Sunday, December 14, 2014

Industrial Agriculture: Rejecting Nature's Tool-Kit

"As we work to save the vital whitebark pine from disappearing from the landscape, it is essential to use all available tools. Ectomycorrhizal fungi are an integral part of forest integrity, ecology and health; showing respect for these mighty microbes might just mean the difference between the restoration and death of a forest."
Dr. Cathy L. Cripps is an associate professor at Montana State University
 Somewhere a Monsanto Research & Development Chief  just fell off a chair
Ghost forest of whitebark pine “skeletons.” Credit: Dr. Cathy L. Cripps
In his book Diversity of Life, E.O. Wilson states that “Most life on land depends ultimately on one relationship: the mycorrhiza, the intimate and mutually dependent coexistence of fungi and the roots systems of plants.” His point is that the importance of these beneficial fungi should not be underestimated. This is especially true for forest ecosystems, and those of Whitebark Pine are no exception.
"Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) is North America’s only stone pine — pines with seeds that are not dispersed by wind — and it is primarily limited to the Pacific Northwest and the north-central Rocky Mountains. This five-needle pine is considered a keystone species at treeline elevations where other conifers have difficulty surviving. At these high elevations, it forms magnificent forests of gnarled old growth trees or low-tangled krummholz forms. However, whitebark pine populations are diminishing at an alarming rate because of record infestations of mountain pine beetles coupled with the devastating effects of the invasive white pine blister rust. The results are ghost forests of whitebark pine skeletons. The species has been granted endangered status in Canada and awaits this designation in the United States. Enormous efforts are underway to restore lost forests with large plantings of disease-resistant nursery-grown whitebark pine seedlings. But, can we also retrieve all the complex parts of this unique ecosystem? And what about the mycorrhizal fungi — how crucial are they to the survival of these forests?"
"Above ground, the ecology of whitebark pine forests is a fascinating story of the interaction of trees, birds, squirrels and bears. In fall, when the round purple cones mature, the forests erupt in a riot of sound and a flurry of activity. Clark’s nutcrackers, large gray corvid birds with long bills, attract each other to the ripening food source with their raucous calls. Landing precariously in tree tops, they incise seeds out of cones like surgeons and gulp them into their crops. They fly off to bury their treasure as a food stash. Meanwhile, red squirrels chatter high above trying to beat the birds to the cones by clipping and dropping whole branches — an efficient way to gather a winter’s cone supply. Later, as winter approaches, grizzly and black bears raid the squirrel stashes for the fatty seeds. In spring, seedlings germinate in clusters from the un-retrieved seeds and, remarkably, this is the main dispersal mechanism for whitebark pine as a species; it depends on the forgetfulness of the birds."
"What goes on below ground is more of a mystery. Here, a major portion of the trees exist as extensive and massive roots systems that push through hard soil in harsh high-elevation habitats just below treeline. This is the interface between the living and non-living world. It is a dark place where pale, living roots come into contact with minerals in the soil — or do they?"
Credit: Dr. Cathy L. Cripps.

How ectomycorrhizal fungi works (Click to Enlarge)
"In a twist of nature, certain mycorrhizal fungi insert themselves between tree roots and soil to form a protective barrier around each root tip. In addition, the fungi boost the uptake of nitrogen into roots by extending their long thin bodies into the soil where they forage for scarce nutrients. The microscopic threads that comprise their bodies are called hyphae — or, when in mass, mycelium — and they act as conduits, moving nutrients and water from soil into roots. These fungi can also protect tree roots from heavy metals, tiny invertebrate grazers, and root pathogens hiding in the soil. The fungi themselves are able to eke out a living on photosynthetic scraps, sugars that leak from fine roots."
"‘Mycorr-’ means fungus and ‘-rhizal’ means root and the unions of these two entities, called mycorrhizae, are found on the roots of more than 80 percent of the plant species on Earth. This mutualism is not the exception, but the rule in nature, and all forests — except perhaps those of mangroves — depend on mycorrhizal fungi. This has been true for thousands of years."
"The group of fungi that attach themselves to woody plants, mostly trees, wrap themselves around the outside of roots to form what are called ectomycorrhizae. These tiny sock-like structures are found on each of the thousands of root tips throughout a forest. Although miniscule, ectomycorrhizae have a huge impact on the survival of trees, many of which could not maintain themselves in nature, especially in harsh climates, without these fungi. They are only visible when they reproduce and their fruiting bodies (i.e. mushrooms) push up though the soil to produce the spores that fly off in the wind to land, mate and continue the species’ life cycle."
Credit: Dr. Cathy L. Cripps

Siberian slippery Jack (Suillus sibiricus)
ectomycorrhizal with whitebark pine
 "Just as each tree species is not interchangeable with another, so too one fungal species cannot be substituted for another without altering the biology of an ecosystem. There are thousands of species of ectomycorrhizal fungi in the world, each with its own unique ecology, physiology, and preference for certain tree hosts."
"As an example, Cenococcum is a tough hardy fungus with dense black mycelium that is found everywhere, often at low levels just below the radar. But it comes into its own during periods of drought, when it thrives while other fungi die, all the while passing the benefits of drought tolerance on to its tree partner. Another example is Piloderma, a promiscuous fungus that attaches itself to many different tree species; it not only gains sugars from tree roots but also has the ability to decompose dead organic material and pass the nutrients along to living trees. Its bright yellow mycelium can be observed in rotting wood or organically rich soils as well as on roots. Douglas-fir alone associates with more than 2,000 different species of ectomycorrhizal fungi, and some are only found with this species. A single tree in a forest can host any number of ectomycorrhizal fungi simultaneously, with each providing its own unique set of benefits. Often, there is a succession of fungi found on a tree over its lifetime. Certain ectomycorrhizal fungi are important in a tree’s establishment as a seedling, and other fungi come in later to provide benefits in mature forest situations."
Credit: Dr. Cathy L. Cripps

Slippery jacks are also part of the forest food
 chain. These were nibbled by a small animal
"Until recently, we knew very little about ectomycorrhizal fungi in whitebark pine forests. Our mycology lab at Montana State University (MSU) has discovered that from the Greater Yellowstone Area (GYA) north into Alberta, these forests appear to host only a limited number of ectomycorrhizal species in great contrast to Douglas-fir forests. Some of these fungi are specialists and are only found with five-needle pines; some only occur with stone pines. There are several species of stone pines scattered throughout Europe and Asia, in addition to the whitebark pines of North America."
"A well-known fungal inhabitant of stone pine forests in Europe (P. cembra forests) and Asia (P. pumila forests) is the so-called Siberian slippery jack (Suillus sibiricus). Remarkably, this fungus also occurs with five-needle pines in western North America, and we now report it from most of the whitebark pine forests studied in the GYA. These records show that the Siberian Suillus has a long evolutionary history with stone pines in the northern hemisphere that may be an indication of its importance to these pines; it does not occur with other conifers or on two/three-needle pines. Other examples of specialists with whitebark pine include S. tomentosus variety discolor and S. subalpinus; the latter is only known from the Yellowstone region. A variety of mammals, large and small, devour the mushrooms produced by these fungi as a natural part of the forest food chain."

"Other special ectomycorrhizal fungi found in whitebark pine forests include Rhizopogon, commonly called “pogies.” These interesting fungi spend their whole life underground. Instead of mushrooms, they produce subterranean tuber-like fruiting bodies often called false truffles. These marble- to golf-ball-sized tubers have unique odors that attract squirrels, voles, deer and bears — including grizzlies — which sniff them out and dig them up as a food source. When ripe, these pogies can smell intriguingly musky, fermented fruity or sour — even like blue cheese. The spores located inside the pogies are capable of traveling through the digestive tract of a mammal unharmed and are eventually deposited in pellets and piles. In a sense, these fungi have co-opted mammals as their spore dispersal mechanism just as whitebark pines have co-opted birds to disperse their seeds. Ultimately, the spores germinate and reunite with a root to form an ectomycorrhizal bond after passing through the gut of a mammal. When greasy scat samples of grizzly bears were brought into the MSU lab, examination with a microscope revealed a mass of one kind of spore. The bears had feasted exclusively on one particular kind of pogie, no doubt with a very attractive odor!"
"Coming full circle, while we see whitebark pines providing habitat for the animals that eat or spread its seeds and rest or nest in boughs and shade for the understory plants that proliferate at their base, there are even more intricate ecological relationships among these organisms, including the ectomycorrhizal fungi that help maintain the forests."
Credit: Dr. Cathy L. Cripps

Roots of an inoculated seedling covered
with ectomycorrhizae
"Are these fungi a missing piece of the puzzle in whitebark pine restoration? Can they be used to jumpstart the whitebark pine seedlings being planted in such huge numbers to help a greater number survive?   
In Austria, forests on steep slopes were clear-cut to extend pastureland many years ago. Subsequent efforts were made to restore these forests which included the planting of European stone pine seedlings, a practice that continues today. Fifty years ago, a wise mycologist named Meinhard Moser discovered that adding the spores or mycelium of Suillus sibiricus (and related species) to nursery seedlings could significantly boost the survival of these nursery seedlings when they were out-planted. Today, mature forests are flourishing on the alpine slopes of Austria and the Siberian Suillus is still used on the stone pine seedlings in the Austrian Federal Nursery. Inoculation of nursery trees with ectomycorrhizal fungi is now status quo in Europe."
Credit: Dr. Cathy L. Cripps

Lonergan monitoring whitebark pine
 seedlings in the field.
"At MSU, graduate student Erin Lonergan and postdoc Dr. Eva Grimme examined how this practice might be applied to nurseries in the western United States. From their research, we now know that S. sibiricus can form ectomycorrhizae efficiently on whitebark pine seedlings in the greenhouse and that colonization will occur if given enough time (a few months) and if a low nitrogen fertilizer is used. High nitrogen fertilizers and fungicides prevent mycorrhizal colonization. The age of the whitebark pine seedlings at inoculation is also important since prolific side roots need to develop before colonization can take place. When successful, hundreds of tiny, white sock-like ectomycorrhizae can be observed on the roots of containerized seedlings."
(Article Source: American forests)
MSU study: Native fungus could be another tool for helping restore ghostly forests 
Credit: Don Bachman

Cripps inoculating whitebark pine seedlings
The information and understanding of how our natural world really operates and functions has been known for quite a few decades now. Unfortunately such highly vauluable knowledge has been deliberately suppressed until now because of something called worldview. There is a time wasting strategy when it comes life's origins called "Argument from Poor Design." This has done more to hold back good valuable sustainable scientific practice far more than anything else. The reason is that this lame argumentation insists that nature is flawed, inept, inefficient and badly designed and all of this is proof that there is no intelligent designer. They argue that if there were an intelligent designer, he would have designed such and such in such and such a fashion because the design in their opinion is flawed. But how could anyone know this ? What experiment did they create using the scientific method to arrive at such a conclusion ? I couldn't do that, so how could they do that ?
Below is a glaring example of how the Industrial Science industry has attempted to indoctrinate the average person into adopting the flawed worldview of how vicious and cursed the planet was and in desperate need of Industrial Science's various services. Remember these mind dumbing commericals from the 1970s which trashed Nature ???

"Argument from Poor Design" (Exposing Nature's Flaws ???)
Believe it or not this is why biotechs refuse to actually replicate what nature does. They take their cue from some off topic lousy lame false religious concept such as the poor design arguments. They believe nature is flawed and poorly designed and only they can fix it. How well has that worked out for Mankind and Nature thus far ??? Do we live in a better world because of this dogma ??? The culture of science types are loathed to criticize industrial science (even the giant Environmental Organizations) because they fear the aweful backlash of being labeled as anti-science, which is a Biotech's cowardly way of justifying their business model. Incredibly all of this points back to Darwin and his writings. He actually started the bad design arguments. Here's an examples below given to us by none other than Richard Dawkins.

The above photo of a Tomato Hornworm caterpillar being victimized by the eggs of the wasp larvae, overlaid with Charles Darwin's famous 1860 "wasp feeding quote", which worked to teeter him away from a belief in a creator. Such examples of the supposedly bad designs which exist in nature have been utilized by people like Richard Dawkins, who admixtured in "selfish genes" + "Hamilton rule" + "blind forces", and used these Nature flaws as his main atheism movement to promote a purposeless universe ideology. But this has actually back fired on nature. How much good viable science and sustainable ecological technological innovation has been stifled because a handful of ideologues have a hard on towards Christensom ? Look, I get the argument against many of the religious institutions, but these people like Dawkins have stolen their playbook and made it their own with a plethora of failed their own version of blind faith Teleological arguments that have back fired on our natural world. The main problem has been when scientists and other researchers cannot explain something, the problem must lay with the flaws of natural design and not their own university cultivated intellectual ignorance. This is why they came up with Junk DNA as a label for the non-coding DNA. They didn't know what it did, could not find a useful function for it's presence and therefore concluded it must be a vestigial evolutionary hold over from the distant mythical past. It was touted as proof of evolution and no intelligent designer. But lo & behold geneticists are finding a wealth of instructions when all this imaginary *cough-cough* Junk apparently does have function when used within a context of other genes. This has become more and more to do with epigenetics or different gene expression triggered by various environmental cues. Now there is this big movement towards promoting biomimetics or biomimicry. Suddenly people who've for years dismissed this practice are now on board. However, to be taken seriously, they must first apologize to mankind for holding back good science and running our planet into the ground with their own unsustainable inept technological innovation based on nature being inept at designing anything. As yet they have refused to do this. Janine Benyus is one example. She won't touch this subject of bad design with a ten foot pole. 
Biomimicry: Streamlining Innovation for Environmentally Sustainable Products
The reason designs found in Nature are seriously being more considered now is that Scientists are now realizing too late that they have no choice but to consider these remarkable designs found throughout all of the Earth's ecosystems because their own degenerate past ideologically driven science has been wrong all along. This is not to say there have not been dedicated Scientists  out there over the last few decades who have been working hard all along to discover and create practical application of what they have observed and learned out in the field. I know because I've been following many of them for decades. What has always influenced the direction Science takes in research for decades has always been it's being shackled to their sources of funding that comes from big industrial agri-business interests. It is even worse now because Scientists who desire major funding for their pet projects must tow the corporate line or risk having their funding removed. 

This has actually happened to my former Agricultural Instructor who retired early from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. He had a course on Sustainable Agriculture and apparently it was this class which he was teaching with regards to ecological and more sustainable farming practices which were found to be offensive to an Executive of an Industrial scale Feedlot business (Harris Ranch Beef) interest over in the San Joaquin Valley who threatened Cal Poly San Luis Obispo by withholding a certain promise of $500,000 in Grant Funding towards a new Butchering facility if he wasn't fired and his Sustainable Agriculture course dismantled. Also, at this same time period, they were peeved by a Campus visit of Michael Pollan who they also viewed as a radical or agricultural heretic.

Robert Rutherford
My wife and I went to Cal Poly San Luis Obispo this past June 2014 and saw the new state of the art butchering facility. Oddly enough I thought he would still be working there, but when I saw that the large new beautiful building had been built after all, I guess I knew then that he was gone. So I wrote an email to him when I got back to San Diego. He said he got fed up with the administration at Cal Poly and with this issue hanging over him, he realized he could no longer make a significant difference as he wanted, so agreements were made and he retired early. He said University Professors are rewarded for the status quo. They & their Industrial Ag partners are a sort of Band of Brothers. I really admire and respect him for not caving into their demands, sticking to his core principles and following what knows to be the truth. He now has his own business [Whole Options LLC] where he travels and lectures about sustainable Agriculture. In particular, pasture and grazing practices which are best for the environment.

Unlike my Ag Instructor, the man I quoted at the beginning of this post below the photograph with the dead whitewashed skeletons of Whitebark Pines was Edward O. Wilson a Harvard Biologist who wrote the book, "Diversity of Life" from which the quote was taken Unfortunately, Mr E.O. Wilson has gone down a much different road than my Ag Instructor. Here is that quote once more:
“Most life on land depends ultimately on one relationship: the mycorrhiza, the intimate and mutually dependent coexistence of fungi and the roots systems of plants.”
He is also an environmentalist of sorts and has many radical ideas such as giving back half of the Earth to Nature again. He just seems  so committed to Nature in that quote doesn't he ? Unfortunately it would seem that Mr E.O. Wilson has other commitments as well. I can almost agree with that sentiment of giving back much of the land to Nature, since I despise most cities and prefer the quiet solitude of Natural surroundings anyway. Unfortunately, I also read an interview he had done in "EarthSky Journal" in December 2011, where he was asked his views on what scientific advances in biology he sees advancing into the 21st Century. Unbelievably, this is what this same man said who wrote that environmental book and the quote about about how we should use Nature's Tool-Kit for maintaining living systems. 
"And within science, this is going to be a century of biology. We are entering an age of synthesis. So many discoveries have been made in biology in the cell, at the molecular level, and on up to the development of organisms."
"And we need all the biology and all the advances we can find in agriculture, especially. We’re going to have to switch worldwide to dry land agriculture. We don’t have enough water in enough countries to feed all those people and to restore soil to arable condition. So this means that we have to have genetically modified organisms. I’d take that as a given. Some people don’t like the idea. But that’s one of those necessities brought about by the human condition."

Image credit: Jim Harrison
Unlike my former Ag Instructor who stuck to his principles and standards on what he knows to be right by rejecting a good ole boys club, E.O. Wilson is a disappointment of sorts in that he sides with the billionaire  boys club. How can you make the same observation of pristine Nature and the various mechanisms and components within it's Tool-Fit for maintaining all ecosystem for eternity by championing this from one side of your mouth in an environmental book on Biodiversity and then turn directly around in an about face and from the other side of your mouth praise Industrial Science which continually takes a cheap shots at Nature through genetic manipulation and creating synthetic organisms and the dangerous chemicals that they are engineered to work with ? And why does Industrial Science do this ? Well, aside from the major lure of obscene profit demanded by share holders, it's because Industrial Science is influenced by those same ideologically driven philosophers that teach modern Mankind that Nature is a bad designer with major flaws and that they can fix it, for a price of course. Suddenly the praise for mycorrhiza, as Wilson called it, flies out the window and no longer has any meaning. Of course in that debate between Team Monsanto & Team Organic at that infamous Intelligence Squared Debates, it was said that Biotechs have consensus and peer-review on their side. You know, the #1 biggest problem with College Professors and Research Scientists who are shackled and committed to the funding by Industrial Agriculture is that when they do write their research papers, they are then peer reviewed by other committed industrial scientists, which are then consumed by yet other Industrial Corporate Scientist and you suddenly then realize there really is no such thing as honest scientific scrutiny. You finally have to come to the realization that an individual like E.O. Wilson is committed first and foremost to his own status as a celebrity icon. The trouble with the world of science is this potential for fame, glitter and glory which allows personal ambition and bias to hinder real science in pursuit of that goal.

Fortunately, researchers like Dr Cathy Cripps are looking at a more natural holistic approach in replicating Nature as it really works. In the decades past I was always told by government experts that it  was not necessary to inoculate the nursery stock before out planting. Why they said, "those mycorrhizal spores were everywhere in nature. Why those spores are floating around us in the very air we breathe." Fortunately I never listened to and bought into their theory and have proof to show for it. When you look at the above ground surface and see that many plants within almost every ecosystem around the globe are failing now days, don't you think that what lives underground may also itself be failing as well ? Nothing anymore is indestructible. Every living thing today is at risk. So maybe the microbiological activity under the ground needs a boost to. When humans destroy Earth's ecosystems as rapidly as they have during the past 100+ years of enlightenment, we don't have thousands of years to wait and see if it can heal itself or not. Clearly things need a push and helping hand. For the moment, California is getting what is considered a rescue of another El Nino  rainy season of sorts. In my own experience, it has always been these small windows of exceptional wet periods of when Nature can spring back the best and humans can help it to further heal if they know the exact tools and how to use them. But we are finding that these system mechanisms are now breaking down and need help and a jump start. Mycorrhizal Fungi and Beneficial Bacteria can performance enhance that recovery if those in charge are humble enough to admit they have been making mistakes for the past 100+ years and will make a 360 degree turn around and start working with Nature instead of against it. Now go back and read Dr Cathy Cripps' research again, and then go seek out advice on a reputable Mycorrhizal promoting website and order the right blend of material for inoculation of your own trees and shrubs. Maybe your own restoration project. And dump the we don't have to inoculate dogma, because yes you do.

There is no mysticism here. You want successful landscaping, farming or gardening then you have to inoculate. The only mystic fantasy here is that the human leadership that people have allowed to be put in charge of land management has been a miserable failure. Using Nature's Tool-Kit by learning to identify and use the right mechanisms will lead to many many success stories.
Further Reading references
Mycorrhizal Applications Inc
Using Nature's Mycorrhizal Tool-Kit to compete with Weeds vrs killing them with Glyphosate
The Agricultural Controversy

Friday, September 12, 2014

Why Streams still flow in California's officially designated "Exceptional Drought" zone

It's been building up in the News for the last couple of decades. The global Climate Change or Global Warming and now the worst drought to hit the southwestern states in years. The state of California of course is on top of the pile with differing regions showing varying degrees of  the drought's worst effects. Oddly enough when I went through the one region listed as being above the "extreme" level with the designation "Exceptional" in some places along this coastline in Central California, it was hard to tell if any coastal and immediate interior valleys were really suffering. Of course I've already partly written about this experience with my post:
 Palo Colorado Canyon Rd, Big Sur California 
Now further inland from the coast on the eastern side of the Santa Lucia mountain coastal chain & Hwy 101 from Salinas south to Paso Robles over to the San Joaquin Valley it did indeed deserve the label "Exceptional" Drought. The steep hills which should be chaparral covered have been grazed to the bare soil for more than 100+ years. Only a handful of rare pockets of chaparral and Oak/Pine woodland are present. The closest exact location of a photo I can find which matches the area we past through and the landmarks we witnessed in exceptional drought is from a Google Earth - Panoramio user, 'Patmon' who photographed an exact spot we drove through this past June 2014, only the date was in 2009. I was tough with myself not to take too many negative photos, but maybe I should have taken a few for educational purposes. The photo below is a bit deceiving if you drive through this area on Hwy 58 today. This picture is actually a lush grassland compared to the reality of what my wife and I experienced on the drive all the way from San Joaquin Valley town of Buttonwillow to Santa Margarita near Hwy 101. There literally is no grass at all at this very moment of writing. The entire landscape is nothing more than bare soil with not even a whisper of any stubble. Joel Salatin was right, the rule of grazing on hilly terrain should be, "If you cannot drive a tractor on it, don't graze cattle there."  The only exception of the presence of plant life of course were the pockets vegetation high up the ridges like chaparral and mature oak trees which you can see in the photo below and there were not many of those vegetation pocket islands to be found. 

Hwy 58 Buttonwillow to Santa Margarita California
What mankind has done in the name of Agri-business [We only  want to feed mankind] has been disastrous for the natural world. Stripping steep slopes of their weather moderating, cloud formation and rainfall creating mechanisms makes absolutely no sense and yet, 'lo & behold' lookie at where we stand today and the dire climate disruption crisis we're all facing. For all the supposed brain power which runs western science [Europe/North America], you'd think the collapse of many of their own collective Nation's ecosystems would provide a pattern for the developing world of what you shouldn't do. But unfortunately we're just not seeing that. Maybe all the folks who actually care about what's happening to the Earth's hydrological cycling should stop telling those in positions of environmental responsibility and oversight who seem to blunder time and again, "Just how stupid can you people be?"  I'm beginning to think that many of these world leaders appear to be taking it as a challenge. Well, it's just an observation.

image Mine: Along Cabrillo Highway at Big Sur California
Given the designated label of "Exceptional Drought" status by the U.S. Drought Monitor for this central coastal California location, I was surprised to see that so many streams were running with a fair amount of water, with even many of the smaller brooks up Palo Colorado Canyon and beyond at a good flow. The question of course that entered my mind was, Why ? Now when you look up any information about this part of the natural world and it's many ecosystems, the label Closed-Cone Forest comes to the fore. One also realizes that this is the southern end of the famous California Coastal Redwood tree in it's native range. But in the literature about the Closed-Cone Forest Climate description, you will find that rainfall totals from actual Pacific Storms during the wintertime's  rainy wet season only amount to about between 16 to 25 inches of actual rainfall from these storms and again it varies from location to location. Doesn't seem enough to support Redwoods and other trees like Madrone (Arbutus), Big Leaf Maple, California Bay, etc. But, there is of course another phenomena which needs to be factored in which contributes to higher moisture totals. The higher moisture readings are calculated from a unique phenomena to this area which also receives moisture in the form of heavy wet low marine clouds and fog which is said to push some area totals upwards to 60 or 70 inches annually. Again it still depends on the location. But still, does this explain why streams are running well with lots of water, enough for 100s campers to romp, play and bathe at Pfeiffer State Park at Big Sur when we came through this past June 2014 ? Even at the full blown average of 20 to 22 inches of annual rain along the coast, that doesn't really explain the volume I saw in many of these streams.

As we all know, things regarding climate and generally local weather in most areas have been trending poorly. Like the historical tracking chart above of San Diego for a last two decades which while showing a couple spikes above average, these still don't make up for the well below normal dry averages which are more common in recent years [especially the past decade]. Last Winter I actually followed the weather rain events and storm totals throughout Southern California. What I remember most is the lack of consistent rainfall amounts across the entire southland. Some areas were drenched while others got only a mere trace. San Diego which is supposed to average around 10.34 actually received only 5.05 this past season and that following two previous dry years which have progressively gotten worse - 2012 @ 7.09 & 2013 @ 6.55. There is one particular rainfall record I also followed, though it's unofficial, it matches identically those of the official reporting stations throughout California. The record is on a blog called "Breathing Treatment" and written by Brent Morgan who lives in Rancho Palos Verdes along the coast in Los Angeles County. The way he went about reporting was by storm/Date, not monthly totals. I think this illustrates beautifully just how the total rainfall here recorded actually becomes worse when you consider where it went or rather where it didn't go.
Brent Morgan recorded the 2013/2014 rainy season by Storm Event with Date - Month/Year
October 27, 2013 - 0.15
November 20, 2013 - 0.54
November 29, 2013 - 0.4
December 7, 2013 - 0.27
January 29, 2014 - 0.001
February 2, 2014 - 0.19
February 6, 2014 - 0.28
February 7, 2014 - 0.02
February 26, 2014 - 0.83
February 27, 2014 - 1.5
 March 1, 2014 - 1.0
March 25, 2014 - 0.02
August 2, 2014 - 0.09  
 Total Storms 13 - total rainfall for season  5.29 inches
(Rainfall Totals Source) 
Now what is interesting to me with Brent's Rainfall Record and more importantly it's not so much the total rainfall amount at the end of season, but the low storm event amounts and significant time lapse between the storm events. There is almost no real measurable percolation into the soil, with the exception of maybe a little over three inches between February 26th through March 1st. No beneficial moisture even came close to penetrating the subsoil to sustain any newer season plant growth, which explains why many shrubs refrained from putting on any new growth this season [my firsthand observation] with the  shedding of more leaves as a result of drought stress and the fact that even weeds and other annual grasses made very little if any showing in many areas this year. This was even worse up north of here in Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties which are at the center of the "Exceptional Drought" Zone. Now factor in the present drought over the past three years which has actually halved most of those same California annual average totals in almost every location throughout the State, which would bring numbers way down further, this still is a puzzle as to what exactly is sustaining not only the good stream flows along those central coastal areas, but what must also be sustaining the massive usage necessary to maintain the large volume of old growth forest for this region. So what gives ?

"Hydraulic Redistribution", but especially & more specifically "Hydraulic Descent"
image mine: Big Sur coastline with fog and low clouds rolling inland

Researchers have known for quite some time that these Central and Northern California regions with those towering majestic old growth Redwood Forests would have never gotten that far in the sky without a little help from those coastal fogs and low elevation moisture rich marine layers. You see, Sequoia sempervirens has poor stomatal control in response to a drying atmosphere. Without help, it would be difficult for the Coast Redwood to reach great heights without a little help from above. Hence, rates of water loss on very dry days/nights can reach up to 40% during the midday summer season for which the tree on it's own is incapable of replacing water lost without the help of the Fog Belt marine layer. So it appears that the fog and low clouds with heavy moisture content have a greater role in suppressing this water loss from leaves of those extremely tall trees and thereby improve upon the daily water stress by providing supplemental water to foliage in the upper canopy. This is why the coastal Redwoods thrive in such fog belt areas in central and northern California and do not exist down in Southern California. Yes, of course people in SoCal do plant them in the landscape, but like many other similar trees not native to that environment, their requirements change and increase as they age. Pay close attention to the needle burn of many older aged Redwoods in Southern California gardens and any public landscapes. So the Fog/Marine cloud layers offers at least two services that we do know of. First, it clearly prevents very much evapotranspiration [water loss from leaves] from the foliage. Second, it also has the ability to hydrate the upper foliage canopy  for which these extremely tall Redwoods appear to have a tough time mechanically doing on their own by transporting water way up possibly a couple hundred foot high from their root systems far below. But there may be a third important benefit from these Fog Belts effects, that of Hydraulic Descent all the way down into the root system. 

An article published back in 2010 by the journal Scientific American, dealt with the work of Hydraulic Redistribution researcher Todd Dawson who I have repeatedly quoted and referenced on this blog. You may recall that Dr. Dawson discovered, that deep-rooted sugar maples were so well equipped with the ability to pull water from deeper layers in the subsoil and equally as well as any desert sagebrush. Drawing upon this deep water, the trees were able to water their neighboring plants within the ecosystem which ensured their survival during summertime back east. Dr. Dawson estimated that a 40-foot-tall maple was able to deliver between 40 and 60 gallons of water to the upper soil layers every night. He is also on record as stating in his belief of a health forest's ability at hydraulically descent of excess surface water to deeper subsoil layers and even regenerating deep aquifers. The 2010 Scientific American article itself was alluding to the very real possibility of these Fog Belt regions of the eastern Pacific disappearing altogether as climate change continues to advance. That would be devastating to these southern region Redwood Forests. That would create a Mediterranean climate in central California more like that of Southern California where Redwoods are not native. But there were a few paragraphs I'll quote from that article which were intriguing. 
"From 25 to 40 percent of the moisture in the system comes from fog," says Todd Dawson, who has been studying the relationship between the coastal fog and the redwoods for two decades. Some of the fog simply covers the leaves and prevents evaporation. But some of it also enters the stomata, or tiny pores, on the leaves and is drawn down through the branches to the roots. This is the reverse of transpiration, the normal flow of water from the roots to the leaves that exists in most trees. Redwoods are the first trees found to move water in both directions, though others have been identified.
Fog is not just a vital element for the redwoods—it's also crucial to the entire redwood forest ecosystem. Some of the moisture drips off the redwood leaves, landing on the forest floor to water the trees and young saplings. "It's not just a drip, drip, drip," says ecologist Holly Ewing of Bates College in Lewiston, Maine, who also worked with Dawson. "The moisture can descend into the ground up to 35 centimeters deep, and that's a lot of water."
Scientific American: "Clearing and Present Danger? Fog That Nourishes California Redwoods Is Declining"
 Deep-rooted plants have much greater impact on climate than experts thought
UC Berkeley News - Press Release 2006 (selected paragraphs)
Trees, particularly those with deep roots, contribute to the Earth's climate much more than scientists thought, according to a new study by biologists and climatologists from the University of California, Berkeley.
The new study in the Amazonian forest shows that trees use water in a much more complex way: The tap roots transfer rainwater from the surface to reservoirs deep underground and redistribute water upwards after the rains to keep the top layers moist, thereby accentuating both carbon uptake and localized atmospheric cooling during dry periods.
Trees have long been known to lift water from the soil to great heights using a principle called hydraulic lift, with energy supplied by evaporation of water from leaf openings called stomata. Twenty years ago, however, some small plants were found to do more than lift water from the soil to the leaves - they also lifted deep water with their tap root and deposited it in shallow soil for use at a later time, and reversed the process during the rainy season to push water into storage deep underground. Dawson discovered in 1990 that trees do this, too, and to date, so-called hydraulic redistribution has been found in some 60 separate deeply rooted plant species.
During the wet season, these plants can store as much as 10 percent of the annual precipitation as deep as 13 meters (43 feet) underground, to be tapped during the dry months. 
For Further information along these lines, I've actually created a resource page, so as not to over load the post here, which goes further into this amazing and fascinating phenomena which should be made simplified and inserted into every High School and College textbook around the globe:
 How Forests Attract Rain: An Examination of a New Hypothesis called the "Biotic Pump"
After all this time I still don't know why the role of vegetation in our Earth's hydrological cycle has to remain so controversial and a mystery. Incredibly, around the globe, local indigenous peoples in many partially forested regions have always believed that forests attract rain, but climatology has until the last decade or so had no real scientific explanation for that belief. Of course many intellectuals will discount what many of these people say because they are often looked upon as illiterate and lack the Alphabet Soup credentials of those in charge of informing humankind just how the Earth functions. From the latest studies now, we know the roles these trees play in even simple cloud formation. Unfortunately, back in the Industrial Science News spotlight once again are Roger C. Bales and Michael Goulden adding their take to the controversy. You may remember that Roger Bales believes trees and chaparral are harming the Sierra Nevada Mountain's rivers and streams and therefore tree thinning by logging and salvage logging after wildfire should be championed to bring water flows [which he thinks trees & chaparral waste] to the San Joaquin Valley Industrial Agricultural business ventures. You may also remember Goulden along with Anne Kelly who slammed Jon Keeley & Dylan Schwilk for their take on why plants were moving up Santa Rosa Mountains above Palm Desert ? Anyway, they are pushing vegetation is evil hypothesis again, because they insist vegetation hogs water from rivers and streams needed to supply industrial farming interests in the valleys below. Therefore whether it's a "Burn Baby Burn" policy or removal by Salvage Logging by Timber Industry interests, Nature in the end is taking another beating besides the breakdown of it's own weather creation mechanisms which are no fault of it's own !!!

 Credit: NSF Southern Sierra Critical Zone Observatory/Jenny Park

Research at NSF's Southern Sierra CZO links snowmelt with downstream water supplies. 

"Trees growing higher on the slopes will soak up water before it can run into rivers" Roger C. Bales
"The paper's results should be "another call to improve forest management to protect the water system," Roger C. Bales
"Managers need to understand what's going to happen to the water runoff from the mountains," says Bales "This paper is another piece to help inform that and will hopefully get more people's attention."
National Geographic: "As California Warms, Greener Mountains Will Mean Less Water for People" 
UPDATE: John Muir Project of Earth Island Institute is now pushing the Roger Bales Water Scam
Berkeley Lab study finds California wildfires increase runoff, groundwater
You have to also understand this business nonsense of cutting forests down to allow snow to reflect heat back into the atmosphere came out long before the John Muir Project pushing this narrative of wildfires are wonderful because they help water infiltration came out long before in 2013. The John Muir Project's, Chad Hanson, says he is against forest thinning or even clearcutting because it's bad for the environment, but a deveastating wildfire which nukes the landscape of all living biological things is supposedly a good thing because it facilitates water percolation and infiltration into the soil ??? Seriously ??? Really ??? Here's a 2013 Huffington Post article championing and waving Pom Poms for clearing the planet of forest trees because it's good for snow and cooling the planet.
Huffington Post: "Can Cutting Down Trees Actually Help Save The Planet?"
Here's my previous post on the Roger C. Bales Water Scam
Earth's Internet: "BREAKING NEWS: Apparently Trees don't really Gulp, Guzzle & Water Hog, only Humans do that"
I really don't want to get into Bales and Goulden's latest whining or even Chad Hanson's narrative of wildfire as the Grand Creator, but their worldview take on exactly how Nature actually works stands in stark contrast to what Todd Dawson/Inez Fung & Victor Gorshkov-Anastassia Makarieva have put together and published. And why are Gorschkov/Makarieva's research papers the ones that are given the label, "controversial" and not Bales' and Goulden's work ? Here's a better question, whose Funding backers stand to gain financially over such research work conclusions ? In any event, I'm banking on the later work of Dawson & Fung, Gorshkov & Makarieva for a more real world honest assessment. Do the hydraulic Redistribution abilities of Redwoods, Bigleaf Maples, California Bay and other native trees have the ability of sustaining stream flow within the coastal Santa Lucia Range ? So do I know for sure what is going on with consistent stream flow ? Not for a certainty, but I have a clear inference as to what the mechanisms could be. The fact that foliage transpiration is limited in such a marine coastal environment and that hydration mostly comes from marine layer moisture excesses rather than from roots to canopy, surely something far more important is secretly going on down below within this regional area marked by the U.S. Drought Monitor Authority as "Exceptional Drought Zone"

image Mine: Dense old growth forests in Palo Colorado Canyon Rd, Big Sur

Dense Forest and Chaparral cover drying up of Streams and Rivers Theory just doesn't jive here in the Big Sur location of Central California
Update: September 17, 2014
Remember the Pine Tree Health gauge ? The less there are past historical year's needles present, the more stressed and close to death a Pine tree is. Now judge for yourself the health of the largest tree in Idyllwild from the middle of the tree to the top of it's crown. So how much time do you believe this tree has left of life ? In the old days, you could never see the branching structure through the dense foliage. This is probably the last remnant of massive trees leftover from the early logging days when that Timber Industry stripped the Strawberry Valley of most of it's old growth which were as big as Redwood trees. For Jeffreys it was common for there to be 400 - 500 year old trees. The oldest on record I believe is a 631 year old Jeffrey in the Sierra Nevada ranges. Such old growth Ponderosa and Jeffrey pines will never come back again under the present system of mismanagement.

Wildlife Biologist Tom Robert's Forest Prophecy Fulfilled
Wildlife Biologist Tom Roberts
The tree below here should not be a surprise to anyone. I wrote about this tree up in Idyllwild California which is actually growing on Taquitz Drive and right next to Strawberry Creek. The rooting infrastructure must be deeply entrenched within the Strawberry Valley's aquifer and yet  this tree is clearly struggling here. The Mountain's ecosystem clearly doesn't have enough water to provide healthy it's hydration needs beyond the tree's middle trunk. Only a couple season's needles are clearly present, something that never existed a couple decades ago. Back in 1983, I went and visited Wildlife Biologist Thomas Robert's at his office where Town Crier Newspaper now resides. He had just published a report on the Ponderosa and Jeffrey Pines of Strawberry Valley and other surrounding communities around Idyllwild, in fact the Town Crier had carried his article in interview. He mentioned that most of the present trees, which were on average 90 years old at the time would all disappear in about 30-40 years and his recommendation was to replace them with Sequoia giganteum (Sierra Giant Sequoias) which were a tougher tree which would resist smog & drought much better. At the time it was a hard sell to believe in. Even though the trees all along Strawberry Creek were only 90 years old, they were so huge, large diameter trunks and vigorous foliage. The forest floor was so dark and nothing like the present openness it is today. I thought surely he must be wrong. Unfortunately he was dead on accurate. Most of those large trees are gone. Starwberry Creek in many parts are a stark naked contrast to their former glory. This seems to be the well extension global pattern everywhere. Humans are going to have to go after newer building and construction materials. Remember, 90% of the old growth Redwood is gone and the restoration plantations are incapable of providing the same service of weather mechanisms that old growth forests provide. This was also the information provided by the studies with regards the phenomena of "Biotic Pump" which I'll address at another time. Once again, look below at a powerful giant failing at life. The mechanisms which kept this beautiful majestic pine tree alive for 400+ years are no longer functional.

Photograph is mine from Idyllwild California 2013
Update 2017 The Ponderosa Pine giant above is now gone and cut down as of March ths year 2017. I've updated the post below with a video.
"Saturday in Idyllwild viewing it's most gigantic Ponderosa Pine" (May 2013)
 Further Reading of Interest
Foliar water uptake: a common water acquisition strategy for plants of the redwood forest

Controversial research outlines physics behind how forests may bring rain

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Chaparral Biome & it's Forest building abilities with or without Wildfire

The great debate is over as far as the Industrial Forestry gang is concerned about how forests should be managed and made more productive for profit. Viewing the latest articles on how the Rim fire should be managed over at the New Century Forest Planning website, it is clear that much of the terminology they use in describing plants that normally and naturally sprout up after a wildfire, specifically  chaparral, is meant in the derogatory sense. Of all the metaphors, "Brush" is meant as a derogatory blanket description for any plant species within the Chaparral Biome. Brush in their warped view is nothing more than useless rangy bits of vegetation which hinders more valuable wood/paper component production plants such as Ponderosa Pines, Douglas Firs, Incense Cedar, etc, etc, etc. Some times these same critics even suffer from mixed metaphor disorder, when they label chaparral "invasive brush". First, the term "brush" again is meant as a derogatory term for living things these Foresters find no monetary value or worth in. This is a mistake, because it is exactly these living things which provide the early stages of healthy development until the desired timber gets a strong foothold on life. Second is the other term often applied in word or term combination and that is "invasive brush". This term "invasive" is often used even with trees which are considered undesirable for no other reason than someone's opinion. For example Red Cedar are often said to be creeping into a prairie or meadow. Or the Western Cedar is said to be invading Cattle grazing country up in Oregon, even though they are native there anyway. But how can you label something that is native to a region as something invasive, only because you don't like it ? This is where science ceases to become science and simply morphs into the sewer of bigotry by the ignorant. I've previous hit hard on the incredible ability of Chaparral to open up soil through cracks and fissures and bore deeply into subsoils, something many forest trees cannot do on their own. I've also hit hard on their ability of hydraulically lifting water and redistributing it to other shallow rooted plants within their sphere of influence which ultimately benefits the entire ecosystem as a whole. They also have the ability to deep percolate water deeply within the earth for use later, or to be an important component of aquifer recharge which also helps the entire ecosystem as a whole. This includes those highly valued timber Seedlings and later Saplings. But they also provide something else, something that most urban landscapers generally have to do artificially, although most probably don't give what they are doing a second thought as to how things work in the wild. Staking!

The reality is Chaparral plants do have other value and worth in the tender young tree structural support department. Unfortunately for these plants, the ignorance of exactly what benefits they do provide go mostly unnoticed or if known buried in the prevailing popular conventional literature and University textbooks, in favour of failed management policies mandated as successful which favour big business interests striving for monoculture forest products. As you can see in this photo at left, this is a Coulter Pine Sapling emerging from the Chaparral in a former burn from the 1990s. This particular tree is along a now extinct creek bed which was deliberately made extinct by diverting an ancient stream bed higher up in elevation to prevent a bridge being constructed over the creek on Hwy State Route 74 in favour of a cheap small culvert. The evidence and constructed berm are still up there, but mostly buried and covered over by vegetation. This tree is the resulting germination after that arson set fire and well away from the Hwy 74. There are no trails here. I only was able to find this shot by means of bushwhacking with friends. But notice the Staking ability of the chaparral to keep the delicate tree upright and strong and all the while providing water and nutrients even during these drought times. Of course this was taken in Spring of 2013, so maybe circumstances have changed as they have elsewhere. Nevertheless, this is what urban landscapers have to do artificially when creating a landscape scenario. Many trees just won't do well without staking or propping up with large poles. Below I have personal examples of my own and those I saw at some of the newer landscape features at the San Diego Safari Park near Escondido, California.

This is an Engelmann Oak (Quercus engelmannii) which I purchased in the middle of April 2013 from Las Pilitas Native Plant Nursery north of Escondido. This photo was actually taken at the middle of June 2013 just the day before I left to fly back to Sweden. When I originally purchased the tree, it was only about 10" high. You can see the newer top growth which grew from the previous year's bud formation after I planted it in it's new permanent location in my Mum's front yard. So it grew maybe another 10 or so inches while I was there. One of the other benefits of course was a healthy blend of mycorrhizal inoculent at the time of planting. Never ever plant a native without doing that to ensure it's lifetime health and survival. I do not like getting 5 gallon or larger trees. In my experience these one gallon will eventually out perform the ready made tall landscape trees demanded by most homeowners and/or commercial business enterprises. Unfortunately people are impatient and want instant landscape, but the next photo here below which I took at the end of this years trip the 1st of July 2014 reveals a year old planting which is presently over a meter in height and in desperate need of artificial staking as a result. Even with the many longer side branches which will eventually provide a measure of stability, this tree still needs staking. The staking itself was done this year when I first arrived. I never did stake it in the beginning, even after the 10 inch growth spurt. The continual growth was incredible after replicating a deep soaking rain with the garden hose for a few days when I first arrived. The abnormal lack of rain this winter season in San Diego and all of California actually necessitates artificially deep soaking during winter months to replicate deep soil moisture which will be utilized throughout the rest of the year if you plan it correctly.

Engelmann Oak (Quercus engelmannii)

It should be noted that when I left the end of the first week of July 2014, the Oak was still growing, but more slowly, which is a good thing because I wanted it to harden off and toughen up. Who knows how big it will get next season. Still, one mete in a year wasn't a bad deal, even for the landscape impatient folks. I believe this is all the staking I will do. Trees need an element of wind swaying them back and forth to toughen up it's woody structure. If over done, then the tree again never develops properly on it's own. The situation turns into a type of tree bondage arrangement where the tree becomes dependent on a type of welfare entitlement and that is an undesirable goal for your landscape. For me, this is a sort of an "enabling" behavior, much like when you mix generous amounts of unnecessary soil amendment into the planting hole or establish a permanent drip system immediately around the trunk of the tree and it stays there for years. The tree simply will not mature the way it's supposed to. The goal here is to replicate the wild. The drip line in the above photo is no longer functional near the tree and none of the drip emitters provide anything to the oak. This was a previous line to other roses which are mostly gone except for the one or two in the background behind the Oak in the picture. Below here is a gallery of trees I photographed at the San Diego Safari Park near Escondido. They are indeed in need of staking, many of them Torrey Pines which are chaparral dependent.

Tree staked Torrey Pine @ San Diego Safari Park

Torrey Pines are long and leggy when young, especially in the urban landscape where water is plentiful and competition is usually nonexistent. They really do need chaparral in their youth. The area in which these beautiful pines growth actually receives very little rainfall by comparison to most pine habitats in the mountains of California. So the Torreys are very dependent on deeper rooted chaparral for their water requirements during those dry periods of the year. Of course the very mild climate along the coast coupled with the low clouds and fog of May-Gray & June-Gloom help a lot as well. Still, these tough trees excel in other ways and under other unique circumstances inland, but once again the chaparral are the main component necessary for survival as I have proven previously.

Below is an older grove of Torrey Pines at the San Diego Safari Park. Back when it was the San Diego Wild Animal Park there was a trail system which past under these trees. The area is a mix of chaparral in and around the grove of Torreys. Laurel Sumac and Lemonade Berry are the predominant shrubs mixed within this area. In a future post maybe I'll write about the Torrey Pine potential as a wood product tree. Most of the literature speaks of it as an inferior source for lumber, but they generally make such judgement calls based on it's growth along the coastal areas where it is still wild, but mostly in rounded and twisted picturesque forms. That would be a given, but when grown in the interior, they grow straight and tall with very few limbs on the lower truck. 

The Torrey Pine below is one where I experimented back in the late 1970s with the understanding that there is great potential of utilizing a nurse tree. In this case a Torrey Pine nursed along by a Laurel Sumac Chaparral shrub. At the time of this picture in 2011, this particular tree was between 25-30 in height. Landscape conditions would have more than doubled that trees size, but the experiment was to see what could happen in the wild and under harsh hotter and drier condition than where they are restricted as natives along the much cooler coastal areas around Del Mar. As far as I'm concerned the experiment was a success as I viewed it over the decades, which aloud me to replicate this in several places in and around Anza Valley where there are small woodlands of pines in areas the Forestry officials said would never become a success. Fortunately they were wrong. 

Unfortunately however, in hind sight, it apparently was a mistake to have written about and photographed where those Torrey Pine trees were located down in El Cajon on Rattlesnake Mountain. The biologist behind the Conservation Area project which oversees the protection of such endangered species in the coastal chaparral scrub there such as the California Knatcatcher songbird as much as hinted that he was alerted to the trees after I had asked why they were cut down with chainsaw. Evidently some reader complained. Frankly it really doesn't matter as I gained so much anyway from the experience, but it was still a cowardly thing to do. He was vague as to having anything to do with what the people up there in the Sky Ranch housing development did in chain sawing them down. But what's done is done. At least it's been documented and there for teaching purposes only.

Interestingly in the early years, that Torrey in the above photo and the others out of the picture to the right and left of this tree were almost completely smothered by the luxuriant Laurel Sumac foliage, but eventually they all of them exploded through the heavy shrub canopy. Now taking a different direction, take a close look at what I call a pine tree health gauge or ruler from the illustration below. Each whorl of a pine tree's branch reveals where next years buds form can as a general rule in the wild be considered one years worth of growth. Of course in the landscape there could be several growth whorls within a year and depending on the species, like Pinus halepensis which almost can have continuous growth and whorls given the ideal growing circumstances. But for the most part, California native pines have one whorl per year, unless it goes through an exceptionally wet El Nino period. I've had all my pines in Anza as well as this one above having the ability of keeping five or six years worth of needles on the growth whorls still intact and present on the tree even during dry years. In each case they were all connected to chaparral plants within the ecosystem. That's usually a sign of good health. It's when a pine gets down to one or only two years of whorls of needles, that a landscaper or homeowner should start to worry that the tree is drought stressing and in need of moisture. You seriously will need to get moisture to those trees quickly and manually if necessary. If chaparral are present in and around the trees, this is generally unnecessary in my experience.

The photograph below is of a location around the interchange of Freeways 15 & 52 near Miramar Naval Air Station where the 2003 Cedar fire blew through. Afterwards a bold attempt was made to use natives such as Torrey Pines and also California Sycamores on the banks above the shoulders. There was a massive amount of irrigation infrastructure installed everywhere to support these trees. In the beginning they were young and beautiful, but they were placed out on open sterile ground like most conventional landscapes with no real artistic imagination or placement other than rows of trees and planted with the same techniques and traditional understanding of plant establishment the US Forest Service uses when they plant pines on ground prepared by stripping it of all chaparral and then lightly tilling it. I understand that CalTran's Officials probably considers the chaparral a fire facilitator [especially after the Cedar Fire 2003], but so is any other landscape vegetation whether native or exotic. The fact is these trees would be far larger and have a much healthier history of dense foliage had they first planted and established chaparral shrubs in the beginning first couple of years, then planted those Torrey Pines thereafter. In the beginning they had staking because they were already several year old large container plants, but that doesn't help these plants now. Seriously, remember what I said about one gallon plants. Given the present drought crisis, I don't know if any of this can be salvaged. I don't think they have the water or motivational drive to even try.

Image Google Earth - Interstate 15 near Freeway 52
Oak Woodlands need Chaparral for Successful Advancement
Hwy 79 @ Schoolhouse Rd
Okay, here is another subject, Oak trees & chaparral. Below is an example from the San Diego Safari Park which also added some newer oaks into the landscape where they were creating more of a native plants theme along the new pathways just recently constructed. Most all California Oaks need staking in the urban landscape in the beginning. Most California Oak varieties, with the exception of a few, have a twisted sort of growth with regards their central leading trunk as opposed to others which have a more pole-like structure. Hence the need for staking when young in the absence of Chaparral. Oaks in California generally do far better in a chaparral nursery environment than in an open grassland environment. The chaparral is the place where Scrubjays prefer hiding their catch of harvested acorns and such a large heavy seed certainly needs help being mechanically planted into the soil. At the based of a old growth chaparral shrub is an ideal place to a Scrubjay. But there are many people who believe oaks do far better and are much more natural in an Oak Savanna woodland setting. While California does have many areas where there are vast Oak Savannas, these were mostly created by ranchers who removed chaparral to allow grasses to grow for  grazing their cattle. Anza is a prime example of where they went too far and removed all oaks and chaparral entirely from the valley floor. Oaks have a tougher time germinating within a Savanna grassland than within a chaparral biome where chances of germination percentage-wise are much higher. This doesn't mean they won't germinate in grasslands, but the need for being buried is tougher in grasslands. The photo above is of an Engelmann Oak which has germinated long ago along the Hwy 79 roadside across from Santa Ysabel Indian Reservation entrance at Schoolhouse Road north of Dudley's Bakery. I actually saw this and another oak sapling struggle for survival here for almost two  decades. Under normal chaparral cover, the oak would have progressed much better and been three or four times the size than what you see in the picture above. You can see where this little oak has suffered some die back at times and the only reason it has gotten this far is because of concentrated storm runoff from the highway to the shoulder which it grows next to.

Incredibly, I stumbled across a website from the organization called the "Pleasant Valley Conservancy" which champions the care and maintenance of Oak Savanna woodlands. This group is based in Wisconsin and it's website reveals some incredible marketing and propaganda strategies which explains how & why human attitudes about the wild can be warped even from an early age over decades of time. The first quote below is what I would call a propaganda quote which champions the justification for fire. Not that fire isn't natural and cannot be used as a tool, but in the last century it has been over promoted and justified with just such misinformation as contained within the quote below:
"One of the principal reasons for clearing the undergrowth from around these open-grown oaks is to encourage acorn production. Acorns are the most important wildlife food and acorn production is best in healthy oaks that are able to "spread their wings".
In all my years I have never found oaks more productive in Acorn production because of so-called removal of competition from other plants. The idea here is that grasses and chaparral prevent the oak tree from having productive acorn seasons. No doubt further propaganda would have it that the Native Americans knew this. Seriously, I have seen old growth forests and heavy old growth chaparral plant communities intermingled with large massive oaks in which were exceptionally productive Acorn season year after year. Trust me, the Natives would have also seen what I have experienced as well, but it doesn't make for as romantic a story line to those with a vested interest in some money making venture. I know because I collected acorns in the past and processed them for meal production. Large Oaks within heavy Chaparral plant cover were the heaviest producers when I went out into the bush. Then there was this subheading on that first page calling attention to people's perception of what they considered a healthy forest is out in Nature. This had more to do with marketing an opinion and biased ideology more than anything else. They polled the people as to what they thought looks more aesthetically pleasing:
Aesthetics of the Oak Savanna Landscape
"Surveys of attitudes and perceptions have shown that the oak savanna landscape rates highly in the public mind. Open forests with large, relatively old trees are considered very attractive. Other pleasing factors of the oak savanna include the high plant diversity, the presence of wild flowers, the large openings surrounded by trees, and the extensive vistas and overlooks. These are characteristic of parks, and the park-like setting of oak savannas is appealing, just as it was to early travelers through the Midwest."
This is the exact marketing put out there by the US Forest Service. This is the mirror image of the mandated purpose up in the San Jacinto Mountains by the Palms to Pines highway beautification project and maintenance program. Show people park-like conditions which appear to be the most aesthetically pleasing to the average Joe/Jane Q-Public driving thru the area in their car and they'll imagine you are doing your job properly. Now I do like Oak Savannas and there is no doubt a historical presence throughout California's central valley & surrounding lower foothills for them, especially considering at one time there was an historical presence of more than 500,000 Elk alone which no doubt maintained such Oak Savanna areas. But much of the mountainous regions on the west side of the central valley to the coast of California has been ruined by overgrazing and removal of large tracts of chaparral where majestic oaks and Foothill pine have been left. Eventually these older trees will die and those Oak Savannas will be gone. What will be leftover is nothing but non-native grasslands and other exotic weeds. I saw it this past June 2014 when my wife and I traveled from Buttonwillow California over highway 58 to Santa Margarita on our way to Monterey up Hwy 101. The grazing that has been allowed on numerous steep slopes of mountainsides for miles and miles has cattle which have mowed the grasses to the ground where nothing now but bare soil exists. There are some pockets of large Oaks spread out here and there, but also many dead ones. There is zero presence of regeneration as would be evidenced by the existence of various younger to middle aged trees even over the last few decades. There's nothing but old oak trees and dead remnants. Even Foothill Pines are dying everywhere and lack of anything new, with the exception of maybe some roadside pine germination because of concentrated road runoff. Oaks and Pines in California need chaparral nurse feeding, hydrating and staking. Chaparral historically provided everything they needed. If humans don't get their act together with regards proper custodianship of Earth, then like climate change, all plant ecosystems may also end up at a point of no return.
Ideas and Plans for using Chaparral in the Landscape
Additional Tree Staking Resources:
Girdling Roots -- A Problem of Shade Trees, Ohio State University Extension
Planting Guidelines: Container Trees & Shrubs, University of Arizona Cooperative Extension
The Myth of Staking: "Newly planted trees should be staked firmly and securely", 
Linda Chalker-Scott, Ph.D., Extension Horticulturist and Associate Professor, Puyallup, Research and Extension Center, Washington State University