Los Angeles’ legendary palm trees are dying – and few will be replaced
A beetle and a fungus are killing off the trees that have become synonymous with the city, making way for trees that give more shade and use less water
…
Palm trees greet you outside the LAX airport, they line Hollywood Boulevard, stand guard over the Pacific and crisscross neighbourhoods poor and rich, a botanical army of stems and fronds which symbolise the world’s entertainment capital.
Apparently not for much longer. LA’s palm trees are dying. And most won’t be replaced.
A beetle known as the South American palm weevil and a fungus called Fusarium are killing palm trees across southern California. Others are dying of old age. “It’ll change the overall aesthetic because palm trees are so distinctive. It’s the look and feel of Los Angeles,” said Carol Bornstein, director of the nature gardens at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles.
A city tally in 1990 estimated the number of palms on city streets at 75,000, a number which has not been updated but is destined to plunge in coming decades, the Los Angeles Times reported this week, citing officials.
No one knows how many will die, or how fast. For palm lovers, the even worse news is that they won’t be replaced, perhaps not even mourned.
uthorities will instead plant other species that give more shade and consume less water – important factors for an overheating city. By the middle of the century, LA is expected to be three to five degrees fahrenheit warmer and to have triple the number of extreme heat days.
“Palms are decorative and iconic, but Los Angeles is facing more and more heatwaves, so it’s important that we plant trees that provide adequate shade to protect people and cool the city down,” said Elizabeth Skrzat, programme director for City Plants, the city’s tree planting arm.
…
Climate change has made California hotter and drier, a boon to bugs that destroy vegetation, said Andy Lipkis, the president of TreePeople, an LA-based advocacy group. Palms afforded LA little protection from heat, drought and flooding, plus they served as a habitat for the Norway rat, but their die-off signalled a wider crisis, he said.
“It’s a wake-up call. Millions of trees are dying in southern California. One price tag for removing the dead trees over the next 30 years is $37bn. Trees have a much harder time growing and thriving in cities today because the climate is much harsher.”
Full story at The Guardian
Maybe LA should ACT on their BELIEFS and ask advise from a city that has experience with the ‘predicted’ climate. ……… Like Tripoli …. oops. USA bombed it to the stone age. Maybe Bagdad? Nah…… Dubai, Yes!
What does Dubai use? …. hmmm, palms and lots of water features for evaporative cooling. Anything to break up the concrete jungle.
And since California wants to reduce vehicle emissions to mule cart levels, there is no need for six car lanes. Only the ‘elite’ will have the money and connections for a Tesla. The ‘deplorables’ can ride a bike or take the bus. Two lanes with bicycle lanes and a green divider will suffice.
Dubai also has this
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/09/19/dubai-will-soon-home-worlds-largest-concentrated-solar-facility/
and this:
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2017/01/17/epc-chosen-and-groundbreaking-set-to-commence-on-800-mw-solar-plant-in-dubai/
Palm trees are synonymous with Los Angeles, California! We love and we cannot starve itboff now. We should lunch a formal protest against this decision. The City and State should coordinate their effort to simply replace the desd trees and move on. VIVA LOS ANGELES!Blessing Wiwuga Orage
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Tablet
Wow nearly half a million to pull down each tree???
That barely covers the environmental impact statement.
I like the bit about planting new trees to provide shade to mitigate the extra AGW warmth. Presumably the leaves have no intelligence and will be not just shading the humans but also the pavement, commonly known as the surface. Hence lower intensity of solar radiation on the concrete. I think they just solved their problem, bigger and leafier trees. Job done!
Nothing about this article makes much biological sense. Even the rat is wrong – Norway Rats are largely terrestrial – basements, sewers, wood piles and whatever is close to the ground. Roof Rats (Rattus rattus), as one might expect, are the ones that like to climb and are known for nesting in palms.
I don’t know about LA, but in the Midwest and the East there are lots of streets name “Elm Street”. Not many elm trees left. Dutch Elm disease took them out. Just like the Emerald Ash Borer is taking out the ash trees.
Hmmm….I think I can tie both into Man’s (and only Man’s) CO2 emissions. (Coal powered power plants CO2 is particularly odious.) The Elms are about gone here. But are still some Ash trees.
Obama’s gone so I guess I can’t get a government grant to “prove” it.
Maybe I’ll set up a “GoFundMe” page?
I’m sure all those Hollywood climate experts would rally to the cry, “Save our Ashes!”
Really? I thought I’d check the trends of temperature and precipitation. I went to https://wrcc.dri.edu/monitor/cal-mon/frames_version.html and chose Time Series, on the right. I downloaded the monthly data for the state of California from 1895 (the thick end of 123 years). Excel reports temperature rose about 2°F (1.1°C), or about 1.6°F per 100 yrs. Insignificant. Precipitation rose a small fraction of an inch, maybe a third. Insignificant, but certainly not an alarming fall.
Another piece of alarmist hogwash. I wonder what dataset the Guardian relied on.
“Climate change has made California hotter and drier”
They might try the (native) California Washingtonia palm. It is one of the hardiest palm species and will survive moderately hard frost, provided it is dry and the afternoons are reasonably warm. It does fairly well in the Mojave.
“Perhaps these types of trees would be good for cities.”
@Bryan
Same basic question. What do you mean by good (or bad)? If your idea of good is the good that electricity does, then your solar PV trees are not very good.
Replace the palm trees with windmills. And gardens with solar panels. Easy.
Any warming in Los Angeles is caused by there being too many people in Los Angeles, too many concrete and bitumen areas, too many cars and not by Climate Change/ Global Warming.
“Palms afforded LA little protection from heat, drought and flooding, plus they served as a habitat for the Norway rat”
Habitat for the Norway Rat? In LA? Those things are a disease vector, and they are not native to North America. Get rid of the damned palm trees. They are not native to California either.
Have you ever heard of anyone lounging in the shade of a palm tree? I thought so.
California does have native palm trees you know, California Washingtonia Washingtonia filifera
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2zO_5LhlOW0/VQmeK0FwqPI/AAAAAAAASZI/i2CnMKxYEBA/s1600/Washingtonia_filifera.jpg.
I have indeed lounged in the shade of a Phoenix palm. That may have been a very bad idea.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/well-good/teach-me/93083793/the-pretty-palm-tree-that-can-bring-a-world-of-pain
Just wait … legal marijuana is coming to California. It can only get better.
going to need more trees, if it is going to be ‘shade grown’
I’m an arborist of 18 years experience and i raised orchards for 15 years. I live in Israel where palm trees are a normal part of the landscape. I treat tree diseases and insect infestations and the claim that “Climate change has made California hotter and drier, a boon to bugs that destroy vegetation.” is patent nonsense. The metabolic processes of both bugs and vegetation increase with increasing temperature, and though the bugs will be more active in warmer temperatures so too will the immune systems of vegetation act faster and be more effective. Not only that, when temps rise not only do the harmful insects increase in number and activity but their predators also get a proportional boost. These climate-catastrophe clowns wring their hands in angst and only think that the bad bugs will gain the advantage in warmer weather while ignoring – or are ignorant of – the abundant beneficial bugs that will increase proportionally. This is another example of people promoting their agenda on matters of which they have no background knowledge, much less expertise.
Well if they’re dying from natural causes probably best to replace them with something else, we don’t keep trying to plant elm trees since Dutch elm disease appeared. And replacing them with things that take less water and provide more shade, if such can indeed be found, sounds like a good idea. I’d have thought more shade would require more leaves taking up more water, but maybe there’s something.
Have my doubts about the place getting warmer though.