ashe juniper--they're all in on it!
"Victor M. Martinez" wrote in message
... Babberney wrote: Well, now the editorial page endorses the description of this tree as a water-wasting invasive non-native (they stopped short of agreeing But it *is* a water-wasting invasive non-native, is it not? Before settlers stopped seasonal fires from occuring, this tree took over what used to be grasslands and suffocated the native grasses that used to thrive there. Amen to drying the multiple springs that used to provide water for the wildlife. -snip- Many juniper 'facts' are challenged he http://juniper1.home.texas.net/cedarstuff.html Among other tidbits, the author cites fossilized juniper pollen found in a cave in NW Bexar county, which would suggest that they are not non-native. Also that a study measured stemflow of water in a 10 foot juniper and found it varied seasonally from 22 liters/day in the rainy springtime to 3 liters/day in the summer months. I'm sure that there is pro-juniper 'spin' found on that website, but I am sure there is a lot of anti-juniper 'spin' commonly reported. The truth is probably in the middle somewhere. |
ashe juniper--they're all in on it!
Well, there is almost certainly some truth to both of the previous
posts here. The tree is a native, but Victor is correct in saying it has spread to areas where it previously didn't grow. As for the water wasting, I'm not familiar with the site Victor describes. What I do know is, all plants transpire. Water is pulled from the soil and evaporates from the leaves. They also create shade, which means less water evaporates directly from the soil. If you read the material in the ("pro-cedar") link already provided, you'll see a suggestion (presented as fact, so, yes, i suspect a bit of propaganda here as well) that the increased percolation will diminish over time as the oaks and other remaining plants extend their roots to take advantage of the extra moisture. Whether or not that is true, what I know about plants tells me that thay get water when and where they can, and they can't pull water from dry soil. Junipers in drought are not using the same amount of water that they will when it's raining. And they do not have some nefarious taproot reaching into the bowels of the aquifer to suck it dry. To be perfectly honest, I do not know how other species compare in terms of amount of water that flows through them (as I suspect is true of most, if not all, of the people who cite the juniper figures as proof that they suck it down too vigorously). But a big red flag goes up in my mind when I see that the non-native claim is always attached to the water-wasting one. It suggests that people with a grudge against the tree parrot every bad thing they hear about it without really looking into the facts, then refer to each other for evidence. I'm sure there are people managing their property carefully who may have seen benefits from their efforts (which may or may not be long-term effects), but the guys profiled in the paper do not give the impression that they will follow suit. They acknowledge they probably cannot kill all the "damn cedars," but they are still willing to try. Then they want to replace them all with live oaks--I know I don't have to explaiin the risks that go along with monoculture here. And they want us to forget the "dumb birds" and put people first--now there's a change in policy for you if I ever heard one. Put people first--why, it's downright revolutionary! As for the newspaper, they did finally contact me about the letter (in the past they've been much more prompt about this). They always say they are "considering publication," so you may or may not see my response in a day or two. I'm feeling a bit less smug in my counter-arguments than I was, but I still believe there are truths that are being ignored, and I hope my letter prompts some people to look into this further than they would have. k For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit http://www2.champaign.isa-arbor.com/. For consumer info about tree care, visit http://www2.champaign.isa-arbor.com/.../consumer.html |
ashe juniper--they're all in on it!
|
ashe juniper--they're all in on it!
|
ashe juniper--they're all in on it!
On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 16:52:01 GMT, (Babberney)
wrote: As for the newspaper, they did finally contact me about the letter (in the past they've been much more prompt about this). They always say they are "considering publication," so you may or may not see my response in a day or two. I'm feeling a bit less smug in my counter-arguments than I was, but I still believe there are truths that are being ignored, and I hope my letter prompts some people to look into this further than they would have. Looking for info on juniper litter today, found a site by our friends over in College Station. http://texnat.tamu.edu/symposia/juniper/TOC.htm From the site is "A HOLISTIC PERSPECTIVE ON JUNIPER " by Steve Nelle. http://texnat.tamu.edu/symposia/juniper/NELLE.htm. Nelle's provided the most balanced treatment of ashe juniper I've read to date, i.e. he agrees with me. :-) Nelle summarizes: "1. Juniper woodlands are the native, natural vegetation type on many sites. 2. Juniper has invaded into other grassland and savanna sites where it is not natural. 3. The primary cause of the invasion is overgrazing and the lack of fire. 4. Under conditions of overgrazing, the invasion of juniper is the natural ecological response which provides a degree of protection and rehabilitation to the site. 5. Watershed response to juniper control can be positive or negative depending on subsequent grazing management. 6. Where juniper control is desired, it should be preceded by a firm commitment to proper stocking rates, regular planned rest periods and periodic prescribed burning. Otherwise it will quickly return. 7. The use of goats or other browsers to control juniper usually has harmful side-effects of eliminating other more desirable species." Hope this helps. |
ashe juniper--they're all in on it!
"Victor M. Martinez" wrote:
That's not what I've seen. Have you been to Selah? It's amazing what Mr. Bamberger has done to that property. He's won many environmental and land restoration awards. The first thing he did was cut down the cedar everywhere except the canyons where it belongs. Texas Monthly had an article about Selah a couple years ago. Go to www.texasmonthly.com and put selah into their search engine. You'll have to register to read it (no cost) but it's worth the effort. Nice to see private landowners succeding where the government has failed. Texas Monthly October 2000: Splendor in the Grass --steve |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter