Common Weeds of the United States [Paperback]

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: June 1, 1971

Covers 220 important weeds with illustrations, maps, botanical information, plant lore for each. Over 225 illustrations. "It is good to have this helpful and attractive book easily available at a very reasonable price." — Phytologia.

Product Details

• Paperback: 463 pages
• Publisher: Dover Publications; 2nd edition (June 1, 1971)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0486205045
• ISBN-13: 978-0486205045
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6.5 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #584,946 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

60 of 61 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Identify the wild green in your path!, June 10, 2000

By 

S. Stine (USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Common Weeds of the United States (Paperback)

The black ink line drawings by Regina O'Hughes, prepared from herbarium specimens, are exquisite in detail and scientific accuracy and are works of art, besides. The nearly 500 pages, drawings on right hand page (9 inches by nearly 7 inches), text and distribution map on left hand page, make this a comprehensive, yet easy to understand and use, reference book. First published in 1970 by the United States Department of Agriculture, this Dover republication book is a tremendous value for the money and its contents are as timely today as they were 30 years ago. These are the plants that Peterson Field Guides ignored. The book contains an extensive bibliography for those who want to further their study of these amazing plants. This book is definitely worth 5 stars!

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Older but interesting piece to my collection, November 9, 2008

By 

Coderpitt "Pitt" (Texas) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Common Weeds of the United States (Paperback)

This book has some common weeds. Most of my books are for identification of grasses, trees, wetland plants, and flowers. Sometimes the weeds don't fall into those categories and I've found them in this book rather than some of the others. It's an older book, so some of the names might have changed, but with online sources and/or a checklist like the Vascular Plants of Texas the older names don't hurt.

4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Outdated, outdated, of historical interest perhaps, June 1, 2010

By 

Elizabeth A Triano "lizziewriter" (In Transition, NY (watch this space)) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Common Weeds of the United States (Paperback)

I picked this book up secondhand to add to my collection of similar volumes. Mostly I use Weeds of the Northeast (Comstock books) and also National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Wildflowers--E: Eastern Region - Revised Edition, but quite a few others as well, some out of print. This one is so outdated that it's basically useless.

The drawings are detailed, yes, and there is one for almost every plant. Very nice. There is no listing at all for Heracleum / Giant Hogweed, which has become a health hazard in some areas. Poison ivy and poison oak are listed as completely separate species with no indication of the range of appearance -- and no mention of the "Toxicodendron" taxonomy now preferred. (Regarding poison ivy, I very much like this book: The Poison Ivy, Oak and Sumac Book: A Short Natural History and Cautionary Account.) The lack of attention to detail in getting the names right is appalling. I must admit that the listing for "hemp" (Cannabis sativa) is pretty cute. I would like to be able to field ID hemp dogbane, which we do have in my area, but I can't yet, and the entry in this book isn't any help either. I suspect that for some plants nothing replaces a living person pointing out that first example.

The book has a copyright date of 1970 but really feels more like a relic of the 1950s. I am writing this in 2010. Aside from the cute listing for "hemp," and the historical value of the range maps, I can see no reason for this book to take up shelf space as an actual field reference item. Not to say people may not find it of value as part of a collection of USDA titles, or for the drawings. It's useless to me. I wish they'd come out with an updated version.