Wildlife

I was so caught up with plants I almost forgot that wildlife exists. I don't know why I prefer plants over animals but I do care about the well-being of both. I think it's nice that we have found a way to live with all the resident wildlife on campus. Then again, the diversity isn't exactly great from what I've seen. I bet the urban life deoesn't suit many species but others, like squirrels, are adaptable and thrive. 

Dickson's resident skunk

Caution! chipmunk

The animals here are so used to people's presence that half the time they act as if you don't exist. The other day I was wandering along the lake when I realized that I had stepped over a goose nest. Completely unguarded, with no goose in sight. It it were DC, I would've gotten pecked to death long ago. The geese here in a way are nice they let you pass instead of the other way around. I wonder how that happened.

Heron and a Canadian Goose

Goose nest

The wildlife is more than just for viewing pleasure. They are a part of the ecosystem. Squirrels and chipmunks hoard away seeds underground, which then sprout regenerating forests. However annoying it is to have hundreds of oak seedling pop up in your flowerbeds, the planting is a valuable ecosystem service to the forests. They also help clean up the ecosystem. Scavengers like vultures clean up carrion, which prevent disease spread. We have a responsibility to allow these cycles to happen to the best of our ability. It's also logical to. Ecosystem services are invaluable to us , yet many times we don't realize it.

Vultures ( I saw them up close but didn't get a photo)

The Norway Maple

The Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) is one of the earliest trees to flower in the NE. It's clusters of chartreuse flowers signals the beginning of spring. Introduced to the US in 1756, it quickly became a popular street tree for its ability to tolerate adverse conditions. On the other hand, the native Sugar Maple is famously (among gardeners) unable to tolerate disturbance to roots, heat, and drought, associated with life in urban areas. Many other native trees like the American Elm, Ash, and American Chestnut were killed by diseases hitchhiking over on plant from Europe. To replace the rapidly dying canopy, trees like the Norway Maple were planted. The Norway Maple made itself at home in the NE and quickly began to spread outside of gardens and cities. However, at the time, much of the land was being farmed so its opportunity to invade forests was lessened because there were no forests to invade.

Norway Maple flowers

 Plains and elsewhere, Farmland was abandoned en masse and allowed to revert back to forest. In the past, Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum), and Red Oaks (Quercus rubra) would be the dominant species in a climax forest. However, the Norway Maple had many advantages. For example, its root system is thick and fibrous, allowing it to literally suck the life out of the soil, as anyone who has tried to grow a lawn under one of these trees can attest. In addition, any plants that managed to grab a foothold under the tree would be shaded out by the Norway maple's wide leaves. The fact that it is one of the earliest trees to leaf out also helps. Its ability to out compete many trees also allows it to suppress the understory. There is simply not much that can grow under a Norway maple. Interestingly, to me these characteristics would be a dealbreaker for an ornamental tree not to mention that it often girdles itself in cramped environments, that it, strangle itself to death with its roots, but I guess some people want a carefree tree.
 
Norway maples often establish pure stands, especially near areas disturbed by humans. In the more far flung areas, there are isolated specimens, but something has kept them from establishing themselves. Either they physically did not spread there or they may have already died out since their lifespans generally under 100 years as the secondary growth forest grows. Either way, it is considered an invasive species for its ability to displace native plants in disturbed sites.

I don't have anything against introduced species coexisting with native species but as some of the introduced species, like Norway Maples push other plants out, then they become a problem. Even in their native habitat, they do not form monocultures since there are diseases and other plants that keep them in check, which are not present in the US. These species should be dealt with accordingly, ideally by extirpation. However,  the attitudinal fix of education probably won't work, especially when the tree is mainly planted in urban areas where people can't see its effects. A technical fix would be creating a sterile variety that can;t reproduce. But there are certainly breeding populations out there already and those would need to be eliminated. The structural fix of banning the sale of them, which has been done in some states like Wisconsin and Illinois, where the invasion has been worse, but the sale of the Norway Maple in New York is still legal and only regulated in a way that intentional introduction into the wild is illegal. The Norway Maple is probably one of the oldest invasive species in the US, and like almost all the other ones, was introduced as a ornamental or agricultural plant with an intended use. The list of problems the cause goes on and on. It also goes to show that some actions intended to fix problems can create more problems than they are worth.

I like trees Part II

Wow I really ran off on a tangent over there on the last post. As humans, we seem to appreciate things that are bigger and older than us, like trees. They have seen and been through more than any of us, and yet they stand there unmovingly, silent. Something about their branches upstretched towards the sky. They are the epitome of the religious sublime and just enduring grandeur in general.  I really do love trees and I am saddened by their destruction by disease, as well as by human activity. Growing up in a neighborhood undergoing redevelopment in a rapidly developing suburb of DC, I have seen more than my fair share of trees, often older than the houses they stand by go down and be replaced by new McMansions or entire forests be replaced by a new subdivision. It seems that in the buzz of growth and prosperity, we have forgotten what literally constructs the country-trees.  Sometimes us treehuggers secure a victory, such as when urban planners decided to build metro tracks to curve around the oldest tree in my county at an estimated 299 years old. Even then, it's bounded by a 6 lane road on one side, and a freeway on another and if it wasn't the oldest tree, it would have been ground to mulch.

The Linden Oak, a White Oak, with the metro tracks in the background

In comparison, the oldest tree on campus here at Cornell is also an White Oak, with an estimated age of 350 years old. It is located on Libe slope near Gannet.

Cornell's oldest tree

In the arboretums, I saw this oak, a Red Oak, which is actually much larger than the Libe Slope oak. However, I could not find any information on the age of the tree or the circumstances of its existence. I have observed trees from all walks of life so I could probably make a guess. Based on its low branching, it probably grew in a full sun and exposed environment. The tree didn't have to grow upwards and compete for light as it would in a forest. It's also meant it had no use as lumber. It was also probably spared the fate of being plowed over since it grew at the transition between a flat area useful for farming into a rather steep hill. The area to the left is still being used as research fields today. As the trees grew in around it, the oak was forced to reach up for the light again, which is why many of the horizontal branches abruptly turn upwards. These limbs died back to a limb that had access to the sun. The wounds from these large dead branches will probably be the downfall of the tree though, as rot progresses down the branches and hollows out the trunk, the horizontal branches might overload, leading to collapse. Cornell seems to see the tree as a risk, which is why it is roped off. It's also pretty good for the tree if we don't tread on its rootzone.

I wouldn't be surprised if this majestic oak has been here for longer than Cornell has been around. Let's see, 1865 founding... 152 years... So if that tree is older than 150 years than it's older than Cornell. Maybe, but without a core we will never find out. Or maybe we don;t hear about it because it's not the oldest or the biggest (also on Libe Slope). It's a shame that people often only care about the superlatives. The way I see it, a 100 year old oak still deserves respect. Don't kill it by stupidly digging a trench 15 feet from the trunk for a septic line. Even a sapling is something precious. The majority of seeds produced don't even get to sprout. We should share the land with the trees that inhabit it. They hold memories of the past (in the rings and branches) and are inn fact living things. In any case, this majestic tree that is lucky to not be located in any land desirable for development (like that poor Fernow oak).  May it have many years of life ahead.