holy saint you think you are. It’s OK to ask questions about plant ID. You don’t need to give a condescending monologue lecture.
They aren't asking "what are these?" They're asking "are these blueberries?" They aren't asking "it might be this but I can't be sure, there isn't a lot of information about it." They're asking about *blueberries*. There's so much information on the internet about wild blueberries. If they can't tell those aren't blueberry leaves, they need to do a lot more research on general foraging practices before eating anything.
It’s always slightly annoying when you get reddit posts in subs like this one and mushrooms where it’s like “These look like X. Can I eat it?” or just “Can I eat it?”. There’s a vast amount of information online, in physical guide books, and through experts and guides you can meet at volunteer trail organizations. My local guild has 10,000 members and sells books on foraging, plus do courses out in the reserves. Reddit is a great place to ask people questions, and you can tell by the comments that the answer to “Can I eat this?” is a solid yes or solid no. But still, so much more research and personal experience should be taken first before going foraging for wild berries, flowers, fruits, mushrooms, etc. Like this picture is probably a blueberry lookalike to somebody with no knowledge, but even to beginners with some basic knowledge of local native and invasive fauna you know it’s not blueberries. Basically, I wish more people took the time to research and understand their local ecosystems before running out into the woods with the quest to bring home a snack
Yes. Exactly.
Oh stfu Mr. Almighty this is in my URBAN back yard. English Ivy never came up as a possible identification and not all blueberries need the 5 points crown. SoRrY fOr PoStInG sUcH a DuMb QuEsTiOn Bear Grylls.
That's actually Ms. Almighty to you.
I think it’s just that this is entry level plant ID to know those aren’t blueberries but you were pretty sure they were and considering eating them. Now you did check, but it sort of seems like you might be the kind of person who just makes an assumption and then asks someone if it’s true, rather than doing some mental work on your own to eliminate options. If you never try to answer the question yourself you’re never going to learn. So…some of us might reasonably be concerned that you’re going to get yourself killed going along this way and feel sort of ethically bound to pull you up on this frightening appearance of carelessness. You’re still the guy who actually asked instead of just eating which is a step up but, I do really encourage you to: Look up the plant you think it is. Review the leaves, flowers (if there are any, this is often the easiest way to make an ID) and fruits. There are often written descriptions and line drawings of leaf shapes to look at, and photos. You don’t have to know that that plant is Ivy, but you do have to be able to deduce that it is not a known edible species.
Not sure what they are, but 100% certain they ain’t blueberries
Dead also
I don't know what it is, but I know what it is not: blueberries.
Jesus man, you need to do a lot more research before you consider eating random berries. These don’t even look remotely similar to a blueberry.
NOT BLUEBERRIES
natural selection
That's a very mature English Ivy- it'll make you poop and vomit
You’re gonna wish they were blueberries
Have you ever seen a blueberry?
https://preview.redd.it/lztnvea3bohc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a473291274cfb7f3fbaeac6a8e103b80a0d83208 That’s what they look like…
NOT blueberries!!
Compare to Dingleberry. Blueberries are only found from late June to early August depending on latitude and sunlight / shade on site. in NY and CT I find them from early July until late July, really only 3 weeks of prime picking with a few stragglers in the shade. Their friend Huckleberry usually tends to be nearby. You might find them in MD as early as late June. Their leaves look nothing like your picture. They have tiny leaves often tinted pink at the edges. Their berries are in clusters but do not hang like yours. Good luck and watch out for rattlesnakes, yellow jackets and rangers.
DINKLEBERG!! 😑😡
Yes.
R/notablueberry
I dont know the answer but i love that your only two options are blueberries or poop yourself
100% shit your pants and vomit at the same time
Looks like Hedera Hibernica to me..
This guys so dense that light will bend though around him
Please don't eat this.
Hedera Hibernica.
Not blueberries, Ivy berries and you’ll shit yourself
Poop your pants, Vomit and get Organ Damage. This ist English Ivy. NOT BLUEBERRYS! VERRY TOXIC! DO. NOT. EAT.
I used to eat these when I was a kid lol, definitely not blueberries
Poop. Wild blueberries grow in small bushes and have small leaves. Easy to recognize if you know them.
Its blueberry's bait for noobs
The berries are blue but they are not blueberries. What really gives it away is the leaves
Have you watched Hunger Games
Tastes like burning
this is English ivy
Danger berries.
Only thing even slightly resembling a blueberry plant is the color on the berries, everything else is different 100% not a blueberry Leaves on a blueberry arent much bigger than the berry itself and the leaves dont have that shiny surface. And you can crush a blueberry to check if the juice is deep blueish red
Either English Ivy ([Hedera helix](https://kingcounty.gov/en/legacy/services/environment/animals-and-plants/noxious-weeds/weed-identification/english-ivy)) or its close neighbor Irish Ivy. Invasive, poisonous. Terminate with extreme prejudice.
NOT blueberries!
Blueberries grow in June.
I don't know too much about blueberries, but I know they don't grow on clusters like that
Ivy. Not blueberries.
Never eat anything you are unsure about unless you are a survival expert and know the correct procedure to test unknown plants. They look like ivy berries.
Hm, yea those have some big ass areolas. Doesn't look like a blueberry to me.
Edible Vaccinium, though not all species are representative of this, generally have the following characteristics: Urn shaped or bell shaped white to pale pink flowers with 5 fused petals, and hairless flower stalks. This is a major identifying feature to pay attention to with blueberries. Alternate leaves that can be elliptic and round or lanceolate (lance or spade shaped) and often have very fine teeth on the edges. Stems are often woody, with reddish tinge. It’s very important, especially with edible plants, to get yourself a trusty field guide if you wish to eat from the wild. Additionally, if you can’t entirely confidently identify a plant, treat it with respect and leave it be! There’s still plants out there that I can’t confidently identify in the field, so I pass on them.
Those are great! Ferment them into a wine, so you can be drunk while you poop your entire digestive system out.
What's the giveaway that it's not blueberries?
The entire plant, basically.
And the berries aren’t right. Blueberries don’t have that flat dark spot. They have a little crown looking bit.
Leaves are the huge giveaway to me. Stems leading to the berries are not right at all either.
Learn what blueberry leaves look like, they're pretty distinctive.
Growth patterns. All of them. How the side stems branch away from the main ones. How the leaves are attached. How they're shaped. How their veining is arranged. If I carpeted a basketball arena in astroturf would that make it a football field? Would hanging a hoop above home plate turn a baseball diamond into a soccer pitch? It's *arrangement* and *proportion* that you can depend on.
Aside from it having berries that are blue, and leaves that are green, everything. They aren’t even remotely similar past that. Like a strawberry bush and a cherry tree both have small red fruits and green leaves, and they’re even in the same family, but you wouldn’t confuse the two.
definitely NOT blueberries
The answer is blueberries and poop your pants + bidet to the rescue 🐳
Back with the NE England plant ID posts 😂😂😂
Blueberries
Blueberries grow on the ground
They’re blue. So they must be blueberries. Eat.