Trees used by Monarch butterflies in California

[Mark Walker]

Doug wrote:

>How much of a problem is this species when it comes to propagating itself?
>I have no data, but it sure seems like the trees stay pretty much where
they
>were originally planted.
>
>I don't mean to argue in favor of planting exotics.  I'm just curious.


> I don't think they spread without help well at all - but that's not so
> much
> the objection here as the idea that one is *replacing* and *excluding*
> native vegetation and animals when one plants eucalypts (there are several
> species used). That 100-year-old grove likely has maybe one other plant
> species in it, few insects, few or no vertebrates, etc. Eucalypts are
> famous for that sort of sterilization, here in Brazil, too. If you want to
> sterilize an area, why not just put up a bunch of concrete totem poles
> instead? Ecologically speaking, there wouldn't be much difference, except
> that grass could grow between totem poles... ;-) (Smilie for the
> humor-impaired)
> 
	Actually, you are correct about that grove.  I don't believe anyone
is tending it (I could be wrong, though, because the ground is relatively
free from fallen limbs, etc.), but there is literally nothing else growing
there.  I think it was originally planted in hopes that the wood would be a
good building material, which it isn't.  It's makes for pretty good
firewood, though.

	Mark Walker.