Loading…
12
Just realized our push for more city trees could backfire ecologically
I've been seeing a lot of praise for my city's new tree planting initiative. But I think focusing only on fast-growing species for quick carbon capture ignores the long-term health of local ecosystems. What do you think about balancing quick carbon capture with ecosystem health?
4 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In4 Comments
blake_bailey6mo ago
Worry you're right about the quick fix idea. Fast growing trees often need lots of water and can change the soil in ways that hurt native plants later, creating weird dead zones. They might also not support local birds or bugs at all, so we get green spaces that are silent and empty. It seems like we're swapping one problem for another if we only count carbon numbers and ignore everything else. Has your city said anything about using native species that grow a bit slower but actually help the whole system?
2
tessap736mo ago
Admit I killed a decorative pear tree by overwatering it trying to make it grow faster, so I'm fully on team slow-and-steady native plants now.
10
rosec856mo ago
How is your city council taking the push for slower growing natives? Mine just approved a bunch of those fast-growing eucalyptus trees for a new park, which feels like a huge miss. In my experience, those quick-fix trees drop leaves that smother anything trying to grow under them, and the roots can wreck sidewalks. My own black thumb killed a "unkillable" cactus from over-care, so maybe I'm just cursed. But watching a native oak slowly fill out and actually see birds using it feels way better than a silent, fast-growing wall of green. The wait is worth it.
1
fiona_kim975mo ago
Our city planted 50 native oaks last year.
5