My guess would be honey suckle, possibly Lonicera tartarica
I don't really want to completely eliminate it because it does create nice cover, but I am trying to kill the honeysuckle that is growing close to native shrubs like plums, hazel and dogwoods.
Right now (may change) my take on bush honeysuckle and buckthorn is to use them to my advantage for deer and to attempt to prevent them spreading to new areas.
Guys, I really do get what you're saying. But please consider that often what we want just isn't compatible with reality. An alcoholic may just want to have a glass of wine with dinner or drink a toast at his daughter's wedding. He might even pull it off for awhile. But reality will eventually become apparent, usually with the realization that control has been lost.
I'm not advocating on ecological grounds - we'll probably never be able to put the genie back in the bottle. I'm advocating from the position of, "Why would you let this happen to your piece of heaven?" I don't mean to tell anyone what to do - I respect your opinions and how you want to run your places. I just don't understand how someone could put so much care and work to improve a place and then risk it all by letting this stuff get a foothold. I strongly speak out against the invasive honeysuckles (primarily lonicera maackii) so that you can make your own informed decision. IMO the benefits cited are insignificant when weighed against the (probable) potential for disaster. And the benefits cited can be achieved with alternative plants that are of greater wildlife value in every way. Why risk it?
It makes me sick when I look at pictures and treestand video of what my place looked like when I bought it and think about how much easier it would have been to control the honeysuckle then. I had no idea what it would become. I apologize for yet another "rant against the plant". I just believe in the message.
"Wildlife" value means so many different things to different people. To hunters, it generally means is an area good for deer, pheasants, grouse, turkey, etc. To a DNR employee it may mean is it good for some endangered songbird, butterfly, beetle, etc. Neither is right or wrong...but I do believe that when hunters pay for the management of these lands, hunters should benefit.
kskid...I certainly respect your passion and opinion on the subject of bush honeysuckle. Not that many years ago I would have been saying the exact same things. I have seen first hand what it can do over a span of time. There was no bush honeysuckle on my old place when I was a kid, but by the time I was in my mid 20's it had begun the takeover. By the time I sold in my mid 40's it had formed a monoculture in a few spots. So had the buckthorn...
I fought them both for many years by hand and with chemicals. The neighbors did not...I lost.
Here on my new place I have areas of monoculture of ironwood and prickly ash, I'd take honeysuckle over the ironwood but not the prickly ash. When I create new forest openings the first thing that moves in is prickly ash. I've found zero new, young bush honeysuckles popping up, of course that doesn't mean things won't change as time goes on. If they do, I'll go back to waging war on the stuff.
I could open it up for DIY'ers....but I won't ;)
I have one guy and his brother who I'd trust to not sue me for cutting their legs off here, but that's about it. They're coming out tomorrow to take down some dead ash and elm in a spot where I want them removed. They won't be allowed to wander all over taking out ironwood though. The ironwood's going to get hinged or dropped and left to rot.
Pretty sure the reason the ironwood is thick here is due to the land having cattle on it for years before I bought it (no more). Ironwood is obviously not a preferred food for cattle (or deer).