Tolemia Monarca

Para os lectores habituais do meu blog quizais xa coñezan a miña postura sobre o monarca, pero póñase ao día aquí se queres. Onte atopeime Este artigo nos tempos de LA – sobre as colonias de monarcas invernantes en Pacific Grove, TAL. Aquí fóra, ao oeste da división continental, Hai bastantes monarcas que emigran á costa de California e Baixa do Norte en lugar de viaxar ao centro de México.. Non todos os monarcas de California quedan no estado, pero hai ducias centos de lugares de descanso coñecidos (.pdf) arriba e abaixo da nosa costa pacífica.

Pacific Grove ten unha das localidades máis coñecidas e construíu a economía local arredor dos seus migrantes estacionais (aínda ninguén está a deportar a estes mexicanos). En resumo, o goberno municipal contratou a un arbolista para cortar o perigoso crecemento do eucalipto. Por que era necesario? Volta 2004 un membro dun piñeiro autóctono enfermo caera e matou a unha muller de 85 anos mentres paseaba cos seus netos.. A raíz do millón de dólares pagados á familia do falecido, a cidade decidiu cortar preventivamente o crecemento das árbores vellas.. Pero agora todo o mundo está a correr gritando mal, as árbores foron cortadas tamén moito. Si, as preciosas casas dos monarcas foron perturbadas e fixo que os veciños se enfurecen. E se o do monarca non volver?

Non te preocupes, o cineasta local Bob Pacelli ten unha solución. Esparexemos tantos eucaliptos como poidamos atopar no souto para atraer máis bolboretas.

Na desesperación, Pacelli elaborou un plan: Busca árbores en caixas, preferentemente eucaliptos de goma azul 20 pés de alto e colócaos en puntos estratéxicos para axudar a protexer aos monarcas entrantes. Pero a cidade tardou en responder, dixo Pacelli. Un funcionario, dixo Pacelli, erróneamente acusouno de pisar unha bolboreta, unha violación do código da cidade. Non se presentaron cargos.

Para os que están atentos, si, o concello de Pacific Grove ten unha lei sobre os libros que impón unha multa de $1,000 sobre calquera que moleste a unha bolboreta. Cousas boas que os monarcas non descansan nas igrexas católicas.

Nowhere in this article is the obvious pointed out. Eucalyptus trees are NOT NATIVE to the United States. Si, they belong down under with koalas and shrimp on the barbie (perdón). The trees were introduced around 1853 in the hopes they would be a miracle tree for lumber and other products. Desafortunadamente, no one tested the theories before letting the tree loose in our landscape, and it has become a dangerous pest. These trees evolved with fire and they have come to truly embrace it. The long peeling bark flakes off into floating torches that carry the flames to the canopy, and the oils within the tree are highly flammable – so much so that burning trees can literally explode. Here in California things that are extremely flammable are usually frowned upon, especially since most of our population lives in a tinderbox (seriously, unha golfer last week set off a blaze when his club struck a rock and the spark couldn’t be put out fast enough!) Yet somehow the eucalyptus is protected in many cities. Si, it could cost you a fine of $500 just to remove a small tree in the city of Santa Cruz. Down in Santa Barbara, where I used to live for a few years, people rally by the thousands to save their precious eucalyptus. It seems to me that residents of places with more money and more sun have inversely fewer braincells to put to use. I did come across this one article (where I pulled the 1853 date from), that discusses the profane nature eucalyptus love. The author is on the right track, but I don’t think euc groves serve as “monarch sinks” – where butterflies roost only to be blown out to sea during winter storms. Extensive monitoring projects would have long ago pointed that out if it were the case.

So what did the monarchs do before 1853? That’s a hard question to answer since to my knowledge there are no reports of trees full of butterflies from early settlers. You would think that it might have been mentioned by someone like John Muir. Pero, one possibility is that the monarchs were here all along – just roosting in stands of Monterey pine and other natives. The pines don’t seem to have the same density as the eucalyptus, so these roosting colonies may not have been very impressive. Roosting may have even been limited to warmer years or when fewer storms pounded our coast. Possibility two is that the monarchs were NOT here in northern/central California before 1853. Most likely the monarchs roosted in the warm coastal areas of southern California and Baja – but with the introduction of the eucalyptus, capitalized on the better shelter tree and branched northwards.

So what should be done? I am all for the removal of eucalyptus statewide, including in the precious monarch groves. So what if the monarchs don’t reappear? En realidade, this year would be one of the best to eradicate the eucalyptus because monarch numbers are down a whopping 90%! Fewer returning monarchs need fewer trees (there seems to be a logical fallacy implied above that having or planting more trees will attract more butterflies – perdón, if they are down 90% then all the eucalyptus in the world won’t attract more butterflies). Now would be the perfect opportunity to replace invasives with native pines. I will close with a quote by Ansel Adams, stolen from the article I link to above (the anti-euc one).

I cannot think of a more tasteless undertaking than to plant trees in a naturally treeless area, and to impose an interpretation of natural beauty on a great landscape that is charged with beauty and wonder and the excellence of eternity.