I see a fair number of submissions that are signs identifying a plant, often with latin name, common name, sometimes a few other words about it. The signs are relatively professional, engraved, etc, but they’re mostly plastic and they’re typically posted on metal stakes or glued to smallish rocks laying on the ground.
Around here, those would be blown away in a few weeks and so wouldn’t qualify as “permanent”. And I wonder if gardeners might just uproot and move them every now and then.
While nominally interesting, they don’t seem to me like the sort of place I’d want to plan a trip to see, not even a short walk.
How are other people reviewing these?
I accept these, as they are educational nature signs, informing of the type of tree/plant, and find them worth exploring. They are meant to be permanent, even if they are just on a stake pushed into the ground, and many may also be there as the trees and plants may be a part of a larger garden and/or abortorium.
I would bet that whoever maintains these areas will take notice if a certain tree or plant has lost a sign due to weather damage or even someone just being dumb and removing them, but again, they are meant typically to be permanent markers for the trees/plants for educational and informative purposes.
I know of a church that just uses engraved plaques on a stake for the memorial trees that they have, and I’ve never seen any of them removed due to weather or any kind of damage, and this church is in an area where wind gets quite heavy, snow happens, etc. I’ve walked by many times, and still see the memorial plaques in the ground (memorial plaques are not eligible, but just giving an example that these are not as easy to remove as one may think).
5 Likes
Yes — mostly all accepted in my area. Voted up as place to explore.
2 Likes
It also occurs to me that these are pretty easy to abuse. I just make one and label it “Sign” or “Tree”, perhaps with some obscure latin included. Plant it, shoot it, submit it. Then pick it up and move it to the next spot. Cheaper than little libraries.
Not that I’ve noticed anyone doing this. Yet. 
1 Like
I really dislike the temporary looking ones on every tree and bush. I love them when I am shown significance like a trail to follow, etc.
3 Likes
I submitted all the ones I could find at a local park maintained and used for educational purposes by a college. I even recorded the trail and uploaded the route to open street maps to help confirm the locations and to make the trail visible in Pokémon Go. The signs definitely get abused 
but I’m confident the college helps to keep the signs in place and if I see a sign knocked over I do my best to reseat it in it’s appropriate place.
1 Like
That sounds like the kind I would like. I have submitted some on this tree id trail:
https://www.carync.gov/home/showdocument?id=19757
This is similar to trail markers. The focus should be on the function of the object.
It does need to look as though it is intended to be permanent. So not a printed piece of card.
It is then a case of a judgement call as to whether the information it contains is educational.
2 Likes
Plant identification signs are subjective. And even if you generally love them - one answer doesn’t fit all.
If they look temporary, mark them as such.
If they look non-professional, you could also mark as temporary (or abuse - another subjective decision).
PS: Also the nominator can resubmit with evidence of its permanence. Better to make them do that, than to risk getting loads of spam in the system.
1 Like