Tree Huggers

615 readers

2 users here now

A community to discuss, appreciate, and advocate for trees and forests. Please follow the SLRPNK instance rules, found here.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

LibertyLizard

Assisted migration of redwoods to Washington state: good or bad idea? (mander.xyz)

submitted 1 year ago by mookulator@mander.xyz to c/treehuggers

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello fellow tree huggers,

Question: if I have a plot of land in the Western Washington Cascades, should I plant redwoods and/or sequoias on it on not? I would do this in addition to the obvious douglas firs, western red cedars, western hemlocks and various appropriate ground shrubs/ferns.

I can see a lot of articles about "assisted migration", many of which reference redwoods, but also all of which state that the idea is controversial. The idea is that Northern California is becoming less habitable for these trees, and Washington and BC become more like how California used to be, so the redwood forest will naturally migrate northwards. However, climate change is happening too fast for a slow-moving forest to realistically keep up.

The proponents argue that it's a way to preserve an important species, especially one which is a great carbon sink.

The doubters argue that some species of plants wouldn't survive the process, or could bring pests, or at least be susceptible them.

I can't tell if those drawbacks really pertain to redwoods/sequoias in Washington though. There are hundreds of them around the Seattle area that are doing just fine, more than a hundred years after residents planted them.

What do y'all think? Do it or no?

all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[+] Treevan@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] mookulator@mander.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wow, thanks for the thorough reply! I'll try to respond to your questions and also add more context...

You've got access to the land for regeneration?

Yes, I own the land.

will you be provenancing them from distance locales of their range?

Honestly haven't thought about this yet, but I figure I'll just go to the nearest nursery!

will you be planting enough of them so that they become a Redwood forest ‘ecotype’ or will they be oddities in your forest, just poking their head out here and there?

Just oddities, mixed together with the endemic species. I should say the lot is only a half acre, so it's really not a forest by any stretch. It's just a little chunk of land I want to care for responsibly. It is right on the edge of the Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest though, so I want to be mindful of what might spread into the "real" forest.

If you are regenerating a bare paddock that isn’t attached to any native areas

The lot is currently in a pretty unnatural state. There are a few western red cedars and native shrubs/ferns, but also a big blackberry patch, lots of English ivy, and a few other species I haven't identified yet. To make things worse, most of those foreign invasives are on a steep hillside that seems like a big erosion risk.

The surrounding forest is a mix. Some of it is nice, old douglas firs, hemlocks, cedars etc with the native undergrowth, and some of it is like mine - blackberries and ivy etc.

final restoration goal

I mainly just want to bring this land back to a mostly natural state so it functions (and feels) like a healthy PNW forest. I also want to put a few fast-growing big trees on the hillside to prevent erosion (this was what got me thinking about redwoods/sequoias). Ideally, the small piece of forest I do have the privilege to steward will be able to help the surrounding area regenerate to how it belongs as well. I'm trying to think ahead 100 years to how the climate will be, and start planting for that now.

Conclusion

This probably won't be a big deal in the grand scheme of the forest anyway, since I have such a small space to work with. I might just do it!

[–] LibertyLizard 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Especially since these trees are widely planted in your area already, I don't see much harm in trying. Assisted migration is mainly controversial as it pertains to reforestation of wild areas. For small plots like this in urban areas or even urban fringes, it's hard to image any harm it could do. In fact, I would argue it's a great place to test these ideas and see what problems may exist for more radical assisted migration projects later on, if those become necessary.

Make sure to pick the right spot--both species prefer deep soils with consistent moisture. Coast redwoods in particular do not tolerate drought or extreme cold. Should not be an issue most of the year but if you are on a well-drained slope, you may need to irrigate in dry summer weather to maintain good health. Coast redwoods are also very difficult to remove/eradicate once established because they vigorously sprout from the stump when damaged. So make sure it's in the right place.

A nice thing about these two species is they are very fire resistant, particularly coast redwoods. As this may be an emerging issue in Washington, they could bring extra resilience to your landscape in the case of catastrophe.

If it's not too cold, I would consider some oaks too--they are very crucial for wildlife and insects in North America. I think Q. garryana would be your local species but if you want to try some assisted migration, Q. kelloggii and Q. chrysolepis could be interesting to trial as well.

I'd recommend looking for a nursery that takes phytosanitation seriously. Many serious diseases and pests of plants are being spread by nurseries right now, especially if trees are being moved long distances. If your lot is more urbanized this is less of an issue because they're likely already present but for a more rural plot it would be well worth paying attention to.