Saturday, April 21, 2007

PART III (of IV): Forest & Beach Commission's Violation of Municipal Code, Land Use Plan, Recommended Tree Species List & USDA Forest Service Policy


Monterey Pine
Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA.
For comparison purposes, click on post title above for a photo of a mature Canary Island Pine.

Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) vs. Canary Island Pine (Pinus canariensis)

Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata)
Origin: California (Central Coast)

SPECIES CHARACTERISTICS:
Evergreen, conifer tree. Fast growth rate, 40 - 100' in height, up to 150’ - 200’ in height, 30 - 40' spread. Broad irregular open crown. Needles in 2's or 3's, 3 - 6" long bright green.
For photo: Copy, paste and click, http://www.californiabiota.com/cabiota/monterey_pine.htm

Scientific classification

Kingdom: Plantae

Division: Pinophyta

Class: Pinopsida

Order: Pinales

Family: Pinaceae

Genus: Pinus

Subgenus: Pinus

Species: P. radiata

• Native to coastal California in three very limited areas in Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties, and (as the variety Pinus radiata var. binata) on Guadalupe Island and Cedros Island off the west coast of Baja California, Mexico.

• Leaves ('needles') are bright green, in clusters of three (two in var. binata), slender, 8-15 cm long and with a blunt tip.

• Cones are 7-17 cm long, brown, ovoid (egg-shaped), and usually set asymmetrically on a branch, attached at an oblique angle.

• Bark is fissured and dark grey to brown

Canary Island Pine (Pinus canariensis)
Identified by their tall and slender structure.

SPECIES CHARACTERISTICS:
Evergreen, conifer tree. Fast growth rate, 50 - 80' in height, 30' spread. Pyramidal in shape. Bluish-green needles in threes, 9 - 12" long.

For more information and photo, click on post title above or copy, paste and click
http://www.delange.org/PineCanary/PineCanary.htm

Scientific classification

Kingdom: Plantae

Division: Pinophyta

Class: Pinopsida

Order: Pinales

Family: Pinaceae

Genus: Pinus

Subgenus: Pinus

Species: P. canariensis

• Native to the outer Canary Islands (Gran Canaria, Tenerife, Gomera, Hierro, La Palma) in the Atlantic Ocean.

• Subtropical pine

• One of the most drought tolerant pines

• Evergreen, conifer tree

• Cones are 10-23 cm long, glossy chestnut-brown in color


Forest Management Plan
Appendix G

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
RECOMMENDED TREE SPECIES LIST


Monterey pines (Pinus radiata) and cypresses (Cypressus macrocarpa) are the primary upper canopy trees of the forest and the planting of these species shall receive the greatest priority in appropriate situations.

COMMENTS:
Monterey Pines are native to a limited number of areas in the world, coastal Monterey County being one of those rare places. The “signature tree” of Carmel-by-the-Sea, it defines Carmel's upper canopy.

In 2006, regarding the incidence of pitch canker, California Pitch Canker Task Force Co-Chairman Stephen Staub stated, "It's definitely a significant issue, but certainly not to the degree we once thought it was." And Co-Chairman of the California Pitch Canker Task Force and Professor of Plant Pathology at the University of California, Davis, Tom Gordon, concured; he stated of his research, “...many trees did not die and instead recovered from the disease. The recovery was due in part to induced resistance. That is, infections by the pitch canker pathogen caused trees to manifest elevated resistance to subsequent infections...Consequently, our present understanding of the disease suggests that future mortality caused by pitch canker will be much lower than originally anticipated.” Moreover, recent research by Professor Gordon et al concluded, “The combined effects of disease escape, inherent genetic resistance and systemic induced resistance (SIR), should allow the Monterey pine forest to adapt to the pitch canker pathogen over time.”

Whereas, Canary Island Pine trees are non-native, “exotic,” tropical, “Christmas tree-like” trees. And at maturity they do not reach a height comparable to Monterey Pine trees and therefore would not replace the upper canopy. Furthermore, Canary Island Pine trees have been found infected with pitch canker fungus in the field, although studies have shown Canary Island Pines to be more resistant to pitch canker.
(Reference: http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/pitch_canker/research/pitchcan.html, McCain et al., 1987; Storer and Dallara 1992; Storer et al., 1994b)

INTERESTING FACTS:
Pitch canker is a disease of conifers caused by the fungus Fusarium subglutinans f. sp. pini. Bark, twig, and cone beetles are implicated as vectors (carriers) of this pathogen.

Naturally infected species include Monterey Pine and Canary Island Pine.
(Source: http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/pitch_canker/prevention_management/treenotes.html)

Natural infections of Monterey pine in California were not seen until 1986 when the pathogen was isolated from symptomatic tissue in Santa Cruz County (McCain et al., 1987).
(Source: http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/pitch_canker/research/pitchcan.html)

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Save the trees! A tangential aspect of this issue is the Leidig proposal for 45 condominiums on the Valley Way & Highway 1 Carmel Convalescent Hospital parcel. 7 houses would allow many, many more trees to survive intact, without removal. Good for the neighborhood, global warming, and the environment.

I hope 80 people and more show up at the May 1 Carmel council meeting. And I hope they restate the content of the Save Our neighbothoods Coalition ad. Make those council people understand the scale of this project, comparable to the Barnyard. NO to high density in our neighborhood. I cannot image any of these council people advocating this project if it were proposed next to their residences. One standard for all, get it Carmel council people?

Anonymous said...

There are numerous occasions when scientific hypotheses are not confirmed. That’s why experimentation and testing is the next step in the process. Here, interestingly, their original hypothesis was discovered to be to negative in terms of indigenous Monterey Pine mortality. So the researchers modified their hypothesis, conducted more experiments and made conclusions more in line with the observed results. Just as science is supposed to operate, in a scientific vacuum, without political influence, slant and bias.