even if it was introduced, since its already there, the only reason i would get rid of it, would be if it was aggressive or invasive in your area. but thats me personally, others may have a different opinion. (i kind of take the live and let be philosophy for non aggressive plants that already exist.) i would ask a local nature preserve or your local NRCS office if they have any problems with it...they are ususally the first people "in the know" about that kind of stuff.

and i double checked the species this time before i posted...

its not aggressive in illinois and actually is quite desirable here ...great seed pods ... beautiful flowers... i particularly like b. bracteata but i have b. lactea in my plantings.

Thank you :)

Well I just came from the weeds of E. WA website and it is not listed on the class A, B, noxious list or C watch list for this area...but just to be sure I will contact the County ext. office/weed board...

Vera

I have 3 types of native indigo (baptisia xx)growing...and none of their leaves are fuzzy......

These leaves are not fuzzy either...B. bracteata has the fuzzy leaves.

Here is a link that might be useful: Plains Wild Indigo AKA Long-bracted Wild Indigo

OK..I think this plant is NOT a Baptisia at all! After recieving my Oct. issue of "The Garden Gate" and reading the discription and doing another google image search I think I have something else.
For all I know it's probably a weed, but I've not been able to see it anywhere else near by. The leaves are in 3's, narrow at the base and blunt at the tips and looks just like the Baptisia's. This is what is different:
There is a single base and the stems are alternately arrangeged and grow in a long horizontal pattern. Very open and airy. Overall blue/gray cast. It started out small and has grown to at least 4 feet this season.
If not Baptisia can you throw out a guess?

Thanks

Vera

sometime else that's not the same as Baptisia...there are not stipoles (sp?) at the base.
Using terminology from my plant ID book the arrangement of the leaves are palmatley trifoliolate on petioles...oooo I feel so smart..lol

Vera

i was going to try to insert a picture as a test - becaue i havent done this yet... thank you vera for letting me use your thread as a test site... i thought you might appreciate this photo...
{{gwi:1158817}}

Nice pic!
I've resigned to the fact what I have is NOT any of the Baptisia's. The 3-parted leaves on the Baptisia share a single petiole. I'm pretty sure it is something of the Fabacea family, but what I am stumped. Not a Lespedeza either....(sigh)
I'm hoping it will flower next year for a better ID. The waiting kills me!

Vera

Nice pic!
I've resigned to the fact what I have is NOT any of the Baptisia's. The 3-parted leaves on the Baptisia share a single petiole. I'm pretty sure it is something of the Fabacea family, but what I am stumped. Not a Lespedeza either....(sigh)
I'm hoping it will flower next year for a better ID. The waiting kills me!

Vera