I, too have issues with the Evil trees - I have neighbors on either side who have 2 full grown trees each! I only have space for one dwarf peach tree because of all the shade (I do have several bushes & small trees like Rose of Sharon). I've been here 18 years now and have learned a thing or two about gardening under these trees since it's either the roots putting out the poison or the dripline killing my plants. It took me years to figure out the rain barrels I was using for the veggie garden was truly wiping out my tomatoes & cucumbers every season by the 4th of July & now I use straw bales to grow them so the poison doesn't touch them. I've found a lot of plants they say will work, don't & a lot that do. It's a matter of trial & error. I remove the plants asap when I notice them succumbing to poison & rinse off the roots thoroughly, then plant in new soil elsewhere (If I can save them in time). Sometimes it works, sometimes not. Ive lost all my Columbine except the wild Michigan ones that are protected- my Mom's friend received permission to take some, & I got her "extras", too! So, I'm helping save a protected species while getting columbines in my gardens! Yay!!! Feel free to contact me to ask any questions. Here's a great link to get you started (tho I have plants growing that here say no & plants that should but don't...): https://www.oakgov.com/msu/Documents/publications/oc0280_black_walnut.pdf

Some one said the highbush cranberry tasted bad, but sometimes the European (Viburnum opulus) gets confused with the American (Viburnum Trilobum) and the European is more medicinal. There is suppose to be a 3rd high bush cranberry type around Canada or Alaska that tastes best of all. But, besides those viburnum there's other edible varieties like the black haw (Viburnum Prunifolium), nannyberry (Viburnum lentago), wild raisin (several edible viburnum share that name), hobble bush Viburnum is said to have " consistency of stewed prunes with a bit of clove like spicy fragrance". The native northern fly honeysuckle (lonicera villosa) is edible, and I read a source saying it was used in the breeding program to make honey berries. I have not read to much information on that, but it's likely. I saw its seeds being sold on Etsy. It doesn't make many berries and they are small, but the hackberry (Celtis occidentalis) is said to have berries with a thin sugary pulp, and the seeds crushed with water are edible and is said to taste of almond milk. Looking at ground covers, besides partridgeberry, wintergreen, cranberry, lingonberry, or snowberry, there's the ground cherries you could try. It's leaves and unripe fruit is poisonous, but they are sweet tasting berries when ripe.

Sara, I am in the middle of the book, "Gingko" which you suggested above and cannot put it down! (Maybe the GardenWeb should start a botanical/horticultural book of the month club. LOL) A question occurs to me and I don't remember it being addressed in the book up to this point. 'Gingko biloba', as the name suggests, describes how leaves are commonly divided into two distinct lobes in most cases. But I see there is a LOT of variation in this respect and some leaves are divided, some not (apparently on the same tree). Will go out later to assess my own specimen (right now chillin' in the shade as it's been HOT, HOT, HOT here). Curiously, in the book, Crane describes earlier species of Ginkgo (now extinct) that had MUCH more prominently lobed leaves than the modern, surviving, relic species. So, I guess my question is..., why all the variation of leaf design within the 'modern' Gingko biloba? Do other trees show such variation within the same species or even on the very same tree? My thinking is that the more deeply lobed leaves are more wind resistant than a non-lobed leaf structure, but just speculating. P.S., For all those who feel protected from the supposed stench of the female fruit, Crane's book documents supposedly MALE trees that apparently crossed gender barriers and went on to produce female fruit (known as "leaky males"; they are much more common apparently than "leaky females"..., as in terms of biological survival, you only need a few (pollen-abundant) males around to fertilize the female who carries the all-important seed to the next generation.

The shrubs up against your foundation have not been properly pruned. Either google how to prune shrubs or get a book on it (I recommend a book, can refer back to it every year). Too late for a hard prune this year to revitalize the foliage, but don't continue a bad habit. If it were me, I'd tear them out because it looks like your house is stucco and I wouldn't want something that holds moisture in the winter that close to the house. Maybe it's not stucco but the moisture issue is a thing in your zone and area due to weather. But anyway, shrubs should be planted at least three feet out from the house and four is better. They also look like burning bush, which is invasive although in your situation doesn't look like they would invade anyplace . . . I prefer fothergilla, just as pretty in the fall and has beautiful scented spring flowers, and is native to boot. Won't work if the spot is sunny. Another nice and super easy to maintain shrub is Myrica pennsylvanica, which is northern bayberry. It's almost evergreen. But it has no fall color, just green all the time. Easy to prune though. Same with the smaller spireas like magic carpet, although again, no nice fall foliage but stunning summer flowers. Not saying you have to remove the shrubs though. Just some alternatives if you decide to tear them out and start over. Again, this is just my .02, but I always measure the space and try to find a shrub that naturally will top out about as big as I want it, rather than a shrub that I constantly have to prune to keep in shape. YMMV. The only downside is when you first plant a smaller growing shrub, they do tend to look skimpy the first couple of years but after than you are golden. You can plant some annuals around the area to fill in while you wait for the shrubs . . .