Five hundred years ago, Spaniards spread the seeds of european annual grasses as they traveled between missions in California. Within a century or two, a large part of the California landscape had changed. Annual grasses crowded out native perennial grasses, and we got our "golden hills." Nobody knows exactly what California looked like before the Spanish arrived or how many species may have gone extinct, but you can still see echoes of what happened. For example Mount Hamilton Jewelflower, now reduced to a few relict populations on serpentine soil where the annual grasses don't grow so high...
SOD is a disturbance of similar magnitude. It won't kill all the oaks. For example it only kills black oaks (coastal live oak, interior live oak, California black oak, ...) but not white oaks (blue oak, valley oak, ...). What it likely will do is over time dramatically change the makeup of the oak woodlands, especially along the coast and in the Sierra Nevada foothills.
Not plant related, but equally fascinating: There used to be a lake bigger than Lake Tahoe in California between Fresno and Bakersfield. It It was the largest fresh water lake west of the Great Lakes (by surface area). It was drained for agriculture.
I discovered this historical trivia myself by chance not long ago. While stopping in Kettleman City off of I-5, there's a retail complex called Bravo Farms. Inside, near the restrooms there's a map on the wall showing a massive "Tulare Lake". I could hardly believe such a large lake existed in this area not too long ago and it's mostly forgotten.
There's a similar story in Israel. There used to be two lakes on the Jordan River (which isn't much a river anymore but that's a different story). The famous Sea of Galilee (Kinneret) and one further to the north called Lake Hula (Merom) that existed until it was drained in the 1950s.
I would highly recommend "Cadillac Desert: The American West and its Disappearing Water;" it goes into fair detail about Lake Tulare. Fascinating read.
There used to be a fairly sizable indigenous community (referred to by English-speaking settlers as the Yokuts) in the vicinity of that lake. Some 70,000 strong at their pre-contact height (one of the highest regional populations in North America):
As a people they were apparently "drained" nearly out of existence, also, through the combined efforts of Mexican and European settlers, around the time that lake was drained (down to an estimated population of 600 by 1910).
For a good read on what happened to Lake Tulare, read "The King of California". The world's largest cotton plantation now sits in the lakebed and holds primary water rights. Pink sheet stock. Ticker BWEL.
I went to the library and browsed the book on your recommendation. It is indeed great. It includes a few photos and maps as well. I will have to find the time to read it.
Did you know there's a group trying to create rice that doesn't absorb arsenic?
It turns out one of the only things that can grow on depleted cotton land is rice, but the pesticides used against weevils contain arsenic, and for some weird reason people don't like to eat rice full of arsenic!
People have been making plans about how to flood parts of the Sahara for about 100 years. Some of the more colorful options involved using buried nuclear warheads as trench-digging tools.
How much of it actually would die is obviously depends on factors like how big the replacement lake is and how much it affects the phosphorus, but I'm constantly amazed by how seemly separate systems are actually intimately interconnected.
The sand only moves if it is light. When the weather and climate changes, the make up of the sand changes and so does the way it moves. It is a complicated process and it would definitely have some surprises.
I had no idea about this facinating part of California history. To think I drove by near the spot dozzens of times between SF and LA wihout ever knowing. Thank you!
Wow - that's actually pretty mindblowing. I lived in Porterville (on the east side of the lake, apparently) when I was a teenager, and my dad was an archaeologist, so he must have known about it but I don't recall him mentioning it. Explains why that whole drive north from there is so flat, though.
See also: the eucalyptus tree which was brought to CA in the 1800s and spread rapidly before everyone realized that young trees are useless for timber [0][1]
Here on the Central Coast, there are eucalyptus groves everywhere (some are massive). They are messy, a fire hazard, and useless for firewood.
Slowly they are being eradicated. People in the East Bay are going apeshit over FEMA's plans to knock down ~10,000 eucalyptus in order to restore native vegetation and prevent a(nother) disastrous fire in the Oakland hills. On the other hand they seem to be very popular in Napa and along the 101 as windbreaks. Maybe we'll never get rid of them.
A bunch of Eucalyptus trees lining the streets along the hills bordering 280 have been removed over the last 5 years.
I was sad at first from seeing these trees I grew up with go away, but then my friend educated me about the invasive nature of the trees, and now that a few years have passed since the first wave of removals in my neighborhood, I can say that I've become accustomed to the new sights.
As an Australian I find the CA eucalyptus very nostalgic. They are most certainly a fire hazard, but I am surprised to learn that they are considered useless for firewood. Here in Australia the best firewood is eucalyptus - it is a bastard to split though.
Yeah, it can work as firewood for heat if its thoroughly dried (1+ year). You have to split it before it dries.
I guess I should clarify my previous post. Most people in CA don't burn wood for heat. I was specifically referring to burning wood for cooking (aka Santa Maria Style BBQ). For that, oak is superior and eucalyptus is a no-go.
Yes it does need to be dried to burn well. I have split by hand an awful lot of seasoned eucalyptus and it is hard work and takes real skill. It is even worse here in Australia as due to the native pests the wood contains a lot more knots. You get used to taking a good look at a log and deciding if that is worth splitting or not.
You can cook with it, but you need to let the fire die down and cook on the coals only - that is unless you love the taste of cough drops.
On the topic of building with it even young eucalyptus is OK if you let the timber season while strapped so it doesn’t twist and warp. The only problem is that it become like iron and is impossible to nail. When I was a kid we had a huge supply of seasoned eucalyptus that my brother and I used to build all sorts of things. We had to pre-drill all the nail holes before we could use it. If you did this it was a 100x better structural timber than pine.
My favourite was logs that had the core eaten out by termites - now they were nice and easy to split :)
Talking of arthropods did you ever have the fun of chainsawing through a bull ant nest while collecting seasoned logs? They are not happy and do they hurt when they bite.
I grew up in northern New Mexico, in an area where piñon and juniper trees grew together, dotting the landscape as far as you could see.
About 15 years ago, after years of drought causing tree weakness, we had a bark beetle epidemic. It affected only the piñon, but losses were close to 100% in many areas. We had probably around 150 piñon trees: after the epidemic, 4 remained. It was heartbreaking to drive around and see huge swaths of brown, dead trees covering the land. The alteration was dramatic.
Only now, the progeny of those dead trees are beginning to come back. It will still probably be another 20 years before things start to look normal to me. The makeup of our forests in California will be altered for a long time, in the best case.
> What it likely will do is over time dramatically change the makeup of the oak woodlands, especially along the coast and in the Sierra Nevada foothills.
Once the disease has run its course (read: all affected oaks dead), couldn't we reintroduce the extinct oaks? We've bought back a species from near-extinction already[1].
The problem is, it doesn't just infect oaks, but several other plant species like California bay laurel. The pathogen lives as an endophyte in the leaves of bay laurel without killing the host or even causing significant damage, yet still spreading the disease. In fact, one method to control the disease is to physically remove all the bay laurel trees from an area you would like to protect. How well this actually works is not clear to me, but I haven't kept up with the literature.
Look at the decades of effort that's gone into restoring the American chestnut, one of the most productive and economically important trees of eastern North America. This is not something that is easy to do.
As to the spread of the disease, in my country they are recommending bikers/hikers to disenfect their shoes if they have been in the woods.
PG@E hires tree companies to trim all branches around their power lines. When the tree company was trimming around my residential trees, I noticed a complete lack of any disinfection protocol.Didn't disenfect tools, boots, gloves, etc. These trucks, and employees looked like they were actively spreading disease. Think about those tree shredders. It seems like if a diseased black oak goes in, it might blow the pathogen everywhere? (I did ask an employee if he knew the difference between White, and Black Oak. Just looked at me puzzled. Went to another employee, and asked the same question--he spoke a little bit of English, and said no. It wasen't their fault. They just weren't trained.)
I complained. When they came back to my street, they acted like they were going into surgery. Spray for tools. Spray for boots. Spray everywhere. It was quite a show.
I belive it was just a show for my behalf? When they arrived a few months later--no disinfects. I know don't notice any safety precautions on their part. This was a few years ago. They came back this year to trim trees, and no disenfectant.
I fiqure we pay a lot for out electricity. PG&E should make sure they hire tree companies that are not spreading Suddden Oak Disease. Plus, it's costly to remove a diseased tree for property owners.
SOD is a disturbance of similar magnitude. It won't kill all the oaks. For example it only kills black oaks (coastal live oak, interior live oak, California black oak, ...) but not white oaks (blue oak, valley oak, ...). What it likely will do is over time dramatically change the makeup of the oak woodlands, especially along the coast and in the Sierra Nevada foothills.